Oh noes teh sky is falling!

[Tok]

Originally Posted by baghdadlion

Many films are available only on DVD e.g. foreign films, independent films, documentaries.

I am not saying DVD should die. But if I have my choice between formats and the title is available on both I will pick the BD over the DVD. But I will admit I am far less likely to purchase DVDs than BDs.

Foreign films, independent films and documentaries don't strongly appeal to me. Enjoy them on DVD if that's the only way you can get them. Those smaller films are consider big for their categories if they sell a few thousand copies. These are not titles that will generate large scale sales.

But don't use the argument that BD is doing poorly because those eclectic categories are less likely to be available on BD. I agree that it isn't really necessary since many of those types of films are shot on video or low grade film stock that wouldn't benefit from BD's HD abilities.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Tok

4k... really? Can't we just be happy with BD for a while.

Tok, lol, you’re Signature ^ reminds me of the attitude of Arri, i.e. the last sentence of this post… https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...py#post7847149

[NeonStreetMelt]

Because people have to have HDTVs and the HDMI plug to go along with the player, and many people first built their home video collections with DVDs, hundreds, and thousands of dollars were spent. Many of these people even had substantial VHS libraries. So in addition to the new equipment, they've been asked to buy both new titles and re-buy titles they already have, some of which they've bought multiple times over, possibly on VHS, and multiple editions on DVD with all the DVD re-issuing that's gone on. Also as others have said it's not the obvious jump in quality improvement and change in what you physically see and hold in your hand.

With DVD you didn't have to rewind anymore and you could scene jump, they were smaller and lighter and didn't degrade with each viewing. Blu Ray has superior picture and sound but is also disc based and it's physical disc looks the same as a DVD, it's not so different to the average consumer. A lot of people don't care about the improvement in picture or audio. DVD is good enough for them. If they buy a blu ray player they can still play their DVDs, if they buy a DVD or Blu Ray, and it's a combo pack it COMES with the other, they can watch the DVD as they're used to and ignore the Blu Ray. VHS's lifespan got extended cause new movies continued being released in the format, AND combo VCR/DVD decks continued to be produced and sell. It was a halfway measure people could take, still holding on to the past and what was familiar and what they'd grown up with.

As long as new big mainstream movies are released on DVD and the combo packs are sold, people simply aren't being forced into the decision to completely transition. If they hadn't stopped releasing new movies on VHS with A History Of Violence the sales probably would've continued to dip but there are those who would've continued buying the VHS releases. Also with what's gone on with the economy you can't blame the studios for as yet, not forcing people to completely make the switch, they're still making too much money from DVDs. There's also the major issue of many TV shows being not worth it quality or money-wise for studios to remaster and re-release, and TV show box sets have been a huge boon for DVD's growth.

I have yet to come even close to buying as many Blu-Rays as DVDs. I'm not going to upgrade and re-buy every title. Most movies I don't feel are worth the Blu-Ray, especially if it's more a talky, low-to-no-action, light on special FX, more drama or comedy type movie. Blu-Ray is just the format I reserve for buying my all-time favorites (a rather low number, certainly nothing close to the 500+ ballooning collections I see some here have) in the best possible quality, and those newer movies I enjoy that I've never owned on any format (I HATE to double dip on any titles, really did a good job avoiding all the reissues on DVD) that I think look exceptional in HD. Some movies I have on VHS were never released on DVD, let alone Bluray, and some on DVD have yet to be released on Bluray so I don't even have the option 7 years into the format to get them even if I wanted to. So, I'm a Bluray buyer, I have the necessary setup, and a lot of the product I would potentially buy, hasn't been made available, so there's another factor of why it hasn't taken off like DVD.

[nolfoc]

Originally Posted by NeonStreetMelt

Because people have to have HDTVs and the HDMI plug to go along with the player, and many people first built their home video collections with DVDs, hundreds, and thousands of dollars were spent. Many of these people even had substantial VHS libraries. So in addition to the new equipment, they've been asked to buy both new titles and re-buy titles they already have, some of which they've bought multiple times over, possibly on VHS, and multiple editions on DVD with all the DVD re-issuing that's gone on. Also as others have said it's not the obvious jump in quality improvement and change in what you physically see and hold in your hand.

