Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[veritas]

So if digital ever becomes mainstream without studios carrying it with serious perks like early releases and 1 or2 dollar disc to digital services (if a format grows without those perks then I would call it mainstream) do you guys think digital will ever see remasters for the poor quality hd digital movies?

With blu ray when you remaster a movie the old copies are devalued and a lot of people will re buy the new higher quality version but with digital.... With digital I see almost zero reasons for companies to fix poor quality encodes unless they are going to try to screw people over by blatantly trying to make you pay to upgrade.

I can see studios doing remasters now and giving away those copies to early adopters since they are willing to give digital away almost at a loss to grow the market but I cant see that trend lasting. In a digital future I foresee few to almost no remasters as they just are not profitable when you remove all double dips.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by alchav21

As for Sound, I usually use my Optical Sony Headset and the Sound is Outstanding. So put that Digital HD argument to rest, because the Quality is there if you have the right set up.

Originally Posted by DamageINC

Are you saying that sound through a headset is equal to a proper 5.1 or 7.1 setup with lossless audio?

Better, have you ever used a good pair of Headsets, you can hear every little nuance. Read some of the Articles in a Magazine like Sound & Vision, Headsets are the thing now, and you don't disturb anyone.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

That's a problem with the source material, not the format. When the same movie is released on both Ultra HD Blu-ray and 4K HDR streaming the Ultra HD Blu-ray is better looking.

And only a little over 50% of Ultra HD Blu-ray are upscales. Here's a list of the ones that are native 4K (there are about 100 of them).
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=270798

I disagree. While maybe that's technically true most of the movies in that thread are shitty so I have no interest in them. When most of your good movies are just upscales of 2K DI that's an issue. Blame the studios or whatever you want but you don't have to worry about that when you stream say The Grand Tour or The OA in all their glorious HDR

[Groot]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

In the last decade physical media sales have dropped drastically. In that time digital has become popular. I think those two things might be connected.

Until the mid 80's with VHS becoming popular in millions of households movie collections like ours simply didn't exist. Still, was the average person in the 80's until DVD buying thousands of VHS's or were they renting? So the rental industry didn't shut down independent films. Which goes back to your prior statement:

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

Buying films digitally just means many of those films won't be available at all in the future. It's far more likely to happen with indie films. Many of the small film companies will fail and no one will be able to offer any of their movies digitally.

https://www.engadget.com/2016/01/20/...-already-dead/

But it's not as if we didn't see this coming. In 2015, Blu-ray and DVD sales fell 12 percent while digital-media sales jumped 16 percent, following years of similar trajectories for both categories, according to figures from the Digital Media Group. In fact, digital sales also surpassed physical-media purchases last year, clocking in at $8.9 billion compared with $8 billion. And let's not forget about streaming subscriptions, which jumped 20 percent to reach $5.7 billion. In other words, 4K Blu-ray is launching at the worst time for disc-based media since the advent of DVDs.

Here, more people are buying films that typically do not out of convenience of the format of digital. Applying that same rental rational, which in this case it makes more money than rentals did, digital would have the opposite effect of what you're saying and would increase the chance of smaller, more obscure titles being seen.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by Texan26

Redbox started the decline of physical sales. Why buy a movie for $20 when I can watch it for a dollar was/is the thought of many consumers.

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

How is Redbox particularly different than Blockbuster or other rental stores? Those had been around for decades before sales declined.

Originally Posted by Texan26

Convenience and price. Redboxes are everywhere, fast and easy to check out, Blockbuster rental prices were a lot higher.

I think the Texan is on to something, I always shopped for the best price to see the Latest Releases. I was a big Red Box Customer, until UV Streaming Movies came along. The biggest drawbacks with Red Box are the trips, and having to see them all in one night to keep the price at a Dollar. Now with Digital no more trips, and with various Providers one has a Plethora of Movie Options.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by Groot

https://www.engadget.com/2016/01/20/...-already-dead/

This article again? How does an article written two months before Ultra HD Blu-ray launched serve as proof that it's doing poorly?

Ultra HD Blu-ray is selling better than Blu-ray did when it launched. So Devindra Hardawar's predictions are wrong.

Originally Posted by Groot

Here, more people are buying films that typically do not out of convenience of the format of digital. Applying that same rental rational, which in this case it makes more money than rentals did, digital would have the opposite effect of what you're saying and would increase the chance of smaller, more obscure titles being seen.

They may be seen more and they may make more money. But they won't remain available in the future, that's my concern. If the physical version of a movie sells poorly it will go out of print but all the copies made before that will still work and can still be redistributed. If the digital version of a movie sells poorly then it will disappear.

[Groot]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

They may be seen more and they may make more money. But they won't remain available in the future, that's my concern. If a physical copy of an indie movie sells poorly it will go out of print but all the copies made before that will still work and can still be redistributed. If a digital copy of an indie movie sells poorly then it will disappear.

There's 30+ million songs on Spotify and Apple Music. Do all the small, indie bands that have their records on there disappear if they aren't streamed? Do streams suddenly disappear from all servers?

