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

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by Vilya

The best available steaming is 4K and the best available disc format is 4K UHD, so that is the pair that I would compare; the best of one with the best of the other.

iTunes has many movies in 4K that aren't available on UHD disc (and more are added on a daily basis). So no, 4K UHD is not the best *available* format in many cases.

Even if 4K streaming offers a bitrate equivalent to that of a blu-ray player reading a blu-ray disc, it still has far more compression than the data on a blu-ray disc. Even setting the matter of compression aside, it means that 4K streaming competes favorably not with the best disc format, 4K UHD, but with its predecessor, blu-ray. In 2018, streaming can now approximate what blu-ray achieved in 2007.

In my experience the 4K streams are closer to UHD disc than to Blu-ray. And Blu-ray never had HDR.

Silence Of The Lambs on Criterion blu-ray is pretty impressive, especially when you factor in all of the extra content provided with it; I have not seen the 4K streaming version of it, so I can not speak to how they compare.

The iTunes version has a nice set of extras too (although I believe the Criterion BD has more), and it looks excellent. And it was a free upgrade for me, for a movie that I originally bought for $4.99 a few years ago.

[PCFan]

Originally Posted by bessetmath

In my opinion, now i prefere digital movies.

I own more over 1000 dvds and bluray.

This is why i prefere digital now :

1- take less space in my home.

2- cheaper than buying bluray movies. (via facebook bluray.com and google group or website)

3- more convenient can watch movies during traveling, during pause at work.

I don't mind the picture quality. I don't own a house, appartment... no surround system.

For me it's cheaper this way for my hobby.

1. If you resell your discs after watching them or just have a small blu-ray or DVD collection because of you being selective of what you want to own and what you want to get rid of then space requirements is not really an issue with physical.

2. It's only cheaper if you are buying codes and someone must buy the blu-ray that includes the code to make the code available for sale. I would not be surprised that more and more people will go back to buying disc for 4k who usually are doing digital by buying cheap codes because now Fox from 4k discs released starting from 2018 will only redeem as HD through MA as that's what I read recently. Buying 4k digitally is getting more expensive digitally because more and more codes from 4k disc will not redeem as 4k through MA. With how convoluted MA is these days and more codes not being able to redeem through iTunes (means no free 4k upgrade in iTunes), I would not be surprised if those people who mainly rely on digital codes for digital go back to discs.

3. I agree with the convenience. However, should an employee be watching movies at work, even if it's during a break, especially on a business computer?

You say it's cheaper for you with digital. Is it mainly because of the cheap codes that are available for sale?

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by octagon

I get why you said it, I just it's remarkable that you said it. It wasn't that long ago that people were flatly rejecting the idea that streaming could ever come close to rivaling blu-ray and your reaction to that proposition coming to fruition seemed to be 'well, duh, of course streaming is as good as blu-ray, that's not saying much'.

That was eye-catching cause 'as good as blu-ray' doesn't sound like faint praise to me. That sounds like some pretty serious progress.

Again, with the qualifier: if true.

Sure, within the context of a partisan foodfight it's always important to compare apples to apples. But I don't really have a dog in that fight.

If it really is the case that streaming is knocking on the door of BD quality that's pretty freaking impressive. And if a few years from now it's knocking on the 4k door that will be pretty freaking impressive too.

To be exact, I said that if 4K streaming was equal to blu-ray, that would not be saying much as that means that state of the art streaming has only now reached where blu-ray was over a decade ago. It has taken this long for 4K streaming, with its added compression, to rival the bitrates of blu-ray disc playback.

And while that means 4K streaming looks very good, the 4K UHD disc looks the best of all. The evolution of disc formats is staying well ahead of the evolution of streaming and that will likely continue as anything beyond 4K will require far, far more bandwidth than our internet infrastructure can provide.

Entire swaths of the nation can not yet stream in 4K and some can not even reliably stream in HD. It will be a long time before streaming in 4K in its current lowly 25 Mbps bitrate average, yet alone above that, is something anyone anywhere can use. Anyone with electricity can enjoy a 4K disc player, not so with 4K streaming.

