Oh noes teh sky is falling!

[biznus97]

Originally Posted by Brown

I had a couple points. First that blu-ray has ignored interests (catalog TV, children's programming, porn) that propelled DVD to its heights, and yes, some of this is due to PQ elitism. Sure, we all want new releases to look glorious but why do so many have such disdain for anything less than Avatar-quality glitz? Blu-ray isn't just about high-def. It has great storage capacity (e.g., the Alien Anthology disc that holds all the SD documentaries) and promise. However, so many people around this site seem merely concerned with perfect PQ. And companies are listening, and they've forsaken these interests and allowed services such as Netflix to sweep in and take advantage.

I want blu-ray to succeed, and I want all types of programming on disc. However, what do I read on forums? Supposed film fans that don't buy digibook releases because the spines don't match the height of their other discs. PQ snobs that sight-unseen ridicule Echo Bridge or Mill Creek releases when no other companies seem willing to put out the films EB or MC have licensed. (I guess movies are better left unseen unless they are all given fresh 4K remastering, right?) There are self-proclaimed "OCD sufferers" here willing admit that they don't purchase double- or triple-features because these releases confound alphabetical ordering of their collections. Forum discussions about films that ignore the quality of the actual movie in favor of slip cover or cover design debates.

And these people represent the loyal customer base that sustains blu-ray? The base that has the ear (or watchful eye) of industry marketers who decide what makes it onto disc? No, I am not angry about this state of affairs. Just puzzled. Puzzled that the obsession over PQ is part of what is holding back the growth of Blu-ray. Sure, PQ is important, but it is not everything.

But if you lessen the importance of PQ/AQ too much, what would Blu-Ray really offer over DVD? More storage is great but if you are storing pretty much the same thing that was being offered before it wouldn't be enough to get people to adopt. Therefore, PQ and AQ should be a huge part of the equation when the source material permits. If every release was a minimal/marginal upgrade in those departments over the DVD that has been available for years what would be the point? I'm don't everyone here wants things to look like they were produced yesterday. I just think that they want more care to be put into some of the less than stellar releases. Along those lines there are companies that have put out a fair share of less than stellar releases: Echo Bridge, Mill Creek, Universal (for certain catalog titles).

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by octagon

The types that were shot on film?

No.....types of movies such as 70mm Lawrence of Arabia, Patton, and Sound of Music.

The upcoming 4k sourced Skyfall release.

IMAX sequences in MI4, or Dark Knight Rises.

The sound in most scifi movies.

[lobosrul]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Blu ray is a premium experience for certain types of movies.....the rest are just fine on dvd, or streaming....and yes even youtube.

Yeah... I disagree. Except that high quality streaming is possible, just not the norm.

[biznus97]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

No.....types of movies such as 70mm Lawrence of Arabia, Patton, and Sound of Music.

The upcoming 4k sourced Skyfall release.

IMAX sequences in MI4, or Dark Knight Rises.

The sound in most scifi movies.

While I agree that Blu-ray is a premium item, I'd rather choose what films I want to buy/upgrade. Assuming a good job has been done, the films worth owning on Blu-ray are the ones you'll watch regardless of the genre.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by biznus97

Assuming a good job has been done, .

This is the factor that makes the difference. Most people do not care about the IMAX sequences, or the 70mm source from Baraka etc. They just want to see the movie.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

No.....types of movies such as 70mm Lawrence of Arabia, Patton, and Sound of Music.

The upcoming 4k sourced Skyfall release.

IMAX sequences in MI4, or Dark Knight Rises.

The sound in most scifi movies.

Just to be clear then, you're suggesting...

A) Films like The Maltese Falcon or All About Eve or Chinatown don't significantly benefit from BD releases

B) Only a complete idiot would disagree with A

[blonde_devil]

i think ultimately it is because dvd is still around. if they said they were going to stop producing them in the next year, people would buy blu because they have to. vhs was still selling when they stopped producing them. you have to draw the line somewhere and studios are too afraid of losing money to actually pull the trigger and quit making dvds. when you have a choice between 2 similar technologies, why would people upgrade if it costs them more? ignore the techinical stuff - are you going to spend $2000 more for a car that has leather seats over one that doesn't? for some people it is yes, no for others but if that car only comes with leather seats and you want that car, you'll buy it.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

you have to draw the line somewhere and studios are too afraid of losing money to actually pull the trigger and quit making dvds.