If you are so concerned about losing your digital copies, like on iTunes, you download them and keep them yourself. Just like a disc can crack, break, whatever, it's really no more fail safe than a digital copy.

Physical won't disappear completely. Just like Apple Music/Spotify haven't fully killed CDs and Vinyl is making a comeback. It's just ridiculous to imply digital would kill film studios.

[DamageINC]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Better, have you ever used a good pair of Headsets, you can hear every little nuance. Read some of the Articles in a Magazine like Sound & Vision, Headsets are the thing now, and you don't disturb anyone.

Better is subjective. It may be better for you. It isn't better for me. I don't care much what a magazine article says. Experience is what counts.

I watched movies via Headsets for quite a while before getting my entry level setup. I enjoy 5.0 far better. But that's me. Headsets are good for late night viewing, but that's all i use them for anymore.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by Groot

There's 30+ million songs on Spotify and Apple Music. Do all the small, indie bands that have their records on there disappear if they aren't streamed? Do streams suddenly disappear from all servers?

The size difference between a movie and a song is enormous. All the digital providers have to constantly upgrade their servers to accommodate 15,000 new movies every year. At some point they'll realize it's much cheaper to delete the old unprofitable movies and reclaim that space.

Originally Posted by Groot

If you are so concerned about losing your digital copies, like on iTunes, you download them and keep them yourself. Just like a disc can crack, break, whatever, it's really no more fail safe than a digital copy.

If one of my discs breaks I can buy another one from one of thousands of people who still owns a copy. Even if I never owned a copy before a title goes out of print I can still buy it. It doesn't matter if the studio that owns each title is still offering it because someone will be. I'm not concerned about movies being available to me... I'm concerned about movies being available to everyone.

Originally Posted by Groot

It's just ridiculous to imply digital would kill film studios.

I didn't say that all. Digital is preventing movies from being preserved. It's not preventing any new movies from being made and sold. I don't think digital is bad business for the studios.

[ThatOneGuy]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

I didn't say that all. Digital is preventing movies from being preserved. It's not preventing any new movies from being made and sold. I don't think digital is bad business for the studios.

How is digital preventing preservation?

[Groot]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

The size difference between a movie and a song is enormous. All the digital providers have to constantly upgrade their servers to accommodate 15,000 new movies every year. At some point they'll realize it's much cheaper to delete the old unprofitable movies and reclaim that space.

Yeah....cloud computing/storage, terabyte servers would negate that too.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by John Klein

How is digital preventing preservation?

It puts all control over distribution of each title in the hands of a single company. If they decide to stop offering a movie then that movie will be completely unavailable.

With physical media everyone who owns a disc has redistribution rights for that disc.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by Groot

Yeah....cloud computing/storage, terabyte servers would negate that too.

At UHD quality a terabyte of data is approximately 17 movies.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Better, have you ever used a good pair of Headsets, you can hear every little nuance. Read some of the Articles in a Magazine like Sound & Vision, Headsets are the thing now, and you don't disturb anyone.

Originally Posted by DamageINC

Better is subjective. It may be better for you. It isn't better for me. I don't care much what a magazine article says. Experience is what counts.

I watched movies via Headsets for quite a while before getting my entry level setup. I enjoy 5.0 far better. But that's me. Headsets are good for late night viewing, but that's all i use them for anymore.

Yea, I know what you mean, I still have a pair of Sansui 2000 Speakers that I bought in a PX in Da Nang, Vietnam back in 1969. They use to blow me away, but wives usually don't go for all that loud sound. So now with some good Headsets I can turn them up as loud as I want....Sometimes, I still get called on it once in a while.

[ThatOneGuy]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

It puts all control over distribution of each title in the hands of a single company. If they decide to stop offering a movie then that movie will be completely unavailable.

With physical media everyone who owns a disc has redistribution rights for that disc.

No we do not. If we copy a film that isn't in the public domain we are literally breaking the law, even if the company who owns the rights do not continue to produce the film we cannot copy or distribute it unless we pay for the right to do so.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by John Klein

No we do not. If we copy a film that isn't in the public domain we are literally breaking the law, even if the company who owns the rights do not continue to produce the film we cannot copy or distribute it unless we pay for the right to do so.

We can't make copies. We can resell the disc.

[Groot]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

At UHD quality a terabyte of data is approximately 17 movies.

TB servers have more than 1 terabyte of data, dude.

[Groot]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

We can't make copies. We can resell the disc.

If a film is so obscure that people have to get OOP discs and trade on the after market the film is clearly very limited to a very small audience. It would be the exact same situation of digital (somehow) miraculously disappearing from all servers worldwide like Skynet got a hold of it - at least in the way you seem to think digital works.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by Groot

TB servers have more than 1 terabyte of data, dude.

I'm aware of that. But it takes thousands of terabytes to store the new movies added every year. Plus there's the expense of replacing failing hard drives every few years. None of that is cheap.

[Groot]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

I'm aware of that. But it takes thousands of terabytes to store the new movies added every year. Plus there's the expense of replacing failing hard drives every few years.

And a company in the business of digital movies would do that. Just like hosting companies have been doing for decades. I don't see millions of websites suddenly dying.