Oh noes teh sky is falling!

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Brown

You are missing the point. Sure, blu-ray can provide a fantastic experience, and I am not saying that people should tolerate screwed up releases. But blu-ray can be more than great looking flicks from 2005 onward plus a few catalog titles. DVD set the bar for its time, but it also provided the widest range of home video entertainment (which didn't/couldn't boast the best PQ). Blind devotion only to the next shiny blockbuster only limits the success of the blu-ray format.

Some of these recent posts talk of blu-ray as being a "premium" experience. What? Is it like some fine china only meant for a lobster dinner? Now that's just setting blu-ray to be the next laser disc. No, blu-ray is a storage medium, one that not only stores much more information than DVD but is less likely to be damaged. To limit its uses makes no business sense.

I agree, for me it does not make sent o say, for exxample, rainman Is not worth the BD but Top gun is worth it. Is Tom Cruise's face that much different in one over the other to make HD more woth it than the other?

OIn the other hand I don't have an issue with the term Premium product. In the end if someone , for example decided to buy Avengers in 3D BD they paid more than 2D BD and more than DVD, so someone that wanted to save a few $ could have bought the DVD over the BD (or 3D BD). On the other hand we also have that roughly 1/2 bought the 2D BD, and 3D and DVD each had roughly 1/4 the sales. Which shows that most people would rather pay the premium price and have the better quality.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

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.

Oh, absolutely. People will stop buying DVDs when they don't want DVDs anymore. That's why companies don't have to draw lines or pick winners and losers.

Markets are more than capable of sorting themselves out and this one is no exception.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by octagon

Oh, absolutely. People will stop buying DVDs when they don't want DVDs anymore. That's why companies don't have to draw lines or pick winners and losers.

Markets are more than capable of sorting themselves out and this one is no exception.

I actually like having both options to choose from. It would really suck if we were forced to purchase the more expensive movie for everything. I can't believe I saw Driving Miss Daisy today for $25+ at Wal-Mart....that is robbery.

The best thing the studios ever did was to bundle dvd/BR and sometimes the digital download all together.

[pagemaster]

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.

Yes, I would agree that studios are too afraid to quit making dvds. The market for dvd is still huge.

[wormraper]

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.

damn, I guess so many of us are idiots for buying all these catalog titles that AREN'T on your approved list of hi-def only transfers. , sorry but just about EVERY titles is worth the upgrade. I was the kinda guy who double and triple dipped on the dvd format alone for upgrades in PQ and AQ. some titles aren't as WILD an upgrade as others, but who comes off trying to tell us that ONLY certain titles are worth the upgrade??? Every person's trash is another person's treasure. I have a TON of old obscure titles that I would take any day of the week over Patton, or LoA... great movies they are, but why should we be restricted to only "the the most popular shiny titles" just because someone else thinks dvd or YOUTUBE (shudder) is "good enough".

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by wormraper

damn, I guess so many of us are idiots for buying all these catalog titles that AREN'T on your approved list of hi-def only transfers. , sorry but just about EVERY titles is worth the upgrade. I was the kinda guy who double and triple dipped on the dvd format alone for upgrades in PQ and AQ. some titles aren't as WILD an upgrade as others, but who comes off trying to tell us that ONLY certain titles are worth the upgrade??? Every person's trash is another person's treasure. I have a TON of old obscure titles that I would take any day of the week over Patton, or LoA... great movies they are, but why should we be restricted to only "the the most popular shiny titles" just because someone else thinks dvd or YOUTUBE (shudder) is "good enough".

His ridiculous point of view is greatly based on money from his own admission. Though I'm sure if anyone was to offer him a choice between the DVD or blu-ray of the same movie for free, or the studios were to sell every blu for the same price as the DVD, he would choose the blu-ray in almost every circumstance.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by octagon

Oh, absolutely. People will stop buying DVDs when they don't want DVDs anymore. That's why companies don't have to draw lines or pick winners and losers.

Markets are more than capable of sorting themselves out and this one is no exception.

yes and no, there will always be someone that thinks "____ is cheaper or _____ still works so why upgrade".

One of my BIL's mom only bought a DVD player Christmas 2005 because the guy at the rental place told her that they would stop releasing movies on VHS at the end of the year. I went over for supper in early 2006 and I hooked it all up for her and I remeber thinking something like "Wow, she is just getting into DVD and I am looking forward to later this year when I will be able to get a BD player and movies"

It is not just that anecdotal evidence, in 2005 studios decided to drop VHS at the end of the year, some titles were released in 2006 on VHS but according to DEG (chart at the topp of page 2) http://www.degonline.org/pressreleas...year%20end.pdf
in 2005 DVD had revenue of $22.8B and DVD + VHS had $24.3B that would mean that VHS did roughly 1.5B$ of business in 2005, so obviously there was still a market where people (other than my sisters MIL) were still buying/renting VHS when studios decided to drop it. There was also some sales in 2006 (hard to say how much since DVD was 24.1 and all combined it was 24.2 so if it was 24.05 for DVD and it was 24.249 there could be nearly 200M that could be mostly VHS but if it was 24.149 for DVD and 24.150 for combined then VHS could have been practically none-existent).

