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

[tob]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Oh, and Richard? Who is Steeldeel?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by tob

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by tele1962

I think the problem here is the vast majority could not give a shit about PQ, as has been shown with PDP versus LCD and slowly they are winning.
The one or two on here that are defending download are a perfect example of the main populous being totally ignorant of the facts or refusing to accept them, for the sake of shiny and new.

We are slowly reverting back to the days of bootleg VHS when as long as it was a latest release we will have it. Most of these guys have never heard of or even care about older films and are more than happy with a download of the latest Avengers movie.

I would honestly love for them to view releases from the likes of Criterion or Arrow, but that is something beyond their comprehension.

Let's face it, many people can't be bothered with subtitles. That's what we are up against.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by GuyIncognito

Digital cons:
1) inability to sell used copies for any title you no longer want
2) connection errors (Sometimes Vudu won't work with a particular title so I have to try Flixster)
3) requires fast internet connection for seamless streaming
4) quality is not as good as physical
5) if you want bonus features, I'm pretty sure you have to buy that specific version directly from a digital vender which means you likely won't get a good deal
6) even if you own something in HDX does not mean your device will allow you to view it in HDX. Weeds complete series on Vudu is where I first noticed this. Most episodes only allow me to view in SD if I'm viewing from a PC. I don't know a single blu-ray disc that pops up with a message that says "SD only available if viewing from a PC blu-ray drive". What is it that decides what can be viewed in HD on a PC and what can't? What happens when a certain title changes status and becomes SD only from PC?
7) Who is to say that Vudu will always be a free service? Sure you own the UV rights to a particular movie, but I wouldn't doubt that there will be a day where commercials are put into your movies so Vudu can make more money. Then you can pay an extra subscription fee to get commercial free Vudu service to view your movies. Hell, they did it with YouTube.
8) What happens if a particular service goes down (Cinemanow)? You have to hope that there is some sort of agreement with another company. If Samsung goes belly up for some reason, my blu-ray player still works.

A few comments here:

1) True (although selling discs isn't really worth the effort either unless it's some rare OOP title).
2) and 3): Not a problem if you use a service that also allows you to download instead of only streaming.
4) Mostly, but not always true (e.g. House of Cards in Netflix UHD looks better than any available physical release today). And it's likely that online delivery will broadly catch up and pass at least Blu-ray soon.
5) Many iTunes titles have similar or the same bonus features as the disc releases. It doesn't matter whether you buy directly from the store or use a code from the gray market.
6) This is a Vudu-specific limitation. You can watch iTunes movies in full quality on any device that is capable of playing them.
7) Since when is Vudu a free service?
8) As discussed earlier, pick a format that you can download and un-DRM if necessary, problem solved.

Other thoughts:
1) buying HD digital code is equal to buying the blu-ray. Same way that buying UHD is equal to buying 4K blu-ray. If you first bought Star Wars in HDX and later you want UHD, you have to pay to buy it again in the higher format. They don't give you the best quality for free upgrade

Yes, that's no different than it is on physical disc. Only minor upgrades may be free (e.g. when Apple upgraded from 720p to 1080p years ago). I think the more relevant discussion in this context is renting/subscription vs. ownership. Is it worth owning content (no matter if it's in digital or physical form) that you don't watch very often in the first place, when it's likely that it will eventually become available in a higher quality format on Netflix or similar? Personally, I feel that I wasted a lot of money particularly for TV shows on DVD that are today available in HD on Netflix or Hulu. Is worth buying minor stuff on Blu-ray today, when it is likely to be available on Netflix in UHD in the future?

2) need a device to view either option. Blu-ray requires blu-ray player. Digital requires streaming device. A Smart TV/blu-ray is not a valid argument because that Smart TV cost more than the exact same TV without Smart features. You are paying extra for that

Not really. There are barely any TVs without "smart" features anymore. Same for BD players.

3) "codes are cheaper than discs". This is false. It only appears that way because people get them included with their physical discs.

True for gray market codes, but the digital stores often have sales as well, where you can buy movies for a few bucks. And new releases are often $15, whereas the BD costs $20+. You also can easily find gift cards for 20% off, and there is no sales tax on digital movies in most states (which is 1-2 bucks for a new BD here in CA).

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by tele1962

I would honestly love for them to view releases from the likes of Criterion or Arrow, but that is something beyond their comprehension.

Try comparing the Criterion 1080p iTunes release of Pierre Melville's Le Samouraï with the available disc releases. It may blow your mind.

[PCFan]

Another advantage to physical is that many blu-rays come with the theatrical, extended, and unrated versions of a film, but the digital code that comes with it only redeems as the theatrical or unrated but not both. In some cases an iTunes code does redeem both versions if redeeming the unrated version but in Vudu a digital code either redeemed as unrated or theatrical but not both. Also buying an unrated version of a movie on Vudu does not get you access to the theatrical version and vice versa. For example I purchased The Blues Brothers (unrated) from Vudu but did not get the theatrical version, but the blu-ray comes with both the unrated and theatrical versions. Not sure if it's the same with iTunes if buying directly from iTunes if you buy the unrated version in iTunes you get the theatrical version as well?