Why do they need to draw a line at all? People still buy DVDs. So what?

Even if one could make the case that pulling the plug on DVDs might maybe somewhere down the line lead to lower BD prices I'm not sure that's a particularly compelling argument.

Should companies stop giving people what they want simply because it might make the stuff I want a couple bucks cheaper?

This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia, is it?

[Steedeel]

I declare the two words 'most people' the most overused and annoying words in the history of home cinema debate.

[lobosrul]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I declare the two words 'most people' the most overused and annoying words in the history of home cinema debate.

Most people agree with you.

[rdodolak]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Exactly, that is why dvds are sometime a much better value than the same movie in blu ray. Seriously, a movie like "Hope Floats" might be $4.99 on dvd, I pity the fool who needs or thinks they need to buy the blu-ray for $17.99 or so.

I would pity them too if they paid too much especially when BBY currently has it for $12.99 and AMZN had it for $8.99 in August. Where are you seeing $17.99?

[rdodolak]

Originally Posted by octagon

Why do they need to draw a line at all? People still buy DVDs. So what?

Even if one could make the case that pulling the plug on DVDs might maybe somewhere down the line lead to lower BD prices I'm not sure that's a particularly compelling argument.

Should companies stop giving people what they want simply because it might make the stuff I want a couple bucks cheaper?

This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia, is it?

Companies will draw the line and cease production when it's no longer cost effective for them regardless if the item is still selling and some people still want it.

[narfenugen]

How do you think CD player sales will fare in 5 years? How about 10 years?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by biznus97

Maybe in your area major retail stores carried LD, DVHS, and VCD but they didn't in my area. You are correct that a split market isn't a new idea but the reality is that when home media sales weren't on the decline most people were buying DVD's instead of the above mentioned formats.

I am not sure what you want to make. Mine was a simple one, DVD (or VHS) never had 100% of the home market and BD does not have it today and will most likely never have it. And for both of those there was also rental and other alternatives (OTA, Cable, Sat). That you mentioned for BD. Now if your point is that LD, DVHS, and VCD should not be counted because they were not available everywhere, and VHS should not be counted (since it eventually disappeared) and BD because it only came out in 2006 to me that makes no sense but how is this case any different? I went to the pharmacy today to get some medicine, there were some DVDs and there were BDs but there were no titles there on Vudu or any other EST so why would you count them? DIVIX titles were available (for as long as it lasted) at circuit city and some other retailers that is more than any of the EST available today. If your point was that all those were niche, then let’s get serious, take all of the EST (Vudu, AppleTV.....) and the market is smaller than Niche. Actually Avengers (the biggest title of 2012) sold more on BD then all the titles on all the EST combined.

My point is the adoption rate DVD had as a platform for home media purchases was much higher than most of the previous formats. This was aided by several factors including its use in game systems and PC's. The convenience factor has already be talked about in this thread and people being able to take one disc and play it in 3 or four pieces of equipment at home is definitely that.

Not sure what you mean, do you mean that I could not take a VHS player and watch it on my VHS player in the LR and then take it and bring it to my sisters and watch it there and bring it to my BR and watch it there, or are you saying I can’t do all that with BD?

Secondly, although you have given examples of people that chose not to buy or buy many DVD's there were many that did. The number in a collection isn't absolutely critical. The point is when the HD formats were introduced there were more people than in previous format transitions in a position to upgrade an existing collection rather than starting for the first time. If there is another physical format I think it will have an even harder time.

Again, I have no idea what you mean, obviously you think you arte making a point but I am not sure what it is. So let me try and clarify what I think.

