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

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by SarahS

you wont even get 5....yes you can resell Criterions for 15 dollars on ebay all day long but unless its a Criterion or an OOP title you are getting squat. In fact places like movie trading company or half price books wont even give you 3 dollars for a run of the mill BD catalog title...more like 1 to two dollars. I know I have sold off my entire 2000+ BD collection and the only ones I have kept are the ones still not available on digital as of yet. Of course I don't know why I just don't sell those as well because my chances in this day and age of actually going to a shelf pulling a disc and placing it into a player to watch is practically 1 million to 1 against.

So you have shed so many movies why exactly? To invest In a format that probably won’t even be mainstream in 5 years time? Do you think the industry want to strick around and invest in a format that is only seeing incredibly modest returns? I think that disc will probably outlast Digital HD.

Note: I am not saying disc will outlast Digital in general, just Digital HD as a format. It’s obvious to everyone that subscription streaming is the future now. Collecting is dying and disc will be the last collectors format. Even Digital HD fans don’t see the value in Digital HD. If you think disc is going away in the next decade, you are a fool (not you, generally). Why would you not want to watch films in the best possible quality?

[Indy64]

For the disc "collectors":

https://www.hometheaterforum.com/col...sive-disorder/

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Indy64

For the disc "collectors":

https://www.hometheaterforum.com/col...sive-disorder/

Does it matter either way? If something gives you enjoyment why worry?

Checking a smartphone 300 times a day is a obsession too. Do billions still do it? Yep.

[Indy64]

No doubt.

But the one (tiny) difference is you have to find space in your home to stockpile discs, most discs that are stockpiled will probably never be re-watched in it's lifetime. The investment of course is huge for little return on investment. Collecting just to "have it on a shelf" for friends to see is a waste of money. Hell, some folks invest 5 figures in their "collections" and I'd be willing to bet they only watch .005% of the whole collection over many years time.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Indy64

For the disc "collectors":

https://www.hometheaterforum.com/col...sive-disorder/

This is one guy reflecting on his buying habits and feeling like he may have a problem. That is not necessarily the case for everyone.

And why is this necessarily exclusive to people who buy physical releases? If someone buys thousands of movies and TV shows digitally, somehow that's not "OCD" just because they are not items taking up physical space?

I have to love the double standards and selective reasoning at play here.

[Indy64]

I doubt there is a big population of general public folks who buy a bunch of "digital movies". We seem to be in the mode where a majority of the general public will just "rent" a movie when needed vs. running to Walmart and buying a new movie for $20 just to have it sit on a shelf at the house and never be watched again.

Oh sure, there will be a niche of folks (mainly users of these kind of forums) who desire to "have it all" but that's not the norm.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Indy64

I doubt there is a big population of general public folks who buy a bunch of "digital movies". We seem to be in the mode where a majority of the general public will just "rent" a movie when needed vs. running to Walmart and buying a new movie for $20 just to have it sit on a shelf at the house and never be watched again.

Oh sure, there will be a niche of folks (mainly users of these kind of forums) who desire to "have it all" but that's not the norm.

The average general public also doesn't have thousands of physical titles, nor did they even in the hey-day of DVD.

The point isn't how many people do this... it's the implications of the ones that do. There are people on this very forum who have digital "collections" in the thousands. They may not be placing something on a physical shelf, but the issue of whether or not they watch most of those titles even once, let alone several times still applies.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Indy64

No doubt.

But the one (tiny) difference is you have to find space in your home to stockpile discs, most discs that are stockpiled will probably never be re-watched in it's lifetime. The investment of course is huge for little return on investment. Collecting just to "have it on a shelf" for friends to see is a waste of money. Hell, some folks invest 5 figures in their "collections" and I'd be willing to bet they only watch .005% of the whole collection over many years time.

Speaking personally, it has nothing to do with other people seeing my collection.

Secondly, my discs are very well presented in two cabinets either side of my room. I’m a tidy freak so no way would I tolerate a mess.

Finally, I just love the quality and the ability to just pick a disc from organised genres. Also beautiful special edition packaging. I also rewatch discs a lot. Especially around holidays. Great films are like comfy slippers for me.

[zarquon]

Originally Posted by Indy64

For the disc "collectors":

https://www.hometheaterforum.com/col...sive-disorder/

I usually find the long-running discussion of the relative pros and cons of digital vs physical movie collecting that is this thread quite interesting and entertaining (if sometimes a bit repetitive), but to disagree with one side or the other to the point of implying they have an actual mental disorder is a bit excessive...

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Vor4

Probably next year, the major electronic video manufacturers (Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, and LG) might be focusing on media streamer players instead of physical media players.

Actually, 4K discs and their players are doing much better than expected so early after their launch.

