Oh noes teh sky is falling!

[lilboyblu]

I'm wondering if some of the people posting responses here bothered to read the entire article? Netflix and the like are fine and good for the most popular titles of the moment, but if you're into watching deep catalog titles, physical media isn't going anwhere. VHS is discussed so prominently because the format still has many good films on it that were never released on DVD or Blu-ray. DVD is mentioned because the format still has many good films on it that were never released to Blu-ray.

Then there's the part about the AFI Top 100. Only 17 of those are available to stream, and not a single one of those even falls into the AFI Top 10. That doesn't make any sense, and these are highly regarded "mainstream" titles. That said, deep catalog niche titles that so many of us here want to watch and collect don't have a chance to be seen at all via streaming. In my opinion, streamed content isn't about eventually making every back catalog gem you can think of available and accessible to everyone, it's about making available whatever they think will make the most money with the least investment.

We need physical media.

[Jr7936]

yes blu rays are good for action movies, blockbusters and tv shows but if I can get a romantic film or a comedy/drama at the library or at redbox for free, i feel those genres don't offer that big of a leap in audio or picture quality, where lets say the new avengers, or the new mad max would

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

An alarming number of people I know personally either can't see, or just don't care about, the difference in quality between DVD and Blu-ray. A recent movie's DVD played in a Blu-ray player looks more than good enough to most people. It isn't just age/eyesight related either; it's flat-out apathy in most cases.

[AnamorphicWidescreen]

Physical media will never go away completely, if only because companies that sell HD TV's want to advertise how good a movie/TV show looks on HD - on their HD set. Sure, streaming has come a long way in the last several years & I have seen HD streams. However, IMHO I don't think a store selling TV's will use streaming as an example of the best way the PQ will look like on the set - when trying to sell their HD TV's on the showroom floor(s)....

Just my .02...

Originally Posted by schlock

Quality means diddly squat to 99% of the general population. Everyone bought a widescreen tv when they came out because that was "the thing", but then they watch all their tv-shows stretched out and distorted, and if they do watch a DVD or Blu, most people don't even have a clue how to adjust the aspect ratio on those. (I've seen people watch 1.85:1 movies stretched out to 2.35:1 with black bars on top and bottom just because their sets are set to stretch.) And they don't even know anything's wrong! Trying to educate them that a Blu has more lines of resolution than a DVD is pretty much a pointless endeavor.

Yeah, I don't like watching stretched-out films/TV shows. This type of thing is immediately obvious to me, but I know it's not always that obvious to others...

[Member-222782]

Where are all those people who couldn't wait to get their first VCRs when home video started to take off? Millions of people enthusiastically shelled out big bucks to buy their own copies of their favorite films after they purchased a VCR (and then DVD player). Have those people completely lost interest? I don't get it. Are there really so few of us out there who care enough to still buy movies?

[klauswhereareyou]

Well considering Sony has decided to go ahead and put out their own release of Christine here in North America makes me think it's not quite "Twilight Time" yet for physical media.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

An alarming number of people I know personally either can't see, or just don't care about, the difference in quality between DVD and Blu-ray. A recent movie's DVD played in a Blu-ray player looks more than good enough to most people. It isn't just age/eyesight related either; it's flat-out apathy in most cases.

As others have said, bingo.

My wife actually can tell, probably because we have a large television, but she still doesn't care. DVD is simply the "good enough" threshold where mainstream consumers stop caring.

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

As others have said, bingo.

My wife actually can tell, probably because we have a large television, but she still doesn't care. DVD is simply the "good enough" threshold where mainstream consumers stop caring.

It also doesn't help that HD PQ with the cable/sat companies is absolute crap. Most of it is only slightly better than an upconverted DVD with some it looking no better.

[bkfountain]

Originally Posted by cine74

Where are all those people who couldn't wait to get their first VCRs when home video started to take off? Millions of people enthusiastically shelled out big bucks to buy their own copies of their favorite films after they purchased a VCR (and then DVD player). Have those people completely lost interest? I don't get it. Are there really so few of us out there who care enough to still buy movies?

there's a difference between when the first home movies were possible with vhs and now. You can find movies on bluray, dvd, itunes, netflix, whatever. People just don't care about the quality difference of streaming netflix and a bluray. Just like with mp3's.

