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

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by ArmyOfDarknessAW

It isn't that big of a leap. 4K Blu-ray is great, but not like the leap from DVD to Blu-ray was.

I respect your opinion but many told me the same thing with DVD! . Glad I didn't listen (no offence to you though)

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by master gandhi

Me too. It almost never happens that I watch a movie I don't like at all, because of the research I've done beforehand.

Yeah, I already have 50 films compiled for purchase in December!

[ArmyOfDarknessAW]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I respect your opinion but many told me the same thing with DVD! . Glad I didn't listen (no offence to you though)

I have a 4K Blu-ray player. I'm not just telling you that from seeing one in store. It really isn't the jump from DVD to Blu-ray. As I said I like it otherwise I wouldn't own a player and 4K Blu-rays. Just saying don't build up expectations.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by ArmyOfDarknessAW

I have a 4K Blu-ray player. I'm not just telling you that from seeing one in store. It really isn't the jump from DVD to Blu-ray. As I said I like it otherwise I wouldn't own a player and 4K Blu-rays. Just saying don't build up expectations.

They are already built up! It's me we are talking about!

[Sector Drone]

I support both formats because I'm a fan of movies and don't like to limit my options. Both have movies unavailable to the other one. My preferred format is Blu-Ray, but digital is great for watching HD movies that are only available on DVD for physical discs. Also digital is getting more and more newer releases that are exclusive to that format. Sometimes they even get movies that are still playing in theaters. D2D is also great just in case something was to ever happen to my physical collection. Theft, fire, flooding, and other natural disasters are always something to worry about, even if the chances of them happening might be small. I have a friend that lost almost his entire physical collection during a flood. I at least have a good portion of my physical collection available digitally if something horrible was to happen.

Both sides obviously have their positives and negatives. I love Blu-Ray, but at the same time I can clearly see physical disc sales decreasing and digital increasing. I rather be prepared for an all digital future than put all my eggs into the Blu-Ray basket and have to start my collection from scratch when the day comes that studios decide to stop supporting it. I really see no reason for me to not support both.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by Sector Drone

I rather be prepared for an all digital future than put all my eggs into the Blu-Ray basket and have to start my collection from scratch when the day comes that studios decide to stop supporting it. I really see no reason for me to not support both.

You're missing the whole point of a physical collection: it doesn't need studio support. After the studios drop support for Blu-ray my collection will continue to work perfectly. But if a digital provider drops support, you will lose your digital collection.

[master gandhi]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

You're missing the whole point of a physical collection: it doesn't need studio support. After the studios drop support for Blu-ray my collection will continue to work perfectly. But if a digital provider drops support, you will lose your digital collection.

When Target Ticket and Nook shut down they gave you a chance to transfer your collection to another provider. You don't lose your collection. It just has to move elsewhere.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by master gandhi

When Target Ticket and Nook shut down they gave you a chance to transfer your collection to another provider. You don't lose your collection. It just has to move elsewhere.

That's presuming Digital HD doesn't start losing numbers drastically. Who would want to take on the responsibility if Digital HD is looking obsolete?

Just look at the U.K for how badly things are going wrong. That could have been the U.S without Vudu.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but You can't even rent or buy UV titles from Flixster? It's purely a redeeming storefront? So we don't even have a means to purchase UV without the bluray. Uv won't survive another couple of years in this country without the codes that come with dicks.

[Miraculous Ladybug]

I very much prefer to own physical copies of my films.

[master gandhi]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

That's presuming Digital HD doesn't start losing numbers drastically. Who would want to take on the responsibility if Digital HD is looking obsolete?

Just look at the U.K for how badly things are going wrong. That could have been the U.S without Vudu.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but You can't even rent or buy UV titles from Flixster? It's purely a redeeming storefront? So we don't even have a means to purchase UV without the bluray. Uv won't survive another couple of years in this country without the codes that come with dicks.

It's still a risk, yes. Digital could become obsolete someday, but what will replace it? I suppose the subscription services could overtake the services that allow you to purchase movies. Then we'd be forced to become nothing but renters. What a lame world that would be. I'd have to check if the service has the movie I'm in the mood for, and if they don't, I'd be out of luck. I kind of doubt it would ever come to that, though. The studios love impulse buys. At worst, they'll charge us to maintain our digital collection, since that's already mentioned in the Ts & Cs.

I'm not too familiar with how Flixster works outside of redeeming codes. I know that's all I ever use it for. You could very well be right about them not having a storefront. I always assumed they had one, but I've never once seen it directly referenced, so it probably doesn't have one. That does put them at a huge disadvantage, and explains it completely as to why they aren't more popular or profitable. I wonder how they even make money.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like almost every UK Blu-ray only includes UV, not iTunes. If so, the demise of UV in the UK could hit digital pretty hard over there, I agree. Otherwise, you're buying digital titles directly through Amazon or iTunes, instead of redeeming codes, and most people would rather just subscribe to a monthly digital service over buying digital copies from scratch.