"UHD Blu-ray disc sales are expected to increase 8-fold this year and Hollywood is expected to release as many new titles in the last 4 months of 2017 as in the first 8, the Blu-ray Disc Association told us when we met them at IFA in Berlin."

"Also, UHD disc player sales are up 133% so far in 2017, with major brands such as LG, Microsoft, Oppo, Panasonic, Philips, Samsung, and Sony onboard."

“Ultra HD Blu-ray, both hardware and software, is experiencing strong double and triple digit growth,” said BDA. “All major Hollywood studios, and many local studios, are now publishing content on Ultra HD Blu-ray.”

from a Sept.11, 2017 article:
https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.ph...&id=1505110408

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Indy64

No doubt.

But the one (tiny) difference is you have to find space in your home to stockpile discs, most discs that are stockpiled will probably never be re-watched in it's lifetime. The investment of course is huge for little return on investment. Collecting just to "have it on a shelf" for friends to see is a waste of money. Hell, some folks invest 5 figures in their "collections" and I'd be willing to bet they only watch .005% of the whole collection over many years time.

My discs are all neatly arranged and are all in alphabetical order by title. I have spent into 6 figures for my collection across all of the different formats over many years, roughly 30. I have no regrets doing so, either, because this hobby is something I enjoy. It is that enjoyment that constitutes my "return on investment." I never collected anything as a financial investment. I acquire things that I like, nothing more involved than that.

I will round my collection to approximately 7,000+ titles and I assure you I watch far more than "0.005%" of it. That works out to 35 titles in a collection the size of mine. I try to watch about 2 titles per day, average. Watching 35 titles "over many years time" takes more like 18 days.

[Indy64]

You must live alone.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Indy64

No doubt.

But the one (tiny) difference is you have to find space in your home to stockpile discs, most discs that are stockpiled will probably never be re-watched in it's lifetime. The investment of course is huge for little return on investment.

They also serve who sit and wait.

One of the reasons I love stockpiling discs is they can sit unused for years but they're right there when the mood strikes. Are there other ways to get most of that functionality? Sure. But discs - even (and maybe especially) discs I don't watch very frequently - are one of the better ways for me.

And considering how absurdly affordable most discs are even a one-and-done disc can be more than worth the 'huge' investment.

Originally Posted by Indy64

Collecting just to "have it on a shelf" for friends to see is a waste of money. Hell, some folks invest 5 figures in their "collections" and I'd be willing to bet they only watch .005% of the whole collection over many years time.

I'll take that bet.

I can use the winnings to stockpile more discs

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Indy64

You must live alone.

Sometimes yes, and sometimes no.

If I want a "boss" (aka spouse) in my life, a paycheck better come with it.

[veritas]

Originally Posted by SarahS

Stop with that silliness right now. They give you crap for your used BD's....nada, hardly anything.

Either way that is a win for physical. Either I buy your collection from you for hardly anything or I have the ability to sell my collection for something which you cant do for digital. The optimal which I have done in the past is I buy the gems from somebodies collection for hardly anything and then I sell a few of the valuable ones I already own to pay for the lot.

I mean I love your mind set. It allows me to get some amazing deals and if I'm buying movies for almost nothing its way easier to get my money back if or when I decide to sell a title.

[Zu Nim]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

They can't just reply to the customer's inquiry, offer a refund, and give a deadline by which the customer has to respond to receive it, rather than just immediately taking away the title and giving their money back without first offering it up as an option?

The rep made a decision. It wasn't good for the customer, but not an adverse reason to buy digital. We have all experienced poor customer service.

And that is a good option in theory. But if someone buys A LOT of movies digitally, then that's a lot of data to store(and they'll probably want to have more than one back up as extra "insurance") to make sure that they don't run into the problem with any title down the road, and hope that there are never any DRM issues that prevent the downloaded files from being played in the future.

Since the issue doesn't come up it doesn't really matter. It's a simple solution for the paranoid.

I get that no one "lives forever," but my point is that as long as they are alive, they should be able to access the content that they've paid for, and that's not necessarily guaranteed. At least within the length of a person's lifetime, perpetuity DOES matter. If someone buys a movie today and lives for another 40 years, then having access to that movie removed 10 years from now would be a big problem, especially if they can't rebuy it.

First, nothing's guaranteed. When your disc collection is lost to a flood in 20 years, how will you rebuy it? Do you think there's going to be a vibrant Blu-ray market for 20-40 year old catalog titles then?

Second, most people won't have a "big problem" because they never have. Most people have bought the same movies repeatedly with each format change. There aren't hordes out there watching VHS and LaserDisc. They tossed the old media in the garbage and moved on with their lives. Which is what you'll end up doing with your collection before you know it, by choice. Long before you have a chance to lose them in a flood.