I compare 4K streaming to 4K disc because I have always pursued the best quality and the best is 4K UHD disc. I don't consider it a "fight" because both choices can and do coexist. I just make my preference abundantly clear.

I understand the advantages that streaming offers to some people, but they are not advantages for me. For me quality is king and true ownership of the content is a must; everything else is just a justification for something less than.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

iTunes has many movies in 4K that aren't available on UHD disc (and more are added on a daily basis). So no, 4K UHD is not the best *available* format in many cases.

In my experience the 4K streams are closer to UHD disc than to Blu-ray. And Blu-ray never had HDR.

Such variations in title availability are inevitable. I suspect that it is easier to bring a title to 4K streaming than it is to manufacture, distribute, and market a 4K UHD disc. We are seeing more 4K UHD disc releases, so that disparity will lessen. The two methods of viewing 4k content can still be contrasted on their technical merits regardless of which has what title.

I want to experiment with 4K streaming beyond those youtube time lapse nature clips I have seen, but I will have to up my data cap and I have not decided on how high I should raise it. The advantages of HDR and WCG are valid considerations and I want to see if 4K streaming of actual movies delivers on the promise of these attributes. If it does, I might agree that 4K streaming surpasses blu-ray disc quality if those gains are not offset by compression artifacts and lesser audio. My internet service somewhat exceeds the minimums for 4K streaming, but remains woefully unreliable.

I am playing with Netflix currently, but not in 4K. I see subscription streaming services as a sampler platter of content I am unsure about owning. It is certainly cheap enough. Other than their original shows, I am not impressed by what they offer in the way of movies. Perhaps some other service would make for a better source?

[stonesfan129]

I don't know why you would buy movies on a cloud service. You don't really own anything and the quality is lower. Even if it is 90% as good, it doesn't cost 90% of the disc, it costs the same. These are probably okay to rent if you don't mind paying $5-6. But I would never buy them over a disc. I don't even see the point of 4K anyway. For me, I don't even have a screen big enough and don't sit close enough to my tv to see a big difference.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by alchav21

You do know we are talking about Bit Streaming, and that could be done from a Disc or Server. The maximum Bitrate for a Blu-ray Player is 40Mbps, so you do have Bandwidth restrictions. Then Penguin said UHD Players go up to 128Mbps. 4K Streaming Providers average 25Mbps, and the average Blu-ray Player averages 20Mbps. So Blu-ray Disc Quality has been achieved, and the top Streaming Providers are working on matching UHD Disc Quality. I always say being Hard Wired gives you the most Bandwidth, just like a Disc Player with an HDMI Cable.

Originally Posted by Vilya

And saying a 4k stream equals what a blu-ray disc provides is dubious praise indeed. A 4K stream needs to equal a 4K disc and it does not. Telling us that 4K streaming providers can match in 2018 what a blu-ray disc player accomplished in 2007 is hardly something to get excited about.

Originally Posted by octagon

If that's true, and I don't know if it is, it actually would be kind of cool.

I love buying BDs but I wouldn't turn my nose up at being able to stream their equivalent too. I could see that being kind of handy from time to time.

Nobody is saying that 4K Streaming equals Blu-ray Disc, it's Like for Like. If Blu-ray Disc has a maximum Bitrate of 40Mbps, then Bandwidth of 50+Mbps will be more than enough for Blu-ray Disc like Quality. Blu-ray Discs are also compressed, so Streaming Disc or Server are all the same.

[bladerunner1]

Originally Posted by PCFan

You say it's cheaper for you with digital. Is it mainly because of the cheap codes that are available for sale?

Yeah that and D2D/MD2D have turned a lot of people digital. No doubt.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Other than their original shows, I am not impressed by what they offer in the way of movies. Perhaps some other service would make for a better source?

[flyry]

Originally Posted by PCFan

You say it's cheaper for you with digital. Is it mainly because of the cheap codes that are available for sale?

It is cheaper. At least for new titles. WB titles for example are $19.99 on VUDU for UHD whereass the 4K disc is $29.99 or more.

