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

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by BlakkMajik3000

My main issue is that while I have my BD collection cataloged on the site, my tower is pretty much an unorganized mess. Usually when I buy a BD, I redeem the code, if applicable (if not, a-ripping we go), and put it on the shelf. So as I said, in my case, I go from browsing to watching faster with digital because I immediately hit "play" once I find something that interests me.

That definitely supports the theory that digital is for lazy people. You haven't even put in the effort to organize your collection. And since you brought up ripping I'd like to be clear: I have absolutely no problem with ripping physical media. A ripped copy of a Blu-ray disc is still physical distribution, the customers retain all the control over availability.

Originally Posted by BlakkMajik3000

Another big advantage for me when it comes to digital is the fact I can watch whatever I want when I want. There are many movies I don't want my youngin to see, and unless I'm watching when she's asleep (so either really late at night or really early in the morning), not going to have much opportunity to watch the BD. 95% of the time, if I'm watching a BD, it's a Disney animated affair or something very family friendly.

Why can't you watch your Blu-ray discs in private?

[BlakkMajik3000]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Another issue I have is the constant experimentation with Digital. Take Netflix, it is obvious to me they are trying to shape their service for a mostly mobile future. Some of the noises they have made in the last six months proves that point. A while back, didn't Hastings say words to the effect of 'we see most engagement with the tv' now all the noises is of shows being reformatted to better fit the mobile experience and 'mobile is our biggest audience' type quotes.

I believe Apple and AT&T are also looking into interactive tv as well as Netflix.
They want 'choose your own adventure' style movies and tv.
So, not only have we moved from film to digital in our cinemas, they want us to abandon quality for convenience and finally, they want to rip the art out of my favourite style of storytelling, (film). They want to kill film altogether. This time next year, we will get blogs/articles asking if interactive tv is going to replace traditional film and tv' and this sorry cycle continues. I can see it now, instead of the wonderful psssive experience we have now, it will be pressing your remote or touchscreen every 40 seconds and having to decide on Twitter what you have to do, because ' like everyone else is, like doing that and it's so, like engrossing'

You Digital guys are driving us to this future and the early experiments have already started.

Haven't they been doing this with movies to some extent already? Alternate endings, director's cuts, extended cuts, etc. Letting the viewer choose the next step is pretty much the next evolution of this.

I think it will remain experimental though. I also agree it would get downright f'n annoying if a movie is asking me "what should happen now?" every 5-10 minutes. Can you even imagine how much a movie like that would cost to make?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by BlakkMajik3000

Haven't they been doing this with movies to some extent already? Alternate endings, director's cuts, extended cuts, etc. Letting the viewer choose the next step is pretty much the next evolution of this.

I think it will remain experimental though. I also agree it would get downright f'n annoying if a movie is asking me "what should happen now?" every 5-10 minutes. Can you even imagine how much a movie like that would cost to make?

Yes, a lot! However, I can still see this getting pushed. The possibility for interactive purchases within a film, say a actor walks past a shop window with a picture frame and you like it and can buy it? That type of thing. Plus, they want to get the social side going so they can get interactive ads in there. They will also want people to return to the cinema to see other alternative endings or plot points.

Addressing your point, I agree about the alternative endings and deleted scenes but we are talking a whole new level here. I hope this stuff is side by side with regular content rather than replacing film and tv.

[BlakkMajik3000]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

That definitely supports the theory that digital is for lazy people. You haven't even put in the effort to organize your collection. And since you brought up ripping I'd like to be clear: I have absolutely no problem with ripping physical media. A ripped copy of a Blu-ray disc is still physical distribution, the customers retain all the control over availability.

If that's how you choose to interpret it, you are definitely free to do so. I can think of several physical activities I'd much rather do than putting disc cases in order. I rarely even sit through an entire movie, unless I'm at the theater. At home, I get up and move about at least once an hour, even if I'm watching a movie. When I say it's all about going from browsing to watching faster, that's all it is for me. Other's MMV.

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

Why can't you watch your Blu-ray discs in private?

On? I'm not going to send my family out of the room so I can watch a movie "on the big TV". The bedroom TVs do not have BD players hooked up to them. The only "acceptable" portable screen I have for watching movies is my Macbook Pro, and they don't come with drives these days. Now yes, I can buy an external drive and get some BD player software, but why? A 1080p iTunes file or VUDU stream is more than enough for my viewing, especially on a smaller screen. Plus, if I'm traveling, I don't have to take a BD drive and a heavy binder full of movies I might want to watch while I am away. I take a single external HDD with my downloaded movies.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by BlakkMajik3000

If that's how you choose to interpret it, you are definitely free to do so. I can think of several physical activities I'd much rather do than putting disc cases in order. I rarely even sit through an entire movie, unless I'm at the theater. At home, I get up and move about at least once an hour, even if I'm watching a movie. When I say it's all about going from browsing to watching faster, that's all it is for me. Other's MMV.




