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

[stonesfan129]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

You can, but it should be obvious by now the divides and restrictions that are going to exist. Some will just bury their heads in the sand but it is coming.

My point was, I can’t really take your posts seriously when you are backtracking every few days. You started as a staunch disc Collector, by next week you will be exclusively digital lol.

I am a steady disc collector. Every time I keep telling myself I don't have more space for discs and I'll go digital, I buy another Blu-ray. I have around 300 of them in total and the only cloud copies I really have are the codes that came with some of these Blu-rays.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by stonesfan129

I am a steady disc collector. Every time I keep telling myself I don't have more space for discs and I'll go digital, I buy another Blu-ray. I have around 300 of them in total and the only cloud copies I really have are the codes that came with some of these Blu-rays.

I'm just glad you buy and enjoy discs. A lot of people do a mixture of both disc and digital for a variety of reasons, but making some disc purchases are infinitely better than making none at all, so a big to you.

[dublinbluray108]

Just on the point about adding Blu-rays & DVDs to the collection database. When I started out my contributions to the site; the additions to my collection was quite slow. I started on building up the Blu-ray collection for the first month or so. Adding in the DVDs came in slowly after that. When I tried to add the DVDs to my collection; I had added some in from rote memory & then had to literally takes stacks of them from upstairs in the house & add in them one by one because I could not remember all of the titles that I had afterwards. This had taken me a couple of hours at a time just for adding my DVD collection alone because I had to sort these out with all the Blu-rays that I had collected as well. Talk about managing a herculean effort. Now with the Blu-rays; most of the time I just add whatever title that I purchased from a shop or online onto the database straight away as soon I get it into my hand as I bring it home.

On digital media; anyone reading posts about mobile content being a possible norm may take this news into stock. Youtube had launched their YT Premium & YT Music service in 17 countries earlier this week. These services used to be originally called Youtube Red. When I'm signed into YT on my laptop for the last few days; two big ad banners came up on my homepage which were displayed above my followed channels. The first time you will see these ads or when you watch the videos on it; it will ask you, via a pop up ad, to opt in for a 3 month free trial for YT Premium & a 1 month free trial of YT Music.

I did not do this because I thought it was a waste of money to begin with after these free trials end.

If you're from a European country that may accept the Euro currency; the monthly payment rates are as follows.

Youtube Premium is at €11.99 p/m

Youtube Music is at €9.99 p/m

These are the monthly prices that I got from the Irish service. I'm not sure if any other European country is charged with the same monthly subscription with the same charging system that is applied to services like Spotify or Prime Video. These YT services are also not really ad free all over the place because there are restrictions in place for shows and movie purchases that are not made from YT. Ads will still show up on these purchases unless it is original content made from YT. One notable thing that I had found from YT music is that you will get free access to Google Play Music included in your subscription. It also happens vice versa with Google Play Music offering free access to YT Music as well in the US, Australia & NZ and also for whenever it is available in other countries.

Article

https://djmag.com/content/youtube-la...aming-services

Youtube Premium Restrictions Q&A

https://support.google.com/youtube/a...ils&hl=en&rd=1

Without taking everything to consideration; I wonder who would actually take up this service because if you tried to download YT content onto your device. Again you wouldn't permanently own a copy of that content. It says in their TOS that the content you download on your device is a temporary download only lasting 30 days which I think is crap value for money. If you didn't subscribe to any of these services; you will still ads everywhere on it.

So what do you guys think?

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

The other streaming providers are never going to match discs or premium download services with their files because there is no reason to. It would significantly increase their spending but barely increase their income.

I have had Netflix, Prime Video and Vudu* (after they went streaming) since day one. I only use them for content not available on disc or in some cases, original content. I keep quite a few DVD's because the titles are not available on BD or streaming or has OAR or the sound track is better. An example, Cat People and Emerald Forest, the BD and UV had better picture than the DVD but in both cases the sound track may as well been in mono.

I had several titles on Laserdisc that never made it to any other format so I wish I had kept the player and those titles. Still have True Lies and a few other titles on D-VHS D-Theater and a JVC HM–DH5U player. Sold my Sony FMP-X10, glad I did not invest too much in content purchase.

The only streaming titles that I have purchased are ones not available on BD. So yes, I do stream a few movie titles but only because they are not available on BD or UHD BD.