That is what is meant by drawing a line obviously it won’t be done when the market is 50-50 but at some point the people still buying the old tech are not worth the effort of supporting that old tech.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

That is what is meant by drawing a line obviously it won’t be done when the market is 50-50 but at some point the people still buying the old tech are not worth the effort of supporting that old tech.

I'm sure that's how you're using 'draw a line' and I don't disagree. At some point companies have to look at the numbers and say 'okay, this is done...time to move on'.

But that's not the sense I get when I usually see calls for studios to stop producing DVDs. When people talk about killing DVD they're usually arguing that studios should take away the 'bad' choice so that consumers will be more inclined to make the 'right' choice and that's simply not necessary.

All other things equal more choices are usually better than fewer choices and consumers will move to blu - or not - at their own pace.

There's no rush.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by lobosrul

Most people agree with you.

Very good!

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

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

True. Normally someone's Aunt or next door neighbour.

[lobosrul]

Originally Posted by Brown

You are missing the point. Sure, blu-ray can provide a fantastic experience, and I am not saying that people should tolerate screwed up releases. But blu-ray can be more than great looking flicks from 2005 onward plus a few catalog titles. DVD set the bar for its time, but it also provided the widest range of home video entertainment (which didn't/couldn't boast the best PQ). Blind devotion only to the next shiny blockbuster only limits the success of the blu-ray format.

Some of these recent posts talk of blu-ray as being a "premium" experience. What? Is it like some fine china only meant for a lobster dinner? Now that's just setting blu-ray to be the next laser disc. No, blu-ray is a storage medium, one that not only stores much more information than DVD but is less likely to be damaged. To limit its uses makes no business sense.

Where did I say blu-ray should only be for flicks from 2005 onward? I watched Lifeboat (1944), last weekend and was quite pleased with the transfer. BD sales are already way way greater than LD ever was. Its not even a concern.

You mentioned porn and TV shows in your previous post. First there is no restriction on adult BD's, that was a rumor. A huge number of TV shows were first released on DVD because it was impractical to do so on VHS. Not many catalog TV shows have been released on BD, because its costly to remaster an old TV show for HD, then put together a BD boxset, the market it. They're not going to go to the trouble of condensing a SD release on BD just for convenience. For one, it may confuse many customers who thought BD automatically meant High def. And two, there is perception of less value. "Joe six-pack" is not going to plop down as much cash for a 1 disc as a 6 disc boxset of his favorite TV show.

The studios are still releasing DVD's because its maximizing their profit. They can offer DVD for less to get in the cheapskates, and charge a premium for BD. If DVD didn't exist they wouldn't be able to do that. Its a different situation from DVD replacing VHS. Those cost more to replicate than DVD, and were seen as less valuable by consumers. BD replacing DVD is a different situation.

Your suggestion that their marketing guys are looking at this forum, seeing that some of us are demanding the best PQ, and "proper" cases, then shrugging their shoulders and saying oh well, is quite frankly silly.

[img eL]

Studios should release SD shows on blu ray. They can easily say 10 DVD's equal 1 blu ray disc. Joe six pack can understand that, Joe 10 pack of DVD's on one Blu ray

[Lucy Diamond]

The HD war in the beginning of Blu-ray's lifespan didn't help.

People are gun shy and also way too average.

The average kat can't tell the difference and doesn't care.

Look at most shows geared towards women...DVD only. I have heard "I just want to see my show, I don't care what it looks like" a thousand times in the aisles at BestBuy, especially since they started mixing Blu in with their DVD stock.

I think Blu-ray will most likely be the last great PHYSICAL media. As soon as the world goes all digital, I'm out of the game.

[img eL]

[QUOTE=Brown;6975688]And if people continue to view blu-ray as a "premium" experience and limit content only to what they think looks best, then blu-ray will be more akin to LD than DVD. Disagree if you want, but blu-ray has not come close to releasing the wide range of content DVD provides. /QUOTE]

Blu ray is a lot more successful than LD (Laser Disc) ever was. Blu ray players are in far more homes than LD players

[biznus97]

[quote=img eL;6975754]

Originally Posted by Brown

And if people continue to view blu-ray as a "premium" experience and limit content only to what they think looks best, then blu-ray will be more akin to LD than DVD. Disagree if you want, but blu-ray has not come close to releasing the wide range of content DVD provides. /QUOTE]

Blu ray is a lot more successful than LD (Laser Disc) ever was. Blu ray players are in far more homes than LD players

Correct,

A premium option only indicates that there are standard options also available. That is the case with home video and audio. In the audio world you can buy MP3, physical CD, and lossless downloads that equal or surpass the quality of a CD. You also have people that elect not to pay the premium for HD channels on the cable bill.

