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

[Vilya]

Saying that a 4K stream equals or surpasses, in picture quality, that of a 1080p blu-ray is not a bragging point any more than saying high definition streaming looks better than a 480p DVD is one. You are comparing streaming's very best with the 2nd best disc format.

Even when making such a lopsided comparison, the audio on blu-ray still surpasses what you get with either HD or 4K streaming.

You can applaud state of the art 4K streaming for possibly matching 11 year-old blu-ray technology in pq only. On the audio side, though, that ancient blu-ray tech still has 4K streaming beat.

Streaming could yet offer improved bitrates and they could provide better audio, but they have not done it, so they get zero credit. Unrealized potential impresses no one, only results do.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by doctor_who

Wait, are you implying that iTunes 4K HDR is not as good as a standar blu-ray for the same title?

Because it’s certainly better.
It’s not a question.

You’re talking in the wrong decade

Backgrounds, large areas of the same colour, are still vulnerable to artefacts imo. Also audio is inferior. Sorry, you are wrong. Sure, the colours and detail Will be stronger, that’s 4K for you, but all the rest? Nah.

So yeah, it is a question. Let’s see if you can come back at me with something other than (imo) juvenile twitter speech like you normally do.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by DouglasRobert

I see that Walmart is selling these little cards for digital copies of movies for about $20 per each. I just don't get that at all. Why spend that much for a file, when one can buy the physical copy and perhaps a digital copy too.

That said, I prefer the actual physical copy.
The only portable device I have is a small screen smart phone. No way am I going to want to watch a movie on the tiny screen with bad sound.

For my computer I get online via paying for data for my hotspot. No way am I going to download movies and eat up my data just to watch a movie.

Even if I had unlimited data I still prefer the actual disc in hand.

Digital lovers claimed for years we would see films priced more reasonable because there is no added cost of packaging, etc. yeah, right!

[stonesfan129]

Originally Posted by doctor_who

Wait, are you implying that iTunes 4K HDR is not as good as a standar blu-ray for the same title?

Because it’s certainly better.
It’s not a question.

You’re talking in the wrong decade

An iTunes 4K stream is 2160p so the picture is sharper and should look better than a 1080P Blu-ray. I'm saying it's not an apples to apples comparison. 1080P is not 2160P.

[IronSoldier]

I personally prefer iTunes 4k HDR over standard blu due to HDR/WCG support. There's enough quality it doesn't look bad and im more impressed by the hdr/wcg than I would from potentially a tiny bit less compression.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by stonesfan129

How does it make any sense to compare a 1080P Blu-ray encoded with H264 to a 4K (2160p) iTunes stream encoded with H265?

It does make sense in cases where there is an iTunes 4K version but no UHD disc. I think there are now well over a hundred movies like that. And even if 4K is available on both, you have to look at the prices.

Besides, there is one area where iTunes 4K is superior to UHD disc: many more movies get the Dolby Vision metadata. And there is still only one very expensive UHD player that has proper Dolby Vision support (and it is about to be discontinued).

From the information I could find, iTunes 1080P streams run at 7-15mbps (not 30) and are encoded with H264.

For movies that are available in 4K but you only have 1080p rights (ported in from MA), the 1080p streams are actually H.265 encoded. It wouldn't surprise me if they switched to H.265 for all movies in the long run.

iTunes also encodes audio with 384k AC3 5.1 - some movies are only available with stereo AAC - and it sounds awful

Hyperbole. And movies are not audiophile concert recordings anyway.

At least with VUDU, some movies give you DD+ in 7.1 channels.

So do some movies on iTunes.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

It does make sense in cases where there is an iTunes 4K version but no UHD disc. I think there are now well over a hundred movies like that. And even if 4K is available on both, you have to look at the prices.

Besides, there is one area where iTunes 4K is superior to UHD disc: many more movies get the Dolby Vision metadata. And there is still only one very expensive UHD player that has proper Dolby Vision support (and it is about to be discontinued).
For movies that are available in 4K but you only have 1080p rights (ported in from MA), the 1080p streams are actually H.265 encoded. It wouldn't surprise me if they switched to H.265 for all movies in the long run.
Hyperbole. And movies are not audiophile concert recordings anyway.
So do some movies on iTunes.