You use one of the often $5.50 vudu credit's and it's $15.49.

All the summer titles that hit home September or later will be $9.99 on or around Black Friday (whereas only a few for physical).

Disney UHD on VUDU 24.99 (again cheaper with a credit) and can go as much as $34.99 on 4k disc.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by flyry

Filmstruck streams in 4K? I was not aware of that.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Nobody is saying that 4K Streaming equals Blu-ray Disc, it's Like for Like. If Blu-ray Disc has a maximum Bitrate of 40Mbps, then Bandwidth of 50+Mbps will be more than enough for Blu-ray Disc like Quality. Blu-ray Discs are also compressed, so Streaming Disc or Server are all the same.

Actually, you are the one who said it:

"4K Streaming Providers average 25Mbps, and the average Blu-ray Player averages 20Mbps. So Blu-ray Disc Quality has been achieved, and the top Streaming Providers are working on matching UHD Disc Quality."

Those are your words from your previous post on the previous page of this thread. So, from your own words streaming has not achieved 4K UHD disc quality AND your comparison was not "like for like" as you specifically compare 4K streaming provider bitrate averages to that of what you claim are the bitrate averages for blu-ray players. 4K streaming is only analogous to 4K UHD disc and that is not the comparison you make in your posts.

I can understand if you have trouble comprehending what you write; you are not alone in that.

Yes, blu-rays discs are compressed, but streaming is more compressed. This is evident from looking at the bitrates from a high definition streaming source and that of a blu-ray disc. The blu-ray disc has a much higher bit rate than that of its high definition streaming counterpart. High definition streaming is only analogous to blu-ray disc. "Compression" is what the first half of the word "codec" means after all. I won't provide links to any definitions as you have immunity to them.

Despite your insistence on misusing the word "streaming", reading data from an optical disc is NOT the same as receiving data from a server via the internet. Where the data is located is different, how the data is accessed is different, the requirements to accomplish that access are different, and the degree of compression is different. When there are differences between things they are no longer the same; do you see how that works?

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Filmstruck streams in 4K? I was not aware of that.

It does not. But it's easily the best movie library.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

I bet there are way more people who don't have a UHD disc player.

Having or not having a 4K UHD disc player is entirely a matter of choice on the part of the consumer, though. Anyone who wants one can easily acquire one no matter where they live and it will work as perfectly in Podunk, IL as it does in Chicago.

4K disc players are still pretty new and they are selling very well. How long have ISP's with outdated networks been in operation?

People in more rural areas, like me, have little choice in their ISP. There are only two here and one of those is DSL with top speeds of 18 Mbps. My only choice is to hope the other ISP invests in network improvements for my little village of 1600 and that seems unlikely. There have been no improvements in over 3 years and counting. They have raised their rates AND lowered their data caps, though.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

I bet there are way more people who don't have a UHD disc player.
Sorry to hear that you have such crappy Internet. Maybe look for a different provider?
That may take years, or perhaps not happen at all. And I'm pretty certain streaming will eclipse even UHD discs in a few years. The visible differences are already very small. In some ways the available streams are already better (e.g. iTunes has many titles in Dolby Vision that are just static HDR10 on disc).

Your first point is irrelevant. This is a enthusiasts forum for people who appreciate quality. If it wasn’t it would be called anyoldbollocksaslongasicanwatchafilm.com.

My internet connection is fantastic but I know what can go wrong having been on a super slow, super patchy connection before I moved. I can comfortably get 4K streams and regularly do for the likes of House Of Cards etc.. we have services like Sky and Virgin here that offer very fast packages. Yet I still choose to watch disc. It’s all about the quality. Sure 4K looks good but this guy doesn’t settle for good. If I am watching films it’s go the best or go home.
You would have us believe the whole of America has super reliant, super smooth fibre that never drops, never cuts out altogether and can supply 12K holograms without issue.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by stonesfan129

I don't know why you would buy movies on a cloud service. You don't really own anything and the quality is lower. Even if it is 90% as good, it doesn't cost 90% of the disc, it costs the same.

