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

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

I believe that they will continue to fix bugs for a while, but I doubt that they'll have resources for significant new development work.
I assume you mean HDR10+ (almost all UHD BDs use HDR10).

I have a kind of myopia when I type sometimes; I think I have hit keys that I in fact missed.

I believe the firmware will keep coming because if it doesn't, they will get hit with warranty claims of "my disc freezes." They said they will keep doing firmware updates, so I give them the benefit of the doubt as their customer support has been legendary. Until I have a reason to doubt them, I won't.

Incidentally, Oppo has announced that they are considering one more production run of their flagship Oppo 205. Those interested can sign up for notifications here:

https://www.oppodigital.com/blu-ray-...lastbatch.aspx

[Bronson13]

Even if Blu-Ray dies do you think Criterion or Shout will still be releasing stuff?

[gotmule]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Would you be able to tell if there are artifacts? It takes a bit of training to know what to listen for.
That's just the thing. Audio perception is heavily influenced by expectation bias. If you think something "should" sound better, it will. That's why blind tests are absolutely necessary to really understand the differences.

I certainly can appreciate that perspective, however I am fairly confident in my pair of ears having experienced more than a handful of blind listening tests over the years either in my two channel system, theater system, showrooms, or at manufacturers’ headquarters.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Bronson13

Even if Blu-Ray dies do you think Criterion or Shout will still be releasing stuff?

I think the rights holders will want to keep their streaming licences to themselves for their own services and major contact providers like Netflix, Amazon and iTunes.

But I've noticed on Amazon some niche distributors have their own channels (Arrow has one I think), so they may still continue to some degree, but not be quite as prolific.

[Rzzzz]

As soon as we can watch movies in our head, blu ray will die....

[Rzzzz]

Originally Posted by Bronson13

Even if Blu-Ray dies do you think Criterion or Shout will still be releasing stuff?

That last Criterion New Years drawing was so depressing. Half of it was dedicated to streaming on Filmstruck.....

[steve_dave]

VHS - over 30 years plus a tiny resurgence thanks to Magnolia/Magnet.

Laserdisc - over 25 years.

Vinyl - Still happening despite a short resting period.

Cassette tapes - Over 30 years with a tiny resurgence thanks to Guardians of the Galaxy

DVD - Over twenty years.

Physical formats will still exist, some will briefly disappear then reappear. The questions is really who will continue to support these formats. Because Sony literally had to stop MAKING floppy discs for people to stop using them. Sony also had to stop making MiniDiscs to get people to stop using them. Matter of fact, if Sony didn't keep pulling the plug on formats, a lot of them would still be in use.

Because not all countries have the same technological development and evolution. Thailand finally stopped putting so much support behind VideoCDs and moved to DVD. But that was because the studios /distributors had to stop it not so much the consumers demanding it.

[bo130]

Originally Posted by Bronson13

Even if Blu-Ray dies do you think Criterion or Shout will still be releasing stuff?

Yes. Why do I think so? Because in ye olden laserdisc days, Criterion basically had their pick of releases since the studio's didn't really consider laserdisc to be relevant.

[bo130]

Originally Posted by Dirk504

I don’t really see Blu Ray going anywhere. Digital isn’t really reliable. There are some internet outages in my area, and the fastest speed available for me is 25mbs. I notice a dip in quality from time to time. Overall it’s just not reliable. Plus we don’t spend all of this money on HT equipment to watch something compressed to hell.

Blu ray and physical formats will get down to one thing: $. People (beyond just enthusiasts I must add) are either going to pay for it, and keep releases going, and equipment being sold, or they aren't. If the $ stops coming in, there will be little to no effort spent - or at the bare minimum the software and hardware releases will be extremely expensive.

[rocknblues81]

I might my first blu ray Casino Royale in 2009, but I didn't really start collecting blu rays until the winter of 2015 and so I would say 6 years. But my collection has skyrocketed since then.