It’s always hyperbole when something does not fit with your argument isn’t it? Audio is a HUGE part of the HT experience. If it isn’t for you, then you are just some geezer with a tele and a sound bar, not a HT enthusiast.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

And there is still only one very expensive UHD player that has proper Dolby Vision support (and it is about to be discontinued).

Besides the Oppo 203 and 205, the LG UP970, the Cambridge CXUHD, the upcoming Panasonic UB 820 and 9000, and the Sony x700, all do, or soon will, support Dolby Vision.

You exaggerate about Oppo being the only UHD players, plural, with proper Dolby Vision support. The LG and the high end Cambridge model have it now. The two Panansonic models will have it when they are released this year and the Sony x700 will via a future firmware update.

In summary, 4 players have Dolby Vision now with 3 more coming soon for a total of 7 players. The two Oppo models will end production this June and the remaining ones are selling very fast; the $1299 Oppo 205 is already out of stock, but more are expected.

And you are beyond wrong about the audio; the audio on a blu-ray or a 4K UHD disc can not only be of audiophile caliber, it can be damn near aurally orgasmic. In a home theater, the sound is every bit as important as the video and discs give you the best of both. I have far more money invested in the audio side of my home theater than I do in the video side because the audio is that critical to a true home theater experience.

Digital fans tout convenience and a "good enough" image, but they never boast about the audio. Instead they just shrug it off if they mention it at all. I, however, want fully immersive audio along with the best image; they don't just compliment each other, they elevate the experience to the near sublime. Discs provide that consistently; streaming does not.

[doctor_who]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Backgrounds, large areas of the same colour, are still vulnerable to artefacts imo. Also audio is inferior. Sorry, you are wrong. Sure, the colours and detail Will be stronger, that’s 4K for you, but all the rest? Nah.

So yeah, it is a question. Let’s see if you can come back at me with something other than (imo) juvenile twitter speech like you normally do.

I know for a fact you don’t own a single iTunes 4K HDR title. Too juvenile?

Meanwhile, I currently own over a thousand blu-rays, have owned up to three thousand at one time before, and currently own over 100 4K UHD discs, which I love to buy. And of course, I own pretty much every 4K title on iTunes and Vudu.

So who’s the one between us that can actually compare without bias?

For example, I would never sell my Lost complete collection on blu-ray because the streaming/digitally owned versions are far inferior.

I’m not talking about audio, by the way. Audio is an obvious win for disc. But yes, visually the 4K HDR stream is with certainty better than the blu-ray overall. The 4K UHD disc certainly outpaces everything, of course. The background detail and dark scenes make this clear, but they are still better than the equivalent blu-ray. This is comparing on a 77 inch LG OLED 7 series, a 65 inch LG E6 OLED, and/or a 55 inch EF9500, which are currently my three tvs. I say this not to brag, but to respond to your posts of grand delusion.

Again, which of us can compare without bias? You can’t even speak to the true benefits of the streaming or digital ownership models, since you aren’t in the US.

Of course, iTunes doesn’t offer 3D, and nothing beats 3D discs on these OLEDs!

Therefore disc is probably always going to be overall better for me, or at least for the foreseeable future. Doesn’t mean I’m in denial about other things, or can’t recognize how great digital ownership and streaming have been for many people, and the benefits they bring.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by doctor_who

This is comparing on a 77 inch LG OLED 7 series, a 65 inch LG E6 OLED, and/or a 55 inch EF9500, which are currently my three tvs.

I bet that 77" OLED is a sight to behold! I would love to watch 3D on that E6; it must be marvelous! You certainly have great taste in TVs.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Vilya

The site I referenced says they arrived at their numbers thusly:

"Note: in order to provide a fair comparison between movies released in different years, all rankings are based on ticket sales, which are calculated using average ticket prices announced by the MPAA in their annual state of the industry report."

and: "Our Theatrical Market pages are based on the Domestic Theatrical Market performance only. The Domestic Market is defined as the North American movie territory (consisting of the United States, Canada, Puerto Rico and Guam). "

They say their source is the MPAA.

https://www.the-numbers.com/market/

Edit: I just saw this little tidbit regarding the 2018 numbers: "Note: Figures for 2018 are at an annualized rate." Or, they simply made their own projection for 2018. Damn italics getcha every time.