I think on average digital movies are actually quite a bit less expensive, even if you discount the availability of redemption codes from the gray market, discounted gift cards and certain other tricks. New releases often start at $15 and drop within a few weeks. For example, Three Billboards in 4K just dropped to $10 on iTunes. The UHD disc is still $25. There are also frequent sales of catalog titles as low as $5.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Sure 4K looks good but this guy doesn’t settle for good. If I am watching films it’s go the best or go home.

Which means for movies such as Silence of the Lambs you have to stream.

BTW, I find it really funny that you keep ranting about people watching movies on phones and tablets, while you yourself are watching on a TV. For me, serious movie watching starts at 100" on a projection screen. Go big or go home.

You would have us believe the whole of America has super reliant, super smooth fibre that never drops, never cuts out altogether and can supply 12K holograms without issue.

A large majority of the population is on copper cable (Comcast, Time Warner etc.) which is more than enough for excellent streaming quality.

[cpr3584]

Its amazing to see how quickly the movies go on sale through digital providers- while the UHD won't drop in price for months. This tells us the true value of movies in a cloud based system. there are worth about as much as a rental, $5-$6, or as much as people are willing to pay for a code. They are long-term rentals, nothing more.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Which means for movies such as Silence of the Lambs you have to stream.

BTW, I find it really funny that you keep ranting about people watching movies on phones and tablets, while you yourself are watching on a TV. For me, serious movie watching starts at 100" on a projection screen. Go big or go home.
A large majority of the population is on copper cable (Comcast, Time Warner etc.) which is more than enough for excellent streaming quality.

I can do either. Tv for the bedroom, proj for my HT. I tend to only watch Netflix , ITunes and BBC IPlayer via my bedroom tv (through a PS4)

The serious stuff gets the Projector treatment (discs obviously)

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Your first point is irrelevant. This is a enthusiasts forum for people who appreciate quality. If it wasn’t it would be called anyoldbollocksaslongasicanwatchafilm.com.

Hey, this link doesn't work! I really wanted to visit this website, too. I love both a bargain and British humor.

According to Forbes, The U.S. ranks 9th globally in "fixed broadband" speed in an article dated Aug. 14, 2017. Our average download speed is 70.75 Mbps and 27.64 Mbps upload. Singapore is number one with average download speeds of 154.38, more than twice the U.S. average. Since July 2016, the U.S. climbed from 11th place to 9th.

U.S. mobile internet ranks 46th in the world, with an average download speed of 23.05 Mbps and 8.26 Mbps upload. We just beat out Albania in the rankings. Since July 2016, the U.S. dropped from 44th to 46th place.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinmu.../#7307bdd065b5

These fixed broadband average speeds are more than enough to stream in 4K and even I can do so in the tiny village where I live, but the reliability of the service remains quite poor. These wonderful speeds mean little when the service is out or when it is just stuttering along. I rarely go two months without having to make a service call.

Just a mile from my home, though, and outside of the village limits, people can only get DSL service with a maximum speed of 18 Mbps. At my sister's home, 5 miles away, her best speed averages around 12 Mbps. Lots of rural folks can not stream in 4K and the ISPs do not seem to be in any rush to invest in network upgrades in these areas. If they want to watch 4K content, a 4K disc player is their only option.

Maybe I should get my sister an Oppo 203 for her birthday this year as it is the only way she'll get to watch 4K content?

[Cutter_]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

I think on average digital movies are actually quite a bit less expensive, even if you discount the availability of redemption codes from the gray market, discounted gift cards and certain other tricks. New releases often start at $15 and drop within a few weeks. For example, Three Billboards in 4K just dropped to $10 on iTunes. The UHD disc is still $25. There are also frequent sales of catalog titles as low as $5.

Agreed, digital wins the price war, it's not even close.

But when talking catalog titles, physical blu-rays can be found for the same price sometimes too, or cheaper. That's why I have price matching for physical, iTunes and Amazon Digital, if I want a title. Because I do both, physical and digital, and sometimes a physical blu-ray will be the cheapest. I just want the cheapest option. Sometimes you just gotta be cheap, patient, and smart to find the best price.