[DukeTogo84]

I was pretty late to the game with blu-ray. I wasn't sure it would last, and then I didn't want to rebuy so many movies. However, I had a pretty "small" TV at this time. Once I got a larger TV, the differences between formats became even more apparent.

Currently rebuying a ton of films, and hoping that the physical format doesn't die.

What is driving me nuts, is what someone previously mentioned. The Irishman could be Netflix's first huge Oscar contender. I would be really frustrated if this doesn't get a physical release at some point.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by alchav21

First you have to clean house and make sure you're set up properly. You should not have drop offs, if you are your ISP has a serious balance problem. This is common with Copper Cable Providers. High Quality Streaming is putting a strain on ISP's. If your ISP is lacking in consistent service, it might be time to change. Then if you don't have ISP options, and High Consistent Bandwidth are priorities, then like Steedeel says a move should be considered.

Originally Posted by Steedeel

To be fair sir, I didn’t say that. I said I moved. That wasn’t the reason. It was just a bonus.

You did say nothing changed until you moved. I'm sure you looked at a few places, and Fiber had to be one of the deciding factors. I have moved several times for many different reasons. Certain things were always at the top of my list, like Structured Cat5 and Internet. When I moved to Palm Desert, CA back in 2000, from the Bay Area I assumed DSL would be available. It was a new Community and all they had was Dial-up. I was surprised, but I wasn't going to settle for that. I joined a group that researched Internet Providers in our area. Within a year we had Time Warner and Verizon wanting to give us service. By 2005 we had Verizon FiOS starting to build out in our Community. So you don't have to move, but you do need to get active within your Community to make a change.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Would you be able to tell if there are artifacts? It takes a bit of training to know what to listen for.
That's just the thing. Audio perception is heavily influenced by expectation bias. If you think something "should" sound better, it will. That's why blind tests are absolutely necessary to really understand the differences.

Originally Posted by squidzilla

You can not tell right away if there is compression in the audio? I can tell right away once any thing that goes past dialogue only begins to happen. Music, sound effects, LFE, etc. All easy to spot. Personally, I think the higher quality audio is pearls before swine for most people. I seriously doubt most people on the digital side would be considered audiophiles on any level. This is a movie forum not an audio video forum.

You're probably right, most people have Sound Bars and don't have elaborate Sound Systems. I subscribe to Sound & Vision, and that's all they write about are these Fantastic Expensive Sound Systems $20K+ Home Entertainment Centers. So if you guys don't come close to this, you don't have the best and you have to step down and compromise. Just because it shakes your room doesn't mean you are getting Quality Sound. Atmos and Dolby Vision HDR10+ are the latest, and that is in the Codec H.265 in 4K UHD Discs and Streaming Video. So if you have the proper set up and it's configured, you're going to pull this Sound from a Disc Player or Streaming Provider. Streaming Providers are pulling ahead in offering more of this content.

[veritas]

Originally Posted by alchav21

You're probably right, most people have Sound Bars and don't have elaborate Sound Systems. I subscribe to Sound & Vision, and that's all they write about are these Fantastic Expensive Sound Systems $20K+ Home Entertainment Centers. So if you guys don't come close to this, you don't have the best and you have to step down and compromise. Just because it shakes your room doesn't mean you are getting Quality Sound. Atmos and Dolby Vision HDR10+ are the latest, and that is in the Codec H.265 in 4K UHD Discs and Streaming Video. So if you have the proper set up and it's configured, you're going to pull this Sound from a Disc Player or Streaming Provider. Streaming Providers are pulling ahead in offering more of this content.

Are we all going to compare our speaker sizes and prices now Personally I'm very happy with my 6 foot sound lab speakers

[vwnut13]

I watched Inferno on Blu-ray and could not for the life of me get automatic captions in foreign language scenes. My digital copy on Vudu had no problems.

I'm not sure if the issue was my player (PS4) or the Blu-ray.

I do know that it really sucks when your only options are to watch with captions on, or rewind every time there is a foreign language.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

you're going to pull this Sound from a Disc Player or Streaming Provider. Streaming Providers are pulling ahead in offering more of this content.