Other than their estimating for 2018, the numbers for the other years, 2017 and back, are a little more conservative than what boxofficemojo reported, but still in the same ballpark.

Suspect #s

http://m.ign.com/articles/2018/04/05...e140570c000989

By comparison, home entertainment spending rose 11% to $47.8 billion, primarily because of video streaming services. Streaming service subscriptions rose 33% to 446.8 million.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by alchav21

I just say Blu-ray because it is just a mere 40Mbps, which is max, vary easily achieved. To surpass UHD 4K Discs you need 128Mbps, also not insurmountable. With the new H.265 Codec and Adaptive Streaming, all the Streaming Providers have to do is update the Movie Codec for the appropriate Bit Rate. Then it's all dependent on your Bandwidth, and the Bit Rate will increase with it. So to achieve UHD 4K Disc Quality, the highest Bit Rates are around 70Mbps. This is my Bandwidth, so I could have UHD Disc Quality Streaming!

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

4K discs also use H.265 so 4K streaming has to match the bitrate to match the quality.

All of this is far more dependent on the providers bandwidth than your bandwidth. It's a cost issue, not a technology issue. They can't afford to stream super high bitrates to millions of customers. And most of their customers don't care about super high bitrates; you obviously don't since you think 4K streaming already looks amazing.

Why would they triple their bitrate (and therefore triple their bandwidth costs) when customers already think it looks amazing?

I think HD Streaming is amazing, I watch most of my Movies on Vudu HDX. You are correct about the Providers having to upgrade their Codec and Bit Rate, but they want to be ahead of the curve. Streaming Video has come like a gigantic wave, and Streaming Providers are popping up all over the place. When I talked to Sony Support, they told me they see that Discs are on the way out and they were gearing up to deliver Disc Like Quality in their Streaming. So I'm sure the Providers that will last will find the funding to provide what the public wants.

[Vilya]

Subscription streaming and 4K UHD disc sales are the only areas seeing explosive growth. Subscription streaming is up 31.05% and 4K disc sales are seeing triple digit growth, up 8 fold over 2016.

Blu-ray disc is only down 0.2% so far this year (thru March 24); which is a pretty great turn around if it can be sustained. And these number do not include Star Wars The Last Jedi sales figures. This data also has revised overall disc performance for 2017, showing a decline of 13.4% instead of the previously reported 14.1%.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=893

So far that little sci fi film is doing great on disc; 80% of its disc sales are on blu-ray with 15% of that coming from 4K UHD.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=896

Digital sell thru had growth of only 5.74% in 2017; in 2016 it was about 15%. The momentum has shifted sharply as its growth has declined by nearly two-thirds in just one year.

Disc is not "on the way out" no matter what echo chamber you heard it in, nor is digital sell thru, but only subscription streaming and 4K disc are enjoying healthy growth with 4K disc growing exponentially.

[veritas]

I do wonder how much 4k has hurt sales for blu ray and digital hd? They basically devalued hd so people are not willing to pay as much for it. I know stuff I personally would have bought on blu ray before I wont pay as much for now that 4k exists. I think that's the reason iTunes wanted to give free upgrades it minimizes the damage 4k was doing to sales of all their other movies.

I would have bought Thor Ragnarok for 20 if 4k did not exist but now I will probably wait till I can get the 4k version for under 15. I did not buy the golden circle for 10 because I expect to get the 4k version for 10 or the blu ray for 5 some time in the future. Making blu ray into no longer a luxury good seriously undermines its price discrimination benefits and 4k doesn't add enough quality to really add a third tier for price discrimination (not enough people can see the difference to pay a premium for it)


Anyway that is just my observation 4k existing has made me spend less on movies as a whole. I don't see a point in rushing to double dip on movies I already own, I don't see a point in paying extra for 4k that offers minimal improvements and I don't see a point in paying as much for blu ray when its not the best version available. This isnt really a physical vs digital issue its just that I see uhd doing more harm then good for the movie industries bottom line (but they cant put the genie back in the bottle so they are stuck with diminishing hd sales)

[jayman3]

I was watching Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle over the weekend. My parents decided we were better off purchasing the digital copy instead.