“My name is Joe I want to buy ___insert title here____ I will buy it on ___insert format here____ “
What format he sais (be it DVD, BD or one of the EST formats) is what is important

To care about
“My name is Joe I don’t want to buy ___insert title here____ so I will not buy it on ___insert format here____ “

Is an insane idea
Yes there were films I bought on DVD (Or VHS) a long time ago and I won’t be re-buying on BD (or what ever replaces BD) but that is immaterial, I won’t be buying them because I am not interested in those films not because of the format. If a parent bought a Barney (or similar) DVD for their 5 year old in 2002 because they would watch it 5 times a day every day does it make sense to expect them to buy it on BD now that the kid is 15? Even though they threw away the DVD 8 years ago because the kid ougrew Barney?

In many places a lot of the hassles (high per movie fees, late fees, limited selections, physical travel to a movie store, etc.) historically associated with renting have been mitigated with today's offerings. The rental options available today require little to no extra hardware making them more accessible than ever before. This hurts media sales across the board which I'm sure studios would love to see higher than they are now. The early to middle part of DVD's lifespan didn't have the same hurdles to deal with.

I disagree, tour comments don’t make sense, you did not need a special player to watch rented DVDs (or VHS before that or BD today), that is a bigger issue with streaming services like Netflix (or pick your own rental streaming choice) where they are not supported by all players. You are also forgetting that there have more or less always been renters and buyers, and that is just as true today. Buyers are not renters and so rental choices are immaterial. On the other hand renters only buy very few films and if I look at everyone I know they still do the same today ( rent a lot of films buy a handful or two a year)

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by octagon

I'm sure that would cause that person many sleepless nights too.

lol

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by biznus97

while i agree that blu-ray is a premium item, i'd rather choose what films i want to buy/upgrade. Assuming a good job has been done, the films worth owning on blu-ray are the ones you'll watch regardless of the genre.

+1

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

i think ultimately it is because dvd is still around. if they said they were going to stop producing them in the next year, people would buy blu because they have to. vhs was still selling when they stopped producing them. you have to draw the line somewhere and studios are too afraid of losing money to actually pull the trigger and quit making dvds. when you have a choice between 2 similar technologies, why would people upgrade if it costs them more? ignore the techinical stuff - are you going to spend $2000 more for a car that has leather seats over one that doesn't? for some people it is yes, no for others but if that car only comes with leather seats and you want that car, you'll buy it.

Agree, it is still a bit early to dump DVD, but then again it was too early in 2003 to drop VHS and that is why it continued until 2006. But you are missing the time factor, As time passes more and more people are buying BDs and less and less are buying DVD, in 2010 Avatar, the biggest selling title, sold nearly equaly well on both formats this year Avengers (the most popular title was nearly 3 BD copies for every DVD. Next year more people will have BD players and when they go out to buy their favourite film BDs market share will be higher. It will continue that way until DVD is gone. Why because as more people have BD players and start watching BDs they will continue to drop DVD. It is the natural progression it is what happend to VHS, is now happening to DVD and will eventually happen to BD.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by octagon

Why do they need to draw a line at all? People still buy DVDs. So what?

Even if one could make the case that pulling the plug on DVDs might maybe somewhere down the line lead to lower BD prices I'm not sure that's a particularly compelling argument.

Should companies stop giving people what they want simply because it might make the stuff I want a couple bucks cheaper?

This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia, is it?

It is just normal business, can I go out and buy a 8mb USB stick? can I go out and buy a 20GB HDD?....... technology advances. At some point the only people that want the old decrepit technology are the very few cheap people and then it does not make sense to cater to them at all.

Can I go out and buy Dredd on VHS? no, at some point in 2005 studios, merchants.... decided the very few people that would rather save a buck and get the VHS copy of a film were to few and most of them would just buy the DVD if they were not given that choice.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I declare the two words 'most people' the most overused and annoying words in the history of home cinema debate.

agree especially since it tends to never be backed up with any proof.

[brps3]

One reason they still make dvd's is so people cant taker the movie with them and put them in their laptop, portable dvd player, or the cars built in dvd player.