"Most" people are content with DVDs and 480p quality, which, ironically, have better audio than streaming; AND they likely listen through their TV's woefully inadequate speakers. "Most" people are a lot of things that I happily am not.

A whole lot of people have mid to high end home theater surround sound systems. And why is that? Because some of us are quality motivated and we want fantastic audio to compliment the superb video we get from our disc players. We did not build elaborate home theaters to watch artifact and buffering prone streaming video with its markedly lower sound quality- and all of this being dependent on unreliable and ever more expensive internet service. I made compromises when I was young and poor, but now that I am all grown-up and comfortably retired since age 44, I want the best I can have. I made my sacrifices and paid my dues; it's time to reap the rewards now.

The cost conscious and convenience driven might settle for a soundbar to go with their sub par streaming video quality; and why not? Streaming offers lower quality audio and a sound bar is good enough for those huddled in their bargain basement.

Streaming lags behind in audio quality by a substantial margin; even most digital proponents concede this fact. Streaming is not giving you Atmos or DTS:X audio; you need to stop pretending it does. Even if it did, your cheap soundbar can't play it.

Streaming has not equaled the video quality of a 4k disc, either. It is debatable if it even matches a blu-ray. Close, maybe, if your internet does not flake out and until you get a dark scene, but it is not equal. Streaming's audio is still way behind that of disc. It is not even a contest.

Could streaming someday offer better video and audio? Theoretically, but nobody wants theory; they want real world results. Flawless fiber faster than fast internet is not a reality. Data caps sure are, though. Recurring price hikes for every level of service are plenty real, too. Many people in the U.S. can not stream the current iteration of compressed (more so than disc) 4K streaming and still too many can not even stream in high definition.

Streaming has to catch up before it can even fantasize about pulling ahead. It is pretty obvious where you pulled your statement from, too. Streaming providers are ahead in exactly nothing related to quality. Cheaper maybe, more convenient maybe, but not equal, not better, and not worth my time, yet alone my money.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Vilya

"Most" people are content with DVDs and 480p quality, which, ironically, have better audio than streaming; AND they likely listen through their TV's woefully inadequate speakers. "Most" people are a lot of things that I happily am not.

A whole lot of people have mid to high end home theater surround sound systems. And why is that? Because some of us are quality motivated and we want fantastic audio to compliment the superb video we get from our disc players. We did not build elaborate home theaters to watch artifact and buffering prone streaming video with its markedly lower sound quality- and all of this being dependent on unreliable and ever more expensive internet service. I made compromises when I was young and poor, but now that I am all grown-up and comfortably retired since age 44, I want the best I can have. I made my sacrifices and paid my dues; it's time to reap the rewards now.

The cost conscious and convenience driven might settle for a soundbar to go with their sub par streaming video quality; and why not? Streaming offers lower quality audio and a sound bar is good enough for those huddled in their bargain basement.

Streaming lags behind in audio quality by a substantial margin; even most digital proponents concede this fact. Streaming is not giving you Atmos or DTS:X audio; you need to stop pretending it does. Even if it did, your cheap soundbar can't play it.

Streaming has not equaled the video quality of a 4k disc, either. It is debatable if it even matches a blu-ray. Close, maybe, if your internet does not flake out and until you get a dark scene, but it is not equal. Streaming's audio is still way behind that of disc. It is not even a contest.

Could streaming someday offer better video and audio? Theoretically, but nobody wants theory; they want real world results. Flawless fiber faster than fast internet is not a reality. Data caps sure are, though. Recurring price hikes for every level of service are plenty real, too. Many people in the U.S. can not stream the current iteration of compressed (more so than disc) 4K streaming and still too many can not even stream in high definition.

Streaming has to catch up before it can even fantasize about pulling ahead. It is pretty obvious where you pulled your statement from, too. Streaming providers are ahead in exactly nothing related to quality. Cheaper maybe, more convenient maybe, but not equal, not better, and not worth my time, yet alone my money.

Excellent post and very true. That speaks for a great many of us. By the way, how the heck did you manage to retire at 44? Did you win the lottery?