For me, I have some freebie digital copies on Amazon, as well as my DMA titles. I have tons of UV copies on Vudu from various sources, including direct purchases, codes and DMA. And lastly, I have a large amount of titles on iTunes via codes, direct purchases and DMA. My sizeable DMA collection beefs up all three services, and so do codes.

If you're not like me and actively checking for sales (every day/week/month), you miss out on a lot of great deals too that helps grow one's digital collection. Of course, this is a habit I still apply to Blu-ray purchasing as well. If I see a great deal on something I want, I go for it. Admittedly, I pursue digital deals much more than Blu-ray deals these days.

My point is that I have eggs in all the major baskets, which has me less worried about the future. I'm somewhat prepared for any possible outcome.

[Cranston37]

You have to remember that when we say Digital we aren't necessairly saying PURCHASE Digital. It feels like a lot of people use Digital now for subscribing/renting. If you go that route it makes any talk of services or formats going obsolete irrelevant.

We've already gone that route with music (it's hard to shell out $11.99 for a digital album when you can stream most albums ever made for $9.99).

[master gandhi]

Originally Posted by Cranston37

You have to remember that when we say Digital we aren't necessairly saying PURCHASE Digital. It feels like a lot of people use Digital now for subscribing/renting. If you go that route it makes any talk of services or formats going obsolete irrelevant.

We've already gone that route with music (it's hard to shell out $11.99 for a digital album when you can stream most albums ever made for $9.99).

In the context of this overall discussion, I'd say most of us are referring to purchased digital, not subscribing/renting digital. Of course, both have been brought up, but when comparing formats, we're primarily talking about it from the collector's angle.

I don't want to offend any music lovers, but it seems like society values music less than movies. At least from an ownership standpoint. They seem to think that music should be dirt cheap, whereas they don't mind paying a little more for movies. Music videos can be viewed for free on YouTube, while most movies aren't legitimately available on YouTube. If you want to watch a movie, you need to somehow pay for it usually (unless you want to break the law). Musicians make most of their money from actual concerts, while movie-makers make their money left and right. Maybe it's because of Napster too. Who knows. It probably took too long for most people to download movie torrents back in the day, but music albums/individual songs could be downloaded quicker.

I think studios benefit from having multiple ways to consume their movies. If movies were only available through rentals or subscription services, studios would make a lot less money than they do now. They would certainly be far less special. When they spend as much money as they usually do to make movies these days, they need movies to feel special.

I don't see purchasing becoming obsolete. The day that happens is the day that every movie is made on an indie film budget.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Cranston37

You have to remember that when we say Digital we aren't necessairly saying PURCHASE Digital. It feels like a lot of people use Digital now for subscribing/renting. If you go that route it makes any talk of services or formats going obsolete irrelevant.

We've already gone that route with music (it's hard to shell out $11.99 for a digital album when you can stream most albums ever made for $9.99).

Yes, but Netflix etc.. Are simply not solutions for movie lovers. They are more tv related. Also, the same problems (buying or renting) apply for the U.K even when renting. We still need a decent storefront that offers HQ HD and 5.1 surround at least. We have loads but none are Ultraviolet.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by master gandhi

It's still a risk, yes. Digital could become obsolete someday, but what will replace it? I suppose the subscription services could overtake the services that allow you to purchase movies. Then we'd be forced to become nothing but renters. What a lame world that would be. I'd have to check if the service has the movie I'm in the mood for, and if they don't, I'd be out of luck. I kind of doubt it would ever come to that, though. The studios love impulse buys. At worst, they'll charge us to maintain our digital collection, since that's already mentioned in the Ts & Cs.

I'm not too familiar with how Flixster works outside of redeeming codes. I know that's all I ever use it for. You could very well be right about them not having a storefront. I always assumed they had one, but I've never once seen it directly referenced, so it probably doesn't have one. That does put them at a huge disadvantage, and explains it completely as to why they aren't more popular or profitable. I wonder how they even make money.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like almost every UK Blu-ray only includes UV, not iTunes. If so, the demise of UV in the UK could hit digital pretty hard over there, I agree. Otherwise, you're buying digital titles directly through Amazon or iTunes, instead of redeeming codes, and most people would rather just subscribe to a monthly digital service over buying digital copies from scratch.