Third, they won't have their movies removed in 1 year or 10 years. I might as well say that they'll shut down all the Blu-ray plants in 10 years. It's farcical.

I understand that. I even aknowledged in my previous post that such deals ending is likely why the movie is out of print on physical media, too. The difference is that if someone REALLY wants the movie, there are ways to obtain the previously released physical versions. If it has never been released digitally, or was and then was taken down for future sales, then at that point it cannot be obtained until when/if it gets re-released.

You acknowledge it but then spend paragraphs acting like there's something different about digital. There isn't. If Dogma had been released years earlier it might be stuck in DVD limbo having never made it to Blu-ray because of the same licensing issues.

And in terms of the movie getting re-released in some form, I hope you are right. But the current issues within their lives likely can get in the way of that. It's not like they don't have other streams of income.

They don't. They are personae non gratae in their industry. That's why they're selling their assets. Their outflow is vastly exceeding their income.

A movie's rights being owned directly by specific individual people and not buy a studio, generally speaking, is a relatively unique situation.

And mostly irrelevant. It's an asset. If it was held by a corporation they could let it sit there, masked by all their other income-producing assets. These guys won't have the luxury in the future.

While buying a copy of the movie on Blu-Ray now will likely cost more than when it was widely available and in print, as I stated, there are options in the $30-$40 range, which is a realistic amount of money for most people to come up with, especially anyone who buys movies regularly anyway.

Except if you limit your discussion to collectors who are willing to spend $30, $40, or $80 on an out of print disc you can say just about anything. That's not the market. That's a niche. The public is not going to spend that. For them it's not a realistic option, which makes it useless. You're talking about a fraction of a fraction of a fraction. That's the point.

You're trying to make some anti-digital argument by using this limited case but it doesn't fly.

That's more like the fisherman having to buy a used boat within the size and range that he would normally use rather than brand new to stay in business. Most aren't going to scoff at that.

No. If nobody's making commercial fishing vessels but there's still demand for them the market for used ones will skyrocket. Like Dogma discs have. It's economics.

And a standard definition DVD may be far from the ideal choice, but in a world where a lot of people settle for "good enough" anyway, it's better than nothing.

Not buying it is even easier. Or pirating it, I guess.

The one sentiment I get from the die-hard Blu-ray fans is that they demand the best, there is no "good enough". It'd be hypocritical to watch DVDs while slamming digital. Better to watch nothing at all. (And I'd agree with them!)

If someone simply wants to have access to the title, then getting a refund isn't going to help with that. Yes, it's better than losing access to the title AND not getting a refund, but simply throwing money at the person who loses access to the film isn't that much of a consolation if they really want that movie and now cannot get it back.

It's the only consolation they're entitled to. If the retailer can't satisfy the request it's prudent to quickly reverse the transaction before it goes too far down the tracks. If the customer hadn't made the original purchase at a discount it wouldn't even be an issue. They might've even appreciated it thinking they could get it on sale at a later date when it's fixed.

A lot of people, even those who generally care about quality, still own and watch DVDs of content not available on Blu-Ray or in HD at all. Watching a movie on DVD may not be the optimal way to experience it, but it's better than having no option to watch it at all.

But has nothing to do with the point. The point was licensing. You're knocking digital because a movie hasn't made it to that format yet. I said you might as well be knocking Blu-ray because a lot of content never made it over from DVD.

Physical media may be able to get lost, damaged, or stolen by a random 3rd party. But to my knowledge, no one who has ever legitimately bought a piece of physical media and taken it home has later had it literally taken away from them by the studio, distributor, or the retailer that they bought it from after the fact.

Who cares? If it's gone, it's gone. It doesn't matter if the police collected it as evidence in a crime or your ex took it when s/he moved out, either. The reason is irrelevant, only the likelihood of losing access is relevant. And I feel very confident that people lose discs far more than digital purchases.

With statements like this, I can only assume that either you have somehow managed to completely miss the the very clear and simple overall point that I was making about the benefits of physical media over digital media in a situation like this, or you are being intentionally obtuse. Either way, you don't come off looking good if you can't acknowledge my points head on and instead try to skirt around them like this.

You said, in a standalone statement: Each time someone opts to buy a movie digitally rather than physically, they are helping to gradually increase the likelihood of issues like this becoming more of a problem for titles that find themselves in strange ownership/licensing scenarios like this.

That is, the trend of buying digital movies instead of discs is actually exacerbating licensing issues like Dogma has. There is no other interpretation.

I responded, Buying discs over digital is not going to change the distribution issues for Dogma. It addressed your statement head-on.

Being correct comes off pretty well, I think.

My entire point is that when a movie ends up being out of print/unavailable due to some kind of distribution issues, the physical copies that were previously released are still out there and can be obtained by someone who really wants it.

No kidding. And I'm saying it's an issue a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the time and in no way undermines digital purchasing.