[cynatnite]

Originally Posted by Vilya

"Most" people are content with DVDs and 480p quality, which, ironically, have better audio than streaming; AND they likely listen through their TV's woefully inadequate speakers. "Most" people are a lot of things that I happily am not.

A whole lot of people have mid to high end home theater surround sound systems. And why is that? Because some of us are quality motivated and we want fantastic audio to compliment the superb video we get from our disc players. We did not build elaborate home theaters to watch artifact and buffering prone streaming video with its markedly lower sound quality- and all of this being dependent on unreliable and ever more expensive internet service. I made compromises when I was young and poor, but now that I am all grown-up and comfortably retired since age 44, I want the best I can have. I made my sacrifices and paid my dues; it's time to reap the rewards now.

The cost conscious and convenience driven might settle for a soundbar to go with their sub par streaming video quality; and why not? Streaming offers lower quality audio and a sound bar is good enough for those huddled in their bargain basement.

Streaming lags behind in audio quality by a substantial margin; even most digital proponents concede this fact. Streaming is not giving you Atmos or DTS:X audio; you need to stop pretending it does. Even if it did, your cheap soundbar can't play it.

Streaming has not equaled the video quality of a 4k disc, either. It is debatable if it even matches a blu-ray. Close, maybe, if your internet does not flake out and until you get a dark scene, but it is not equal. Streaming's audio is still way behind that of disc. It is not even a contest.

Could streaming someday offer better video and audio? Theoretically, but nobody wants theory; they want real world results. Flawless fiber faster than fast internet is not a reality. Data caps sure are, though. Recurring price hikes for every level of service are plenty real, too. Many people in the U.S. can not stream the current iteration of compressed (more so than disc) 4K streaming and still too many can not even stream in high definition.

Streaming has to catch up before it can even fantasize about pulling ahead. It is pretty obvious where you pulled your statement from, too. Streaming providers are ahead in exactly nothing related to quality. Cheaper maybe, more convenient maybe, but not equal, not better, and not worth my time, yet alone my money.

Streaming is not created equally. We can do decently with ours since we get 100Mbps. I can't complain about the quality and reliability in our area. While 4K streaming is subpar compared to UHD's, I think the quality is nearly on par with BD. We've been watching 50 First Dates this morning on Netflix and the PQ matches the BD, IMO.

My dreams of a home theater does not match our budget. We've been fortunate to be able to get a decent 4K display and our living room layout is not conducive having the kind of audio system I'd love to have. So we do have a soundbar. A bit on the expensive side, but I think it's adequate considering our limitations.

Everyone's needs are different. My oldest daughter has a smaller home and a more limited budget. I give her the digital codes for everything we buy and it works for her. She likes having digital media at her fingertips. Our local internet provider is pretty stable. We've had few problems here. It's not perfect, but nothing is.

I do prefer physical media. Mostly because I want to physically own the movies and TV shows I enjoy. PQ and AQ are another reason as well.

Thing is, if we had a house fire tomorrow and I lost all those movies buying again would be a trial. Not to mention the OOP and many steelbooks that are irreplaceable. We have insurance, but it couldn't replace everything.

We're just as vulnerable to losing physical media as we are to digital media. I'd come closer to saying that digital media is a bit easier to recover than physical.

There are pros and cons to both sides. I think the either or argument is silly because there's nothing to say you can't have it both ways if you so choose.

[cpr3584]

Right now I’m 50/50 blu-ray/digital but as many others stated I’m waiting to see wha happens with the Irishman . If I can’t buy a physical copy of the latest movie from the greatest living director that will probably be it for me for blu Ray . I’ll just stream and keep a small digital library

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by cpr3584

Right now I’m 50/50 blu-ray/digital but as many others stated I’m waiting to see wha happens with the Irishman . If I can’t buy a physical copy of the latest movie from the greatest living director that will probably be it for me for blu Ray . I’ll just stream and keep a small digital library

That seems pretty silly, and I strongly doubt that would be the case anyway.