For me, I have some freebie digital copies on Amazon, as well as my DMA titles. I have tons of UV copies on Vudu from various sources, including direct purchases, codes and DMA. And lastly, I have a large amount of titles on iTunes via codes, direct purchases and DMA. My sizeable DMA collection beefs up all three services, and so do codes.

If you're not like me and actively checking for sales (every day/week/month), you miss out on a lot of great deals too that helps grow one's digital collection. Of course, this is a habit I still apply to Blu-ray purchasing as well. If I see a great deal on something I want, I go for it. Admittedly, I pursue digital deals much more than Blu-ray deals these days.

My point is that I have eggs in all the major baskets, which has me less worried about the future. I'm somewhat prepared for any possible outcome.

So therefore, if Bluray dies so does Digital HD if people would rather subscribe like you suggest

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by master gandhi

It's still a risk, yes. Digital could become obsolete someday, but what will replace it? I suppose the subscription services could overtake the services that allow you to purchase movies. Then we'd be forced to become nothing but renters. What a lame world that would be. I'd have to check if the service has the movie I'm in the mood for, and if they don't, I'd be out of luck. I kind of doubt it would ever come to that, though. The studios love impulse buys. At worst, they'll charge us to maintain our digital collection, since that's already mentioned in the Ts & Cs.

I'm not too familiar with how Flixster works outside of redeeming codes. I know that's all I ever use it for. You could very well be right about them not having a storefront. I always assumed they had one, but I've never once seen it directly referenced, so it probably doesn't have one. That does put them at a huge disadvantage, and explains it completely as to why they aren't more popular or profitable. I wonder how they even make money.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like almost every UK Blu-ray only includes UV, not iTunes. If so, the demise of UV in the UK could hit digital pretty hard over there, I agree. Otherwise, you're buying digital titles directly through Amazon or iTunes, instead of redeeming codes, and most people would rather just subscribe to a monthly digital service over buying digital copies from scratch.

For me, I have some freebie digital copies on Amazon, as well as my DMA titles. I have tons of UV copies on Vudu from various sources, including direct purchases, codes and DMA. And lastly, I have a large amount of titles on iTunes via codes, direct purchases and DMA. My sizeable DMA collection beefs up all three services, and so do codes.

If you're not like me and actively checking for sales (every day/week/month), you miss out on a lot of great deals too that helps grow one's digital collection. Of course, this is a habit I still apply to Blu-ray purchasing as well. If I see a great deal on something I want, I go for it. Admittedly, I pursue digital deals much more than Blu-ray deals these days.

My point is that I have eggs in all the major baskets, which has me less worried about the future. I'm somewhat prepared for any possible outcome.

You hit the nail on th head! Lame world. That's where we are heading.

[master gandhi]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

So therefore, if Bluray dies so does Digital HD if people would rather subscribe like you suggest

In the UK, possibly. In the US, no.

[Cranston37]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Yes, but Netflix etc.. Are simply not solutions for movie lovers. They are more tv related. Also, the same problems (buying or renting) apply for the U.K even when renting. We still need a decent storefront that offers HQ HD and 5.1 surround at least. We have loads but none are Ultraviolet.

Very true, but I'm not necessairly talking about where the market is now but where we are heading. Criterion/Warners has a service coming out this fall. A monthly subscription to that might be very attractive to even film lovers when a single Criterion costs $25 a pop to own.

I fully admit that what I'm saying is not fact but conjecture, but it just feels that for the studios they are going to make more money off an all you can eat plan for their entire catalog (like music is doing), rather than in selling individual titles. In a way, Netflix already does with with their disc service. I'm envisioning a streaming version of that.

[master gandhi]

Originally Posted by Cranston37

Very true, but I'm not necessairly talking about where the market is now but where we are heading. Criterion/Warners has a service coming out this fall. A monthly subscription to that might be very attractive to even film lovers when a single Criterion costs $25 a pop to own.

Yes, that service appeals to me very much, even though I don't particularly want another subscription service. If I'm not mistaken, it will include all of Criterion's catalogue and all their features. Can't wait.

That's what usually separates the subscription services from the purchaseable services. The subscription services have little to no extra features. Movies only. I'm obsessed with features.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Cranston37

Very true, but I'm not necessairly talking about where the market is now but where we are heading. Criterion/Warners has a service coming out this fall. A monthly subscription to that might be very attractive to even film lovers when a single Criterion costs $25 a pop to own.

So you are saying a multitude of movie services offering individual subscriptions to their movies? Disney, Sony, WB etc..? That sounds grim.

[master gandhi]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

So you are saying a multitude of movie services offering individual subscriptions to their movies? Disney, Sony, WB etc..? That sounds grim.

Sounds expensive, that's for sure. If they include all their features, that could be appealing, but still sounds expensive and less fun than collecting individual titles.