About an hour into the movie, it suddenly paused and buffered for a good 15 minutes before resuming playback.

I said aloud, "this wouldn't have been an issue if we had the Blu-ray disc."

And that is why I'll stick to physical copies.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by veritas

I do wonder how much 4k has hurt sales for blu ray and digital hd? They basically devalued hd so people are not willing to pay as much for it. I know stuff I personally would have bought on blu ray before I wont pay as much for now that 4k exists. I think that's the reason iTunes wanted to give free upgrades it minimizes the damage 4k was doing to sales of all their other movies.

I would have bought Thor Ragnarok for 20 if 4k did not exist but now I will probably wait till I can get the 4k version for under 15. I did not buy the golden circle for 10 because I expect to get the 4k version for 10 or the blu ray for 5 some time in the future. Making blu ray into no longer a luxury good seriously undermines its price discrimination benefits and 4k doesn't add enough quality to really add a third tier for price discrimination (not enough people can see the difference to pay a premium for it)


Anyway that is just my observation 4k existing has made me spend less on movies as a whole. I don't see a point in rushing to double dip on movies I already own, I don't see a point in paying extra for 4k that offers minimal improvements and I don't see a point in paying as much for blu ray when its not the best version available. This isnt really a physical vs digital issue its just that I see uhd doing more harm then good for the movie industries bottom line (but they cant put the genie back in the bottle so they are stuck with diminishing hd sales)

I think 4K UHD is very helpful to the studios; they are selling very well and at a higher price, so that is all gravy for them. They are still selling a movie here, but now for an even higher premium.

So far this year blu-ray has seen a resurgence, down only 0.2%, while 4K sales continue to rocket skywards. DVD is the format that is down the most, 19.2% to date.

As for the improvements, they can vary quite a bit from title to title. In many instances the improvements are very noticeable, such as Planet Earth II 4K UHD- it looks absolutely stunning. Anyone unable to see a major difference here needs an eye check-up.

The Dark Tower 4K UHD Dolby Vision looks incredible and that alone is almost enough to make up for the movie's other shortcomings. I could mention more titles, but the point is simply that some titles really shine on the new format while some others offer only subtle improvements.

Baby Driver on 4k UHD did not impress me at all; it looked near identical to the blu-ray in my opinion.

Another consideration when watching 4K UHD is that your TV really needs to be properly calibrated. The out-of-the-box settings are always wrong.

Thankfully, we have a very dedicated bunch of members on this website that post their observations about every 4K title that is released. If a title soars, they will praise it and if it doesn't their criticism can be withering. Combine that with the professional reviews and you can get a pretty good idea if a title is worth owning on 4K UHD.

[peep6543]

Originally Posted by jayman3

I was watching Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle over the weekend. My parents decided we were better off purchasing the digital copy instead.

About an hour into the movie, it suddenly paused and buffered for a good 15 minutes before resuming playback.

I said aloud, "this wouldn't have been an issue if we had the Blu-ray disc."

And that is why I'll stick to physical copies.

What internet speed do your parents have??

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by peep6543

What internet speed do your parents have??

It isn’t always about speeds. Some people just have intermittent drop outs. Sometimes it’s the area.

[peep6543]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

It isn’t always about speeds. Some people just have intermittent drop outs. Sometimes it’s the area.

Hm. Gotta tell your ISP to figure that shite out!

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by peep6543

Hm. Gotta tell your ISP to figure that shite out!

I have to make a service call on average every two months; my ISP always wants to blame my modem because I own my own and they don't get any rental revenue from me.

My modem has never been at fault; I have tried theirs and it changed nothing. They are just incompetent. They are also the only broadband provider here and their attitude is:



They are the only game in town and they just don't care.

Additionally, sometimes it is the streaming service that is unable to meet the demands on their servers, compounding the chances for internet dependent failures.