How any movie fan would prefer streaming to BD or UHD BD, many with lossless** Dolby Atmos/DTS:X, is beyond me .

*For those that do not remember, Vudu started as a private company that sold HD movie titles for download to their hardware.

**Yes, I know how Atmos/DTS:X works and the overhead tracks are not lossless so no rebuttals or PM please.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by dublinbluray108

When I started out my contributions to the site; the additions to my collection was quite slow.

For many years I used File Express (flat field database) to keep up with my βetamax tapes, Laserdisc, DVD’s, D-Theater tapes and some Blu-ray disc. Around 2006-7 purchased Movie Collector, Music Collector and a bar code scanner. Scanned all my disc titles and been using Collector ever since.

So what do you guys think?

Will pass on this one.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

How any movie fan would prefer streaming to BD or UHD BD, many with lossless** Dolby Atmos/DTS:X, is beyond me .

Well that's easy enough to understand: not every movie fan is a gearhead.

Some people go out of their way to make room for the biggest display they can shoehorn into their living rooms, others weigh other considerations.

Some people love having up to a dozen speakers in their living room. Others don't.

Some people see obvious, unmistakable differences between HD and SD. Others see marginal differences if that.

Different people prioritize different things, well, differently.

Compression artifacts or artificial sharpening or overly aggressive noise reduction bug the hell out of some people. Other people don't even know what those things are.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Streaming technology that has not even achieved the bitrate average of a blu-ray disc, yet alone a 4K disc, after 23 years of existence impresses you?

Absolutely. I've been online in one form or another since the mid-80s. I connected to my first online service with a 300 baud modem and still remember being envious of the premium business service option that supported 1200 baud modems. 1200...talk about living large.

I've been from one end of this galax...wait, no, wrong thread.

I've seen streaming go from 'well, okay, you can start looking at the naked ladies while the picture is still downloading' to Video on Demand and some pretty remarkable streaming options.

Turn on a TV (which is almost certainly going to be a digital stream, btw) and you can't go five minutes without seeing some wireless carrier hawking how cheap their 'gigs' are.

Set aside the fact that we're actually measuring online data in gigs now. That's remarkable in and of itself but even more remarkable is the fact that people who don't even know what a gig is are ravenous consumers of data.

And the people supplying the pipes have some really remarkable things to meet that demand. It wasn't that long ago that having a T1 line to your residence was an extravagance (along the lines of having, say, a private screening room in your home). And now? Consumers demand that kind of bandwidth (and more) for the devices in their pockets.

And even looking back over the narrow 'NetFlix style video/audio streaming' history of the past few years (I'm at an age when I can refer a decade or more as a 'few years') shows some pretty remarkable advancements.

That type of streaming has come a long way in the past ten years or so.

It's pretty amazing, actually.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by octagon

Well that's easy enough to understand: not every movie fan is a gearhead.

Some people go out of their way to make room for the biggest display they can shoehorn into their living rooms, others weigh other considerations.

Some people love having up to a dozen speakers in their living room. Others don't.

Some people see obvious, unmistakable differences between HD and SD. Others see marginal differences if that.

Different people prioritize different things, well, differently.

Compression artifacts or artificial sharpening or overly aggressive noise reduction bug the hell out of some people. Other people don't even know what those things are.

Some people don’t see the danger in backing a far inferior tech will all the lack of control that brings with it.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by octagon

Absolutely. I've been online in one form or another since the mid-80s. I connected to my first online service with a 300 baud modem and still remember being envious of the premium business service option that supported 1200 baud modems. 1200...talk about living large.

I've been from one end of this galax...wait, no, wrong thread.

I've seen streaming go from 'well, okay, you can start looking at the naked ladies while the picture is still downloading' to Video on Demand and some pretty remarkable streaming options.

Turn on a TV (which is almost certainly going to be a digital stream, btw) and you can't go five minutes without seeing some wireless carrier hawking how cheap their 'gigs' are.

Set aside the fact that we're actually measuring online data in gigs now. That's remarkable in and of itself but even more remarkable is the fact that people who don't even know what a gig is are ravenous consumers of data.