On? I'm not going to send my family out of the room so I can watch a movie "on the big TV". The bedroom TVs do not have BD players hooked up to them. The only "acceptable" portable screen I have for watching movies is my Macbook Pro, and they don't come with drives these days. Now yes, I can buy an external drive and get some BD player software, but why? A 1080p iTunes file or VUDU stream is more than enough for my viewing, especially on a smaller screen. Plus, if I'm traveling, I don't have to take a BD drive and a heavy binder full of movies I might want to watch while I am away. I take a single external HDD with my downloaded movies.

No offence, but why the hell would you walk away from a movie? Or are you saying, you move around while still watching the screen?

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by BlakkMajik3000

Usually when I buy a BD, I redeem the code, if applicable (if not, a-ripping we go), and put it on the shelf. So as I said, in my case, I go from browsing to watching faster with digital because I immediately hit "play" once I find something that interests me.

You are wasting more time in general though. You might be saving time on the back end, but on the front end you having to spend time in front of your computer or device redeeming codes (in the time it takes to do this I can have a disc inserted and loading), and if you are also ripping some discs, this takes additional time and effort as well.

[BlakkMajik3000]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Yes, a lot! However, I can still see this getting pushed. The possibility for interactive purchases within a film, say a actor walks past a shop window with a picture frame and you like it and can buy it? That type of thing. Plus, they want to get the social side going so they can get interactive ads in there. They will also want people to return to the cinema to see other alternative endings or plot points.

Addressing your point, I agree about the alternative endings and deleted scenes but we are talking a whole new level here. I hope this stuff is side by side with regular content rather than replacing film and tv.

Hopefully, any content with interactive features will also have a passive mode as well. I can guarantee I will not be purchasing any movie that isn't able to be played without my input. If I wanted to be a director, I would have gone to film school. There's a reason I chose computer science instead.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by BlakkMajik3000

On? I'm not going to send my family out of the room so I can watch a movie "on the big TV". The bedroom TVs do not have BD players hooked up to them.

Spending $20-$30 to buy a Blu-ray player for your bedroom TV is too much of an expense?

[BlakkMajik3000]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

No offence, but why the hell would you walk away from a movie? Or are you saying, you move around while still watching the screen?

I pause it first of course.

Sometimes I leave the room, and sometimes I let it play as I move around a bit.

Plus, my watch reminds me to get off my rump every hour, and I feel like it's judging me if I don't.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by BlakkMajik3000

I pause it first of course.

Sometimes I leave the room, and sometimes I let it play as I move around a bit.

Plus, my watch reminds me to get off my rump every hour, and I feel like it's judging me if I don't.

Just please don't start watching movies on your watch!

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Just please don't start watching movies on your watch!

I fail to see how people watching digital movies on an assortment of devices (TVs, PCs, tablets, phones, and watches) will lead to any of those choices being eliminated.

Your fear that studios may start charging more for TV versions could happen. And if it does many people won't pay the extra expense. But that doesn't mean that studios will eliminate the more expensive options. Why would a company ever not give customers the option of paying more money?

I also don't think digital purchases will ever go away they just won't last as long. Subscriptions will become the standard (if they aren't already) but there is no reason why any studio wouldn't want people to have the option of paying more money to buy or rent individual movies and TV shows. But since they won't be that popular it means that titles will be removed after a while when the cost of maintaining a digital copy exceeds the money made from sales.

I think focusing on those aspects of digital is really bringing down the whole argument of why digital is a problem.

[BlakkMajik3000]

Originally Posted by Cevolution

You are wasting more time in general though. You might be saving time on the back end, but on the front end you having to spend time in front of your computer or device redeeming codes (in the time it takes to do this I can have a disc inserted and loading), and if you are also ripping some discs, this takes additional time and effort as well.

The difference, time-wise, in punching in a code on a website as opposed to popping in the disc is negligible, at least for me.

Ripping is a different story, and trust me, it's not an activity I enjoy. Unfortunately, I can't stream a 30GB file wirelessly inside my home, so rip + convert is something I generally do. The conversion part is quite a bit more passive, since I can queue up multiple rips and let the process run without any further input from me.