With DVD you didn't have to rewind anymore and you could scene jump, they were smaller and lighter and didn't degrade with each viewing. Blu Ray has superior picture and sound but is also disc based and it's physical disc looks the same as a DVD, it's not so different to the average consumer. A lot of people don't care about the improvement in picture or audio. DVD is good enough for them. If they buy a blu ray player they can still play their DVDs, if they buy a DVD or Blu Ray, and it's a combo pack it COMES with the other, they can watch the DVD as they're used to and ignore the Blu Ray. VHS's lifespan got extended cause new movies continued being released in the format, AND combo VCR/DVD decks continued to be produced and sell. It was a halfway measure people could take, still holding on to the past and what was familiar and what they'd grown up with.

As long as new big mainstream movies are released on DVD and the combo packs are sold, people simply aren't being forced into the decision to completely transition. If they hadn't stopped releasing new movies on VHS with A History Of Violence the sales probably would've continued to dip but there are those who would've continued buying the VHS releases. Also with what's gone on with the economy you can't blame the studios for as yet, not forcing people to completely make the switch, they're still making too much money from DVDs.

I have yet to come even close to buying as many Blu-Rays as DVDs. I'm not going to upgrade and re-buy every title. Most movies I don't feel are worth the Blu-Ray, especially if it's more a talky, low-to-no-action, light on special FX, more drama or comedy type movie. Blu-Ray is just the format I reserve for buying my all-time favorites (a rather low number, certainly nothing close to the 500+ ballooning collections I see some here have) in the best possible quality, and those newer movies I enjoy that I've never owned on any format (I HATE to double dip on any titles, really did a good job avoiding all the reissues on DVD) that I think look exceptional in HD. Some movies I have on VHS were never released on DVD, let alone Bluray, and some on DVD have yet to be released on Bluray so I don't even have the option 7 years into the format to get them even if I wanted to.

every movie is worth the upgrade.. DVD's are atrocious to watch.. even mediocre BD transfer look better than DVD's

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by nolfoc

every movie is worth the upgrade.. DVD's are atrocious to watch.. even mediocre BD transfer look better than DVD's

Agree 100 percent.

[Dragun]

Originally Posted by nolfoc

every movie is worth the upgrade.. DVD's are atrocious to watch.. even mediocre BD transfer look better than DVD's

Obviously if money was no issue I'd replace every DVD with a Blu-Ray, if one existed. But I can't afford to do that, so I prioritize.

I'm awaiting Blu-Rays for some DVDs I'd like to replace and I'm resigned to the fact that some may not get ever get Blu-Rays. Sometimes it feels like the titles I do want to upgrade will never be released on Blu-Ray...

[Nightwing_]

Originally Posted by nec1912

public getting tired switching evey 5 or 10 years ?

Amen! I'm tired of the format changing every 5 to 10 years, so are my pockets.

[baghdadlion]

Originally Posted by NeonStreetMelt

Most movies I don't feel are worth the Blu-Ray, especially if it's more a talky, low-to-no-action, light on special FX, more drama or comedy type movie.

You can get these in BD for around $5-7 if you wait a few months after release.

[RyanPom]

I thought DVD was slowing down because of Digital Downloads and BR taking over?

[baghdadlion]

Originally Posted by Tok

I am not saying DVD should die. But if I have my choice between formats and the title is available on both I will pick the BD over the DVD. But I will admit I am far less likely to purchase DVDs than BDs.

Foreign films, independent films and documentaries don't strongly appeal to me. Enjoy them on DVD if that's the only way you can get them. Those smaller films are consider big for their categories if they sell a few thousand copies. These are not titles that will generate large scale sales.

But don't use the argument that BD is doing poorly because those eclectic categories are less likely to be available on BD. I agree that it isn't really necessary since many of those types of films are shot on video or low grade film stock that wouldn't benefit from BD's HD abilities.

I'm not saying BD is doing poorly. Just that DVD is still needed for certain types of movies.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Tok, lol, you’re Signature ^ reminds me of the attitude of Arri, i.e. the last sentence of this post… https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...py#post7847149

We will see if 4K is the next big thing. I seriously doubt that its going to be the standard anytime soon. I have no interest in it if they won't give us a physical format. The infrastructure isn't there to support 4K streams on a large scale except in name only.

[nolfoc]

Originally Posted by Dragun

Obviously if money was no issue I'd replace every DVD with a Blu-Ray, if one existed. But I can't afford to do that, so I prioritize.