And the people supplying the pipes have some really remarkable things to meet that demand. It wasn't that long ago that having a T1 line to your residence was an extravagance (along the lines of having, say, a private screening room in your home). And now? Consumers demand that kind of bandwidth (and more) for the devices in their pockets.

And even looking back over the narrow 'NetFlix style video/audio streaming' history of the past few years (I'm at an age when I can refer a decade or more as a 'few years') shows some pretty remarkable advancements.

That type of streaming has come a long way in the past ten years or so.

It's pretty amazing, actually.

If you're amazed by a content provider streaming videos to you at 25 Mbps with lossy audio when ISPs can deliver bandwidth over 1+ Gbps, then be amazed.

To me its like riding a tricycle on the Autobahn. These content providers are barely using any of the speed that is available to them. They are practically frozen in amber. Natural evolution is only slightly slower than that of streaming.

The real advancements have been with physical media. Bitrates up to 128 Mbps and lossless audio are now the norm on 4K UHD discs. Streaming has not even caught up to where blu-rays were a decade ago.

Content providers do not show any signs of increasing their bitrate averages, either. They know that their lower standard customers are content with lossy audio and highly compressed videos. They have no particular incentive to use more of the available bandwidth.

I am old to enough to remember being impressed by the first hand held calculator, so I share much of the perspective that advanced age brings. I am impressed by the best that a technology can offer and for home viewing of movies that is with physical media. Streaming has been in a perpetual game of catch-up in the quality department and they now appear to be content with where they are: a place blu-ray was at a decade ago. Such distant second place finishes just don't get me excited.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by octagon

Well that's easy enough to understand: not every movie fan is a gearhead.

Some people go out of their way to make room for the biggest display they can shoehorn into their living rooms, others weigh other considerations.

Some people love having up to a dozen speakers in their living room. Others don't.

Some people see obvious, unmistakable differences between HD and SD. Others see marginal differences if that.

Different people prioritize different things, well, differently.

Compression artifacts or artificial sharpening or overly aggressive noise reduction bug the hell out of some people. Other people don't even know what those things are.

There are casual movie fans and there are passionate movie fans. If being the latter makes one a "gear head", that's fine by me. There is nothing wrong with being either one.

People are passionate about different things. Almost everyone I know seems to have some hobby where they go all out and spare no expense. I do not share many of these interests, nor do they share many of mine, but I have admiration for the best quality even with "gear" that I will never own. State of the art in any area interests me greatly. I like seeing what we are capable of; the very best is what impresses me.

Most of us on this website are film enthusiasts. It follows that many of us want the highest quality presentation possible of our owned movies (well, owned discs). We build expensive home theaters and we build a library of our favorite films on physical media because that is how the best home viewing and listening experience is accomplished. The only limiting factors are finances, of course, and spouses- for those so afflicted.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Some people don’t see the danger in backing a far inferior tech will all the lack of control that brings with it.

Originally Posted by Vilya

Streaming has been in a perpetual game of catch-up in the quality department and they now appear to be content with where they are: a place blu-ray was at a decade ago. Such distant second place finishes just don't get me excited.

Then don't be excited.

And who knows, maybe you're right. Maybe everybody involved in moving data from Point A to Point B has decided that we're good the way things are and they're going to stop trying to make the pipes bigger, better, faster and cheaper. And even if network providers continue to make bigger, better, faster, cheaper pipes content providers might decide they don't really want to take advantage of them. I suppose that's all possible.

Me? I don't see it. I see no reason to think the next decade won't be as impressive as the past decade and I for one can't wait to see what it brings.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by octagon

Then don't be excited.

And who knows, maybe you're right. Maybe everybody involved in moving data from Point A to Point B has decided that we're good the way things are and they're going to stop trying to make the pipes bigger, better, faster and cheaper. And even if network providers continue to make bigger, better, faster, cheaper pipes content providers might decide they don't really want to take advantage of them. I suppose that's all possible.

Me? I don't see it. I see no reason to think the next decade won't be as impressive as the past decade and I for one can't wait to see what it brings.

I am zen calm.