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Is it worth owning content (no matter if it's in digital or physical form) that you don't watch very often in the first place, when it's likely that it will eventually become available in a higher quality format on Netflix or similar? Personally, I feel that I wasted a lot of money particularly for TV shows on DVD that are today available in HD on Netflix or Hulu. Is worth buying minor stuff on Blu-ray today, when it is likely to be available on Netflix in UHD in the future?

That's a big assumption that everything you care about will be available on Netflix or Hulu (and will be there for as long as you care about it).

So you wasted money on your TV because better ones exist (or will in the future)? You wasted money on your car because better ones exist? You wasted money on your house because better ones exist? Your argument that things aren't worth owning because you may have to upgrade later is nonsense.

I own things rather than rent them because I want to retain control of my content. I don't want to rely on the studios deciding when and if I can watch any piece of content. This is only possible with physical media. Even if I don't currently own the disc as long as someone who owns a copy is willing to sell it I will never be prevented from watching any title. With digital all control over each title is held by the studio who owns the right. With physical media control lies with the thousands of people who own a disc.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

I own things rather than rent them because I want to retain control of my content. I don't want to rely on the studios deciding when and if I can watch any piece of content.

I used to think just like you, and as a result I own a 4 figure number of disc-based releases. But I have found that I almost never watch 90% of the content that I "control". I have also found that I can always easily find plenty of other things to watch if necessary. So I don't have an urge to "control" (I think "hord" would actually be a better word) content anymore except for the 10% that are really important to me.

This is only possible with physical media.

And once again, I have just as much "control" with a downloaded digital copy with liberal or no DRM.

With digital all control over each title is held by the studio who owns the right.

Reading some of the comments here one could think that the studios are not in the business of making and selling movies, but rather withholding them from the poor consumers.

[PenguinMaster]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

And once again, I have just as much "control" with a downloaded digital copy with liberal or no DRM.

Some of us would rather not resort to illegal means to retain control over our movies. Redistributing those copies would be even more illegal.
Plus weren't you just talking about rentals? Are you renting movies and then removing their DRM to keep them?

Buying used copies of out-of-print Blu-ray titles is perfectly legal: no piracy is necessary for titles to be circulated without the consent of the studios.

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Reading some of the comments here one could think that the studios are not in the business of making and selling movies, but rather withholding them from the poor consumers.

I don't think there's any malicious intent but as a business the studios will not continue to spend money on any titles that are not profitable. This is especially true with services like Netflix: they aren't going to renew their contract for movies that don't bring in new customers.

[PCFan]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

I used to think just like you, and as a result I own a 4 figure number of disc-based releases. But I have found that I almost never watch 90% of the content that I "control". I have also found that I can always easily find plenty of other things to watch if necessary. So I don't have an urge to "control" (I think "hord" would actually be a better word) content anymore except for the 10% that are really important to me.
And once again, I have just as much "control" with a downloaded digital copy with liberal or no DRM.
Reading some of the comments here one could think that the studios are not in the business of making and selling movies, but rather withholding them from the poor consumers.

You can hoard movies digitally as well. You can own over 1000 digital movies and not take up space in your house. Hoarding does not have to be physical.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Rocket Richard

Those people will not be on Blu-ray Forum comparing digital to physical copies. I am talking about (and only in this thread), of what the future will bring and as we all know, buying Blu ray’s is a niche, as they still do not outsell DVD’s to this day.

I love my (very small) collection Blu-ray’s, but in the future, I will skip 4K discs and will be content to stream by then.

We already get 4K on Netflix. 4K will quickly jump to 8K and if people don’t realize this by now, then they are gullible.

If you feel the need to own a hard copy, there is nothing wrong with that, but I do not.

You are a niche. Joining a Blu-Ray forum to wind disc lovers up in my opinion. It's very telling that you received thanks for one of your posts by a suspended (in my opinion) troll.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by PenguinMaster

That's a big assumption that everything you care about will be available on Netflix or Hulu (and will be there for as long as you care about it).

So you wasted money on your TV because better ones exist (or will in the future)? You wasted money on your car because better ones exist? You wasted money on your house because better ones exist? Your argument that things aren't worth owning because you may have to upgrade later is nonsense.

I own things rather than rent them because I want to retain control of my content. I don't want to rely on the studios deciding when and if I can watch any piece of content. This is only possible with physical media. Even if I don't currently own the disc as long as someone who owns a copy is willing to sell it I will never be prevented from watching any title. With digital all control over each title is held by the studio who owns the right. With physical media control lies with the thousands of people who own a disc.

Shows I really love, I can watch many times. With Blu, I have the security that they will be available always in the finrst quality.