I'm awaiting Blu-Rays for some DVDs I'd like to replace and I'm resigned to the fact that some may not get ever get Blu-Rays. Sometimes it feels like the titles I do want to upgrade will never be released on Blu-Ray...

a lot of people are waiting for their favorite catalog's including myself.. eventually they will all be on BD, I just learned how to be more patient.. I mean hell if Camp Nowhere and Heavyweights are on BD, anything is possible

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by nolfoc

every movie is worth the upgrade.. DVD's are atrocious to watch.. even mediocre BD transfer look better than DVD's

agree. I can get the economic argument (I have it, I can see it, I don't care if it looks like crap since I might never even see it again). But it is just so funny when people try and rationalize their cheapness with "those movies are not worth the upgrade" do your eyes and ears change with the content of the movie. Either you can't hear or see the difference (true for someone like Helen Keller) and then why would any movie be "worth the upgrade" or you can and then all of the movies you will want to watch are worth it.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Dragun

Obviously if money was no issue I'd replace every DVD with a Blu-Ray, if one existed. But I can't afford to do that, so I prioritize.

And that makes perfect sense. No one is saying everyone (or even anyone) should run out and re-buy every movie they ever bought on DVD on BD as soon as they are available. The issue is when people say stuff like "I don't feel are worth the Blu-Ray", the movie (if worth watching) is always worth watching on BD.

I'm awaiting Blu-Rays for some DVDs I'd like to replace and I'm resigned to the fact that some may not get ever get Blu-Rays. Sometimes it feels like the titles I do want to upgrade will never be released on Blu-Ray...

some day they will come, you can't expect studios to release over 100 years of films on a newer media in a couple of years. it takes time since normal people don't go out and buy several hundred movies at a time and movie prices drop with time. It makes more sense to release a handful a week then 100-200 at a time since the guy might buy the handful at full price but he won't buy 100-200 and then next week there are even more.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Tok

We will see if 4K is the next big thing. I seriously doubt that its going to be the standard anytime soon. I have no interest in it if they won't give us a physical format...

Oh you’ll get it if the BDA foresees a worthwhile dollar to be made from it….that’s for sure (and they are keeping a close eye on early adopter sales (and marketing) of everything 4K in the consumer realm). So those with regularly disposable income who chase collecting physical media as well as those who pursue potentially the best movie PQ available ( http://www.avsforum.com/t/1473062/of...-owners-thread ) may someday meet in mutual harmony, for there will be a confluence of interests.

These retrospective ‘why’ threads are quite interesting (especially if one is aspiring to enter the business side of the home entertainment industry) or even if not, they provide a great vehicle to sharpen one’s internet debater skills. Are there any such threads on the forum which we can resurrect for why Blu-ray beat HD DVD or why BD-Live didn’t become more popular?

P.S.
I included the link to AVS because I can’t find any x900a series owners’ thread on this forum, much less, talk about hooking one up to the 4K ‘hockey puck’ to view 4K movies (and the perceived value of that endeavor), save for this lonely soul … https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...tv#post7856965

[NeonStreetMelt]

I can further clarify my views on this by saying: it's less that I think most movies aren't worth owning on Blu ray and MORE that I think most movies aren't worth OWNING period. I can't think of 700+ movies I actually need to own on blu ray that I would watch on a regular basis. I keep my collection LEAN and ELITE, to me. How does one have the time to constantly revisit hundreds upon hundreds, if not thousands of the same old titles, while still seeking new content? I don't. Most new-to-me movies are watched once, my all time favorites, some I'll revisit once a year, others once every 2-5/6 years. Also to me there's just more HD detail and minutia, nooks and crannies so to speak in a blockbuster scifi like Avatar than a talky, normal people walking around normal settings drama like "Hitchcock". Sure on blu ray you can see textures of clothes and walls and people's skin, but this sort of basic HD data doesn't get me going like high-action high FX stuff. I viewed Hitchcock via a digital hd stream and was perfectly content with the quality, enjoyed the film, may never watch it again, have no inclination to buy the disc, of course I'd buy the blu ray over the dvd if I ever did, but have no plans to.

Forgot to mention in my earlier post a huge factor in why blu ray hasn't taken off like dvds is back in 1997-2005 or so pirating movies and downloads was I believe way less mainstream and accessible to people, even when taking into account the lack of broadband speeds alone. Now more people than ever have broadband and more people than ever pirate movies, this eats into blu ray's market share.