ISPs have made advancements and these will likely continue- at least in those markets where they care to make infrastructure investments. It bears remembering that a full 35% of the country still does not have broadband access. The ISPs are not investing in those areas due to insufficient return on investment. That may make business sense, but it is of no comfort to the millions stuck with dial-up internet. The average internet speed in the U.S. remains at a pathetic 10.7 Mbps. We rank 28th in the world in internet speeds- there's some of that "progress" to get excited about. These same people with antiquated internet service are probably not very impressed that Gigabit internet is readily available in Chicago and other densely populated regions.

Content providers have had far, far more bandwidth available to them than what they are using and they have had that access for many years. They show no sign of changing that anytime soon. I did not say they never will, just that they do not appear to have any incentive to incur that extra expense for a streaming market that is happy with their highly compressed 16-25 Mbps streamed videos with lossy audio.

The ISPs offer some really fast lanes on the information super highway in select markets, but content providers are just pedaling along on their little

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by octagon

Well that's easy enough to understand: not every movie fan is a gearhead.

Have been called many things but don't remember gearhead being one of them .

Some people love having up to a dozen speakers in their living room.

Guilty, have 13 (7.2.4) in the media room with a 133" scope screen.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Vilya

There are casual movie fans and there are passionate movie fans. If being the latter makes one a "gear head", that's fine by me. There is nothing wrong with being either one.

No, being a passionate movie fan does not necessarily make on a gearhead. That was kind of my point. One can be a passionate movie fan without know what audio codecs even are let alone caring about them.

Originally Posted by Vilya

Most of us on this website are film enthusiasts. It follows that many of us want the highest quality presentation possible of our owned movies.

Sure, but what does that really tell us?

While there's certainly an overlap between passion for film and passion for gear that correlation is nowhere near strong enough to use ones passion for gear or technical specs as an indicator of ones passion for film.

You can be a movie fan and watch movies on DVD or on cable or via some subscription service. None of those are mutually exclusive.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by alchav21

You guys are stuck in your own Ancient Worlds, Bit Streaming from a Player or Server is basically the same they both require Bandwidth. The Streaming Providers are changing the Codec and using Adaptive Bitrate Streaming, where the Quality is dependent on Bandwidth and Consistency. Downloads will be compressed for efficiency. So if you don't have the Bandwidth or Consistency your Quality will be reduced. We are headed to Streaming from Servers, and Disc Quality can be achieved!

Originally Posted by Vilya

Streaming is very compressed for cost considerations and the reality of our internet infrastructure. A download should actually be less compressed than streaming as it only involves time to accomplish the receipt of the data. Your digital content provider will not match the bandwidth of a premium certified high speed HDMI cable, period. We have been other this too many times and you are just too thick to get it.

You are also completely clueless as to what the digital content providers are doing. If you are stating that they are planning to introduce new codecs that require greater bandwidth closer to that of a 4K disc, you need to provide a citation. Without one, it is just another one of your little fantasies.

We are not "heading" to streaming from servers; that has roots as far back as 1995. A former telecom employ should know as much. I am no longer surprised in the slightest by what you do not know.

The average internet speed in the U.S. is just 10.7 Mbps- a far cry from what digital content providers recommend now. The U.S. is ranked 28th in the world for internet speeds. Over a third of Americans (35%) do not have broadband internet access.

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Weren’t you using a 1080i screen a short while ago? That’s ancient man!

I've had my Sony for over a year now, that's a long time in Tech. As for the use of Discs, now that's becoming Ancient. My source is talking to Sony Support, and they told me their goal was to produce Disc Quality Streaming. They were upgrading their Codec to support this. Like I said, all their Movies are 4K but they adjust from SD. So looking at Adaptive Bitrate Streaming doesn't it make sense for all the Streaming Providers to use this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adapti...rate_streaming

The other thing talking to Sony Support, they were familiar with our Site Blu-ray.com. They said they looked at some of the Posting. With Adaptive Streaming, the Quality can adjust to your Bandwidth and Consistency. So the low Bandwidths can still get good Streamings. That's why some people see Artifacts, their Consistency or Bandwidth is at fault.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by octagon

No, being a passionate movie fan does not necessarily make on a gearhead. That was kind of my point. One can be a passionate movie fan without know what audio codecs even are let alone caring about them.



Sure, but what does that really tell us?

While there's certainly an overlap between passion for film and passion for gear that correlation is nowhere near strong enough to use ones passion for gear or technical specs as an indicator of ones passion for film.