In an ideal world, a Blu-Ray would come with a BD digital copy on a separate disc, but the "digital bridge" remains to be built.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

I fail to see how people watching digital movies on an assortment of devices (TVs, PCs, tablets, phones, and watches) will lead to any of those choices being eliminated.

Your fear that studios may start charging more for TV versions could happen. And if it does many people won't pay the extra expense. But that doesn't mean that studios will eliminate the more expensive options. Why would a company ever not give customers the option of paying more money?

I think focusing on those aspects of digital is really bringing down the whole argument of why digital is a problem.

Really? I see it as one big collection of problems that could bring about the downfall of our favourite hobby. What the masses do, affect us in terms of limited options, or options becoming more expensive.

As for the Smartwatch theory, that is based on mobile being supplanted by the Smartwatch. It's still a mobile device after all. The more mobile entertainment becomes, the worse it will be in the long run.

The world has changed. Industries are pandering to smartphones and mobile devices more than ever and are showing a complete lack of interest in what the over 40's want. For obvious reasons, that's where the money is.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by BlakkMajik3000

In an ideal world, a Blu-Ray would come with a BD digital copy on a separate disc, but the "digital bridge" remains to be built.

It doesn't even need a separate disc. In an ideal world every Blu-ray disc would have a small DRM-free digital copy of the movie on it. You could just copy that file to your hard drive and whenever you want the movie on a portable system you'd have a copy.

But the studios obviously want to institute more control, not less. DRM is getting worse and worse and anyone who thinks that in the future customers will be able to do whatever they want with their digital copies is living in a dream world.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Really? I see it as one big collection of problems that could bring about the downfall of our favourite hobby. What the masses do, affect us in terms of limited options, or options becoming more expensive.

As for the Smartwatch theory, that is based on mobile being supplanted by the Smartwatch. It's still a mobile device after all. The more mobile entertainment becomes, the worse it will be in the long run.

The world has changed. Industries are pandering to smartphones and mobile devices more than ever and are showing a complete lack of interest in what the over 40's want. For obvious reasons, that's where the money is.

But why would the studios ever prevent you from paying more money for a premium "big screen" version?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

But why would they ever prevent you from paying more money for a premium TV version?

Well, maybe sales would be so low it was simply not worth it.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Well, maybe sales would be so low it was simply not worth it.

Mobile devices are getting higher and higher resolutions so the mobile version and the "big screen" version could easily be the same files. Offering a more expensive version of the same movie would be cheap for the studios. It may be cost prohibitive to offer a 4K version. But offering an HD "big screen" version alongside an HD mobile version is a minor expense.

I'm concerned that movies that are unpopular and unprofitable won't remain available for a long time. But I'm not at all concerned that movies will only be available in cheap crappy versions.

[BlakkMajik3000]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

It doesn't even need a separate disc. In an ideal world every Blu-ray disc would have a small DRM-free digital copy of the movie on it. You could just copy that file to your hard drive and whenever you want the movie on a portable system you'd have a copy.

But the studios obviously want to institute more control, not less. DRM is getting worse and worse and anyone who thinks that in the future customers will be able to do whatever they want with their digital copies is living in a dream world.

I think it should be separate. The main disc should include a top-quality transfer plus extras and bonus features only. I don't want them to use including a digital copy on the same disc as an excuse to skimp on the quality of the feature (i.e. We had to make the movie size smaller to accommodate the digital copy). I am suspicious of any BD where the feature is smaller than 25-30GB, but that's just me.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

Mobile devices are getting higher and higher resolutions so the mobile version and the "big screen" version could easily be the same files. Offering a more expensive version of the same movie would be cheap for the studios.

I'm concerned that movies that are unpopular and unprofitable won't remain available for a long time. But I'm not at all concerned that movies will only be available in cheap crappy versions.

Bear in mind Netflix plan on making mobile specific cuts of movies so you would probably have mobile versions then a master copy. How would that play out I wonder.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by BlakkMajik3000

I think it should be separate. The main disc should include a top-quality transfer plus extras and bonus features only. I don't want them to use including a digital copy on the same disc as an excuse to skimp on the quality of the feature (i.e. We had to make the movie size smaller to accommodate the digital copy). I am suspicious of any BD where the feature is smaller than 25-30GB, but that's just me.

Regardless there is no chance of any of that happening. The studios don't want to make physical copies more convenient.