[lobosrul]

Originally Posted by Brown

First, while you may be a fan of Lifeboat, your interest puts you in the minority. The focus of the industry and "most" (sorry) folks here is the next pristine shiny blockbuster. And if people continue to view blu-ray as a "premium" experience and limit content only to what they think looks best, then blu-ray will be more akin to LD than DVD. Disagree if you want, but blu-ray has not come close to releasing the wide range of content DVD provides. (And it has nothing to do with DVD being the choice of "cheapskates" - should we ban the sale of blu-ray in Walmarts because blu-ray is too high-quality to offer to the unwashed bargain hunter?) As for porn, I only mentioned it as an example of a niche blu-ray has failed to exploit.

I think you have it in reverse. The studios view BD as a premium format. As long as there is a cheaper alternative that they continue to support, many people are going to choose that option. And I really do think they prefer it that way.

Why on earth would "we" (as if "we" have the power to do so), prevent Walmart from selling BD. I never said BD is too high-quality for the "unwashed", just that there are many people out there that won't spend even one dollar extra for BD over DVD.

I'm not sure what you even mean by "blu-ray has failed to exploit" porn. BD is just a format. Sony cannot force adult film studios to release their product on BD. And actually there is quite a lot of it out there on Blu. Your looking at BD as some sort of monolithic entity, when its not.

And, yes, industry types are known to lurk about these hallways, and while neither they nor I have a problem with people seeking quality (do you read these posts carefully?), they must find the extreme fixation on grainfree, glitzy, pretty pictures quite amusing. As if there is no place or artistic reason for a gritty film such as The French Connection (or maybe just not on a precious blu-ray disc) or The Godfather (which has been dismissed by some here not only on account of its image but also for being "boring"). I understand that as a advocate for movies such as Lifeboat you are not among this number, but not all of my remarks are directed toward you.

I think you'll find most of us want older films presented faithfully to the source material, with the grain intact. Its releases like The Longest Day, and Patton (the original release), that piss us off. Those that are only interested in pristine, glitzy new releases, and the odd 70mm film, are in a pretty small minority here. Look at how many of us are arguing against pagemaster.

Whether some people find The Godfather to be boring is irrelevant on a discussion about BD replacing DVD. A whole lot of people under about 40 (in my experience, and this is close to saying "most people"), have little to no interest in older movies. I wanted to wring some of my friend necks in the past for absolutely refusing to watch any movie more than about 10 years old. There is nothing that a disc format can do about that.

"Proper" cases? Oh, dear . . . and that's not silly?

Oh, its quite silly (and I am not one of them). You were insinuating that people complaining about cases here is hurting the adoption of BD. Yeah right.

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by img eL

Studios should release SD shows on blu ray. They can easily say 10 DVD's equal 1 blu ray disc. Joe six pack can understand that, Joe 10 pack of DVD's on one Blu ray

yeah, but you lose money that way. why release a season on 1 bluray when you can release on 6 dvd's and charge 3 times the price? remember, it is an industry and the point is to make money. everything else is secondary. and never underestimate the lack of understanding of Joe Six Pack. we have all heard stories of people saying that an upconverted dvd is just as clear as a bluray.

[img eL]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

yeah, but you lose money that way. why release a season on 1 bluray when you can release on 6 dvd's and charge 3 times the price? remember, it is an industry and the point is to make money. everything else is secondary. and never underestimate the lack of understanding of Joe Six Pack. we have all heard stories of people saying that an upconverted dvd is just as clear as a bluray.

By now most shows not all have been released on DVD, you got to get the people who already bought the DVD show release to buy the Blu ray release. Would'nt you buy a Blu ray release of your favorite shows. 10 DVD's on one blu ray disc! That's a good selling point

[lobosrul]

Originally Posted by img eL

By now most shows not all have been released on DVD, you got to get the people who already bought the DVD show release to buy the Blu ray release. Would'nt you buy a Blu ray release of your favorite shows. 10 DVD's on one blu ray disc! That's a good selling point

I don't think you'll find many people repurchasing a DVD boxset on BD, that looks and sound exactly the same, just for convenience. Is that what you were suggesting?

[img eL]

Originally Posted by lobosrul

I don't think you'll find many people repurchasing a DVD boxset on BD, that looks and sound exactly the same, just for convenience. Is that what you were suggesting?

The quality of DVD boxsets could be better as well, a lot of times studios had to squeeze all they could to fit shows on DVD's resulting in loss of picture quality. There is a lot more Studios could add to re-releases on Blu ray.