[nolfoc]

Originally Posted by NeonStreetMelt

I can further clarify my views on this by saying: it's less that I think most movies aren't worth owning on Blu ray and MORE that I think most movies aren't worth OWNING period. I can't think of 700+ movies I actually need to own on blu ray that I would watch on a regular basis. I keep my collection LEAN and ELITE, to me. How does one have the time to constantly revisit hundreds upon hundreds, if not thousands of the same old titles, while still seeking new content? I don't. Most new-to-me movies are watched once, my all time favorites, some I'll revisit once a year, others once every 2-5/6 years. Also to me there's just more HD detail and minutia, nooks and crannies so to speak in a blockbuster scifi like Avatar than a talky, normal people walking around normal settings drama like "Hitchcock". I viewed Hitchcock via a digital hd stream and was perfectly content with the quality, enjoyed the film, may never watch it again, have no inclination to buy the disc, of course I'd buy the blu ray over the dvd if I ever did, but have no plans to.

Forgot to mention in my earlier post a huge factor in why blu ray hasn't taken off like dvds is back in 1997-2005 or so pirating movies and downloads was I believe way less mainstream and accessible to people, even when taking into account the lack of broadband speeds alone. Now more people than ever have broadband and more people than ever pirate movies, this eats into blu ray's market share.

doesn't eat into the market that much; the majority of people pirating movies are ones that don't care about owning a movie.. collectors still want a physical copy and to view that physical copy in the best presentation possible.. Blu-rays are consider a hobby to most people and they enjoy to own the movies they choose to own, if they decide to own 1000 BD's that's their choice to do so and more power to them for having a gigantic/fantastic collection. I also keep my collection as lean as possible I only buy movies that have replay value to me, I've been collecting since 2008 and have around 230 Blu's; do I get around to watching one every day? of course not but when I'm in the mood to sit down and watch a Blu-ray of any genre that I own I have the pleasure to do so whenever i like and that's a beautiful thing

[DaBargainHunta]

I still buy DVDs. Do I buy choose to buy a movie on DVD instead of Blu-Ray? No. But there are DVDs that don't have Blu releases yet, or movies I find for dirt cheap on DVD ($1-$3) that I'm not too sure about but wouldn't mind seeing. Plus, let's be honest, if you have a decent Blu-Ray player, upconverted DVDs can look very good. As good as Blu-Ray? No, but still nice.

As for streaming and cheap rental kiosks like Redbox, that has definitely cut into people's purchases. I purchase less because of it, and I almost never buy TV seasons anymore because streaming really is the way to go for those.

[dib2]

My theory is this:

1. Our economy was doing better when DVDs came to market.
2. Technology for DVDs was cheaper.
3. Didn't that replace VHS which has a limited life expectancy and not durable.
4. Cheap disk so you could keep your favorite movies for a long time with DVD.
5. Blu-ray were more expensive and we learned which movies we really want to re-watch.
6. The DVD generation got older and we don't want to switch anymore.
7. Netflics, iTues portable media. college/high school Kids can get movies for their smartphones or tablets now. They can't buy or see the point in blu-ray.

Even though the sound is greatly improved on Blu-ray, i don't think many people understand or hear a difference. I can tell when we watch a blu-ray on our family room TV that the sound is better but the TV can't reproduce the quality sound. I watch it in our theater and it is amazing but you need to have the sound system to take advantage of it all. Otherwise, DVD quality is good enough for people who don't have the desire or money to buy a good sound system.

[Jack9909090]

Originally Posted by Tok

Not trying to be a jerk... but the 32-in TV is why DVD is good enough for you.
At that screen size and if you are viewing from typical distances you won't see a difference.

I have been watching screens in my home that range in size from 46 inches to 100 inches. My first projector setup was a 576p Matterhorn-based DLP unit on a 92-in screen. DVD was fine initially. Then I started buying BDs and upgraded to 1080p projector with a 100-in screen. I was primarily watching HD feeds (cable broadcast and BD from the PS3) for the first few months of ownership. Then I put a DVD in one day and I couldn't watch it. After getting accustomed to quality 1080p for several months, DVD/SD shortcomings were very apparent. DVD was never meant to be blown up to 100 inches.
.

Frankly i was never was one for Big TV's. Even when i had a CRT TV. I only had a 27". Also the room i watch it in his not very big and so i am probably only 10 to 15 feet away from the TV. So having a 100 inch Tv would be impractical for me. Frankly when i first got my HDTV. I thought everything would look like Crap and it is probably the size that it dosen't.