A film that has never been released digitally or has been removed from digital sale does absolutely no good to anyone who wants to buy it after that has occurred, or loses access to their previous purchase and cannot replace it due it being delisted for sale.

And a film that has never been released on Blu-ray or is out of print/overpriced does no good for the vast majority of Blu-ray buyers either. They want to buy reasonably priced Blu-rays.

I have very much acknowledged that situations like this are the exception and not the rule. I made that clear in my last post. Again, either you missed a very simple, easy to understand point that I made, or you are being purposely obtuse.

Nothing got missed. You acknowledged these were exceptions but then made it out to be a big deal. It's not a big deal.

My point is that even a small handful of titles being effected by this IS still a big problem. The "it's only one" or "it's only a few" mentality justifies something that there is no reasonable justification for at all IMO. That's like saying someone breaking into your house and stealing just a few Blu-Rays is okay as long as the majority of your collection is still there.

Not similar at all. For a guy who thought my apt fisherman analogy was "extreme" you made an interesting choice to equate small licensing issues with felonies.

I've never stated or implied that most titles are likely to fall into distribution issues akin to the situation with Dogma now. My point is that for the titles that do, physical versions can still be obtained after the fact and digital versions cannot.

Nor did I say you did. And what I'm saying is that point is useless. Useless because when it happens copies become scarce and expensive, making it effectively not an option for people. If ground beef goes from $8/lb to $80/lb they'll still sell it but hardly anyone will be buying. Saying it's still possible to buy ground beef is not meaningful, since people will be eating something else.

I don't know how much clearer I can make this. Shall I explain in detail to you why 1+1=2?

I wouldn't. You might stumble over that, too.

I'm not addressing this anymore. It's way too long.

[Zu Nim]

Originally Posted by veritas

I mean I love your mind set. It allows me to get some amazing deals and if I'm buying movies for almost nothing its way easier to get my money back if or when I decide to sell a title.

Sounds like a great deal... if you don't value your time.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

Who cares? If it's gone, it's gone. It doesn't matter if the police collected it as evidence in a crime or your ex took it when s/he moved out, either. The reason is irrelevant, only the likelihood of losing access is relevant. And I feel very confident that people lose discs far more than digital purchases.

Thankfully, I have never lost a disc in the ways you described. I have had very, very few defective discs, and fewer still that went bad over time, but I replaced every one of these rare duds and mostly at no cost to myself.

I never lend them out; that is the most likely way to lose your discs. I can not recall losing a single disc. It has never happened to me or my memory is failing far faster than I could have imagined.

I do not collect digital, so I can not say how often such titles are lost permanently. I have read lots of comments on this site about how digital titles go missing temporarily or change resolutions and lose extra features, but it seems that they eventually sort themselves out if you manage your digital collection closely and spend inordinate amounts of time contacting customer service. To a digital outsider like myself, it seems like a lot of work and aggravation making sure your digital collection is intact and available. Digital titles seem to play "Hide And Seek" too often for my liking.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Zu Nim

Sounds like a great deal... if you don't value your time.

That's uncalled for. We all obviously put a huge premium on our time.

Now if you'll excuse me, these absolutely hilarious Force Awakens gifs aren't going to post themselves...

[Zu Nim]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Thankfully, I have never lost a disc in the ways you described. I have had very, very few defective discs, and fewer still that went bad over time, but I replaced every one of these rare duds and mostly at no cost to myself.

Yeah, I hope none were taken to the evidence locker. But seriously, I'd think that it's far less likely that people on this forum would lose their discs because many are meticulous collectors.

I do not collect digital, so I can not say how often such titles are lost permanently. I have read lots of comments on this site about how digital titles go missing temporarily or change resolutions and lose extra features, but it seems that they eventually sort themselves out if you manage your digital collection closely and spend inordinate amounts of time contacting customer service. To a digital outsider like myself, it seems like a lot of work and aggravation making sure your digital collection is intact and available. Digital titles seem to play "Hide And Seek" too often for my liking.

Most of the time it's user error. Or more accurately, poor design on the part of the retailer. People will search for their movies in the digital store and it won't come up because it's not for sale. But they don't look in their library. Of course searching the store should always present the stuff you own even if it's outside the sales window. Gotta design products for how people use things, not how you think they should be used.

The other times people have lost movies have been temporary glitches. Glitches on the part of a retailer or a digital locker. They come back but while they're missing I don't blame people for being frustrated, and I can see how it wouldn't inspire confidence. Fortunately it doesn't happen often.

Resolution changes and extra features - I think what you're overlooking is that the changes are usually positive. An aspect ratio is wrong, it gets corrected. Movies get new extras, etc. Studio use too much DNR? If they fix it you'll probably get the new version. Discs get no changes, negative or positive.