I'm fine with blurays becoming a niche thing. Retail selection sucks anyways besides blockbuster new releases, and there's good companies licensing catalog titles that the major studios will never bother with themselves.

[Cranston37]

I have a rule of thumb that when you hear soccer mom's talking about what tech stocks they are buying, it's time to sell. Or when the terrible state of the stock market gets magazine covers, it's time to buy.

I guess similarly when long pieces like this come out, talking about a format like they are joining vinyl records in the nostalgia category...

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

It also doesn't help that HD PQ with the cable/sat companies is absolute crap. Most of it is only slightly better than an upconverted with some it looking no better.

Yeah, our Fios is a mess. My wife told me once though "if I can see what's happening I'm fine." The only time I ever heard her complain about PQ was when an on-demand TV show is in SD only and plays in a smaller box on the TV. She always yells for me to zoom it, then she thinks it looks fine.

[BouCoupDinkyDau]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

As others have said, bingo.

My wife actually can tell, probably because we have a large television, but she still doesn't care. DVD is simply the "good enough" threshold where mainstream consumers stop caring.

My wife is in the exact same boat, as well as one of my two children.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by EVERYONE LIES

He started collecting VHS, 16 years ago? That is around the time the format died. No blu-ray player? This makes about as much sense as Criterion still releasing DVD's.

Originally Posted by Brian81

Doesn't matter. I started collected LD around the time it was dying off. I had a CRT TV and I thought DVD's looked pixelated on them. I liked the smoother picture, and the resolution seemed about the same between the two on it. It wasn't until I purchased an HDTV in 2006 that I realized how bad LD looked. The whole digital vs. analog display.

It's also possible that when they say that he started collecting 16 years ago, it could mean in a big way of amassing such a huge collection. He may have casually bought a movie previously (or received them as gifts, since prior to the age of 17, he may not have had much in the way of his own personal income to directly by a lot of them, himself).

It doesn't mean that he was 100% strictly a renter prior to that point.

[Jobber8742]

Originally Posted by BouCoupDinkyDau

My wife is in the exact same boat, as well as one of my two children.

My wife is pretty much the same. Given the choice, she'll watch the Blu-Ray, but she really doesn't care. When I put TV shows on my server, I transfer all of mine in HD but hers in SD to save space because she says just doesn't care.

[Markgway]

You see, this is exactly why I don't like other people!

[CelestialAgent]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Interesting article! Did I read correctly, Matt doesn't even own a computer?
How is that possible? A BD player I can understand, as at least he has some BDs and is looking forward...but no computer??

He won't even be able to read the published article!

Originally Posted by AnamorphicWidescreen

My HD set is 47". To me, this is pretty much the minimum size that you would need to see the difference between DVD & Blu. IMHO, if a set is significantly smaller, the difference between the two formats would be less obvious - that's just me, however.

Well, I'll disagree. My TV is a little over 30" and the difference between DVD and Blu-Ray is obvious to me, especially with older films. That said, with newer films that get simultaneous releases, I don't watch as many newer films so there may be less of a difference in that situation. Plus it's not just a difference in terms of quality, it can also be in terms of what print is used.

Originally Posted by darkknightman

The majority of consumers are going to chose convenience over quality. It's just a fact. You need to look no further than the current generation of children and teens. They do not collect cd's, dvd's or any such physical media at all and are content on having their music in mp3 format and watching movies and shows via Netflix, or other such services.

I am a teenager who collects DVDs and Blu-Rays (although not CDs, I have Spotify for that.) Most of the friends I know are either buying the DVD or using illegal streaming sites; I don't know many people with Netflix. It depends on income and if their parents are interested in Netflix too, or if they're willing to relinquish their credit card. Now this will likely change in a couple of years, and perhaps with younger children and younger teens too. However with late teens I don't see a massive decline, but then this is one person's experience so what do I know.

