Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 160

Thread: Is Blu-Ray Losing the Video Wars?

  1. #26
    Irritated Lawn Guy Klonk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Rockland, NY
    Posts
    2,643
    Really isn't any noticeable difference between 240 Motion capture and 120. I just bought a 4k TV last month. 4K will be the norm sooner than you think. There is already a race with streaming providers to get the biggest UHD library. The picture is ridiculously good!

    You can't even argue about the difference in quality between BR and DVD. BR blows it out of the water in every way. Especially with sound if you have a nice surround system.
    "Who would have thought a whale would be so heavy?" - Moe Sizlak

  2. #27
    facetious maximus Yves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,621
    My current TVs are at 60hz. 120hz would be an upgrade! I realise that the market is changing fast but we're always lagging behind the USA up here. I've got a couple of years before 4K becomes the norm. I watch most of my TV through Netflix these days and with my limited internet, I'm usually watching shows in 720p so there's no need for me to overpay for a 4K TV just yet...
    "Corn Flakes pissed in. You ranted. Mission accomplished. Thread closed."

    -Cozy 3:16-

  3. #28
    Irritated Lawn Guy Klonk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Rockland, NY
    Posts
    2,643
    Oh I hear ya, Yves. But, the prices on these TV's are indeed dropping pretty quick and some names like Sony and Samsung upscale the picture very well (i got a sony)...especially with BR. And shame on you for only having 60hz and being a hockey fan!! Definitely need 120hz to watch our teams without motion blur...while they continue to lose!

    Netflix is slow right now on UHD content. There are some other lesser known streaming like Ultraflix that claim to have big selections. I think Amazon Instant originals are all in UHD.
    "Who would have thought a whale would be so heavy?" - Moe Sizlak

  4. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    140
    Might as well speculate/debate as to which type of horse will ultimately prevail in winning postal delivery contracts with the government. Physical media "wars" in audio and video are over with no winner. It's all about streaming.
    Daily jazz vinyl reviews on Instagram @jazzandcoffee

  5. #30
    Highly Evolved Orangutan JKL2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    16,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerjo View Post
    I tried to sell a stack of DVDs to a used record store a couple months ago (they have a lot of used DVDs). Manager told me that they only buy Blu-Ray now, regular DVDs aren't selling.
    Did you roll your eyes? I would have. Screw him, that's so stupid. Well, screw his customers I guess. I opt for BR now, but I'd certainly buy a used DVD, or go for a DVD if a BR wasn't available. I guess maybe people think the next generation of BR