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

You are a niche. Joining a Blu-Ray forum to wind disc lovers up in my opinion. It's very telling that you received thanks for one of your posts by a suspended (in my opinion) troll.

I have a strange feeling they might be one and the same person?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by tele1962

I have a strange feeling they might be one and the same person?

I thought that but it doesn't tally mate. Wouldn't have surprised me though.

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I thought that but it doesn't tally mate. Wouldn't have surprised me though.

The guy has probably never seen a movie on film and thinks grain should be scrubbed away.

PS
Love your film collection, in particular " Possession ".

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by tele1962

The guy has probably never seen a movie on film and thinks grain should be scrubbed away.

PS
Love your film collection, in particular " Possession ".

Thanks. We both have good taste I think.

Possession is a odd little film but beautiful and I love off kilter films anyway. Probably why I love Twin Peaks so much! (Film and tv show)

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by alchav21

What's going down is the sales of Physical Disc, Blu-ray and especially DVD. The primary revenue stream for The Studios. Sales of Digital HD are soring, spurred by Movies like The Martian, Jurassic World, and Star Wars. This is according to Variety. So keep buying those Blu-rays, The Studios will Love You.

Not strictly true. Bluray is currently up around 6% over last year.

[GuyIncognito]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

A few comments here:

1) True (although selling discs isn't really worth the effort either unless it's some rare OOP title).
2) and 3): Not a problem if you use a service that also allows you to download instead of only streaming.
4) Mostly, but not always true (e.g. House of Cards in Netflix UHD looks better than any available physical release today). And it's likely that online delivery will broadly catch up and pass at least Blu-ray soon.
5) Many iTunes titles have similar or the same bonus features as the disc releases. It doesn't matter whether you buy directly from the store or use a code from the gray market.
6) This is a Vudu-specific limitation. You can watch iTunes movies in full quality on any device that is capable of playing them.
7) Since when is Vudu a free service?
8) As discussed earlier, pick a format that you can download and un-DRM if necessary, problem solved.
-----------------------
Yes, that's no different than it is on physical disc. Only minor upgrades may be free (e.g. when Apple upgraded from 720p to 1080p years ago). I think the more relevant discussion in this context is renting/subscription vs. ownership. Is it worth owning content (no matter if it's in digital or physical form) that you don't watch very often in the first place, when it's likely that it will eventually become available in a higher quality format on Netflix or similar? Personally, I feel that I wasted a lot of money particularly for TV shows on DVD that are today available in HD on Netflix or Hulu. Is worth buying minor stuff on Blu-ray today, when it is likely to be available on Netflix in UHD in the future?
------------------
Not really. There are barely any TVs without "smart" features anymore. Same for BD players.
--------------------
True for gray market codes, but the digital stores often have sales as well, where you can buy movies for a few bucks. And new releases are often $15, whereas the BD costs $20+. You also can easily find gift cards for 20% off, and there is no sales tax on digital movies in most states (which is 1-2 bucks for a new BD here in CA).

The reason I mentioned seamless streaming is because people usually won't have the ability to download their entire 1,000 movie library. So while you can download your title, now you have to wait for a multi-GB download to finish before you can start. Maybe not a big deal, but something to consider.

You're right in that I overlooked iTunes codes coming with bonus features. I'm not very familiar with iTunes (I'm mainly UV). Can you download and watch 1080p iTunes from a Windows computer? I know you can get iTunes on Windows, but I always thought they require some sort of Apple device for best quality.

Vudu is free. They are not free to own content, but they are free to view the content that you do own. You don't have to use Vudu to redeem any code (except Vudu-exclusive titles of course) but you should be able to use Vudu to watch it. I'm saying there could very well be a day when Vudu (or whatever streaming service) starts also charging to use their service in order to view your content or have ads inserted if you have a non-paying account (similar to YouTube).

More and more TVs come with smart features, but not all of them have it. And it's much more difficult to move that TV to another room than it is a Roku or blu-ray player (if that room's TV isn't smart as well).

[huskerbear]

Just a couple thoughts:

Digital does not = small screen

If you are a physical copy person, and haven't upgraded to a 4K TV, why not? a 4K TV not only does UHD but also upscales the rest, so 4K TVs = the best quality to watch a movie on. Or is 1080p good enough? or your willing to sacrifice picture quality?


This is blu-ray.com but we are in a digital sub forum, so don't be surprised to find people here that use digital.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Just a couple thoughts:

Digital does not = small screen

If you are a physical copy person, and haven't upgraded to a 4K TV, why not? a 4K TV not only does UHD but also upscales the rest, so 4K TVs = the best quality to watch a movie on. Or is 1080p good enough? or your willing to sacrifice picture quality?


This is blu-ray.com but we are in a digital sub forum, so don't be surprised to find people here that use digital.

But it could mean that. See my points about 'paying by screen size' I think that idea is a big deal and could cause major problems. I'm surprised no one else can see the potential developments if that scheme was put in place (every chance has it as obviously been discussed)