From my personal standing I see no reason to own music physically or digitally; to me it's ephereal. For most films, I know I probably won't rewatch it but will buy the Blu-Ray if there's at least 20 or 30 minutes of supplemental content, definitely if there's an hour or more. Otherwise it makes way more sense to rent it. However with Netflix, my issue there is there's just too much stuff, even with the limited range in the UK. I have a specific list of what films I want to check out, and I can't just pick something blindly.

Originally Posted by lilboyblu

I'm wondering if some of the people posting responses here bothered to read the entire article? Netflix and the like are fine and good for the most popular titles of the moment, but if you're into watching deep catalog titles, physical media isn't going anwhere. VHS is discussed so prominently because the format still has many good films on it that were never released on DVD or Blu-ray. DVD is mentioned because the format still has many good films on it that were never released to Blu-ray.

I read the article. What I find interesting is that a good proportion use digital and physical in tandem (41%), whilst only 20% are physical only and 12% are digital only, and that's out of nearly 3000 people. So it still has a lot of life.

Originally Posted by gates70

Depends on the size of the screen you're watching on. On my 112", no matter how well a player upscales, DVD still looks like crap.

I didn't even know they made screens that size.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by cine74

Where are all those people who couldn't wait to get their first VCRs when home video started to take off? Millions of people enthusiastically shelled out big bucks to buy their own copies of their favorite films after they purchased a VCR (and then DVD player). Have those people completely lost interest? I don't get it. Are there really so few of us out there who care enough to still buy movies?

Most people didn't buy that many prerecorded tapes when VHS was big, the rental marked was far bigger than sell thru and rental was the equivalent of streaming then. Many like myself also taped far more movies off television than bought films.

[Aclea]

Originally Posted by EVERYONE LIES

He started collecting VHS, 16 years ago? That is around the time the format died. No blu-ray player? This makes about as much sense as Criterion still releasing DVD's.

The article makes a pertinent point about that - there are films on VHS that have never been released on DVD let alone Blu-ray. I still have VHS copies of various films and live shows that will almost certainly never come out on another format. Given a choice between a VHS copy and no copy at all, I'll take the VHS.

[42041]

Originally Posted by lilboyblu

I'm wondering if some of the people posting responses here bothered to read the entire article? Netflix and the like are fine and good for the most popular titles of the moment, but if you're into watching deep catalog titles, physical media isn't going anwhere. VHS is discussed so prominently because the format still has many good films on it that were never released on DVD or Blu-ray. DVD is mentioned because the format still has many good films on it that were never released to Blu-ray.

Then there's the part about the AFI Top 100. Only 17 of those are available to stream, and not a single one of those even falls into the AFI Top 10. That doesn't make any sense, and these are highly regarded "mainstream" titles. That said, deep catalog niche titles that so many of us here want to watch and collect don't have a chance to be seen at all via streaming. In my opinion, streamed content isn't about eventually making every back catalog gem you can think of available and accessible to everyone, it's about making available whatever they think will make the most money with the least investment.

We need physical media.

I think streaming will ultimatey be great for obscure films. Putting something on a disc, inventorying it, selling it through retail is a lot more overhead for releases that will sell in small quantities than Netflix or whoever serving it on demand.

[Barnolde]

I definitely buy less now but it's still my main format. I hate how Digital HD is released before Blu-ray and I have no interest in Ultraviolet or anything like that. Netflix is great for convenience but for "epic" movies like Spartacus, Lawrence of Arabia, Avengers, or Once Upon a Time in the West, Blu-ray is the way to go.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by 42041

I think streaming will ultimatey be great for obscure films. Putting something on a disc, inventorying it, selling it through retail is a lot more overhead for releases that will sell in small quantities than Netflix or whoever serving it on demand.

Even if disc media lasts 30 more years as a niche format there is going to be tons of less popular stuff that goes streaming only. So unless someone is a die-hard anti-streaming person we're all going to have a combination of both at some point.