You can be a movie fan and watch movies on DVD or on cable or via some subscription service. None of those are mutually exclusive.

Yes, a casual fan with functional gear to meet their minimal, or at least lower, requirements, assuming finances and life challenges are not the limiting factors.

I believe there is a strong correlation between purchasing an elaborate home theater and that same person's passion for movies and episodic television. You do not have to be conversant in tech jargon to appreciate a fine home theater and the awesome viewing and listening presentation it provides. I admire exotic cars, but I have never changed a tire in my life.

While I can only speak for myself, I can assure you I did not spend what I did just to admire the pretty gear. I use it daily to enjoy this hobby that I simply love.

[octagon]

Sure, one can fairly safely assume that people who paint their faces in team colors and shave team logos into their hair are passionate fans of that team.

It's far riskier to assume that people who don't paint their faces or shave team logos into their hair are not passionate fans of that team. Or even that they're not as passionate as the face painters.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

I've had my Sony for over a year now, that's a long time in Tech. As for the use of Discs, now that's becoming Ancient. My source is talking to Sony Support, and they told me their goal was to produce Disc Quality Streaming. They were upgrading their Codec to support this. Like I said, all their Movies are 4K but they adjust from SD. So looking at Adaptive Bitrate Streaming doesn't it make sense for all the Streaming Providers to use this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adapti...rate_streaming

The other thing talking to Sony Support, they were familiar with our Site Blu-ray.com. They said they looked at some of the Posting. With Adaptive Streaming, the Quality can adjust to your Bandwidth and Consistency. So the low Bandwidths can still get good Streamings. That's why some people see Artifacts, their Consistency or Bandwidth is at fault.

An alleged conversation with an unnamed someone in Sony's customer service is NOT a verifiable, credible source. You would not put that in a research paper because it is simply HEARSAY, non-specific hearsay at that.

We already know what adaptive streaming is and streaming providers still only average 16-25 Mbps bitrates despite the fact that ISPs offer bandwidth a couple of orders of magnitude greater than that in select markets. We are also well aware of the multitudinous factors that frequently degrade streaming content.

It clearly does not make sense for the streaming content providers to use more of that bandwidth because, firstly, they are not doing it. Secondly, more data usage costs more money- someone would have to pay for it.

Streaming customers are apparently content with what they get now. If they were to stream at higher bitrates, it would cost their providers more money and it would cost the consumer more money. More data means more money. Shouldn't a former networking "professional" be able to comprehend this simple reality?

Disc use is not "ancient", it still outperforms and outsells digital copies by slightly more than 2 to 1. 4K discs offer state of the art video and audio playback at the consumer level. Even blu-rays provide better audio, and less compressed video, than the best of what streaming offers. Something that is state of the art is, by very definition, current and not ancient.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Vilya

If you're amazed by a content provider streaming videos to you at 25 Mbps with lossy audio when ISPs can deliver bandwidth over 1+ Gbps, then be amazed.

To me its like riding a tricycle on the Autobahn. These content providers are barely using any of the speed that is available to them. They are practically frozen in amber. Natural evolution is only slightly slower than that of streaming.

The real advancements have been with physical media. Bitrates up to 128 Mbps and lossless audio are now the norm on 4K UHD discs. Streaming has not even caught up to where blu-rays were a decade ago.

Content providers do not show any signs of increasing their bitrate averages, either. They know that their lower standard customers are content with lossy audio and highly compressed videos. They have no particular incentive to use more of the available bandwidth.

I am old to enough to remember being impressed by the first hand held calculator, so I share much of the perspective that advanced age brings. I am impressed by the best that a technology can offer and for home viewing of movies that is with physical media. Streaming has been in a perpetual game of catch-up in the quality department and they now appear to be content with where they are: a place blu-ray was at a decade ago. Such distant second place finishes just don't get me excited.

If you really think UHD streaming is where blu-ray was a decade ago I don't know what to tell you.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

IMO, you folks are wasting your time responding to that person, people like that just don't get it and most likely never will. Calling streaming the new technology shows their mind set, most do not realize streaming preceded DVD by several years.

This is a silly argument. Who was really streaming in the dial-up days when it took 30 minutes to download a jpeg?

We were early adopters of broadband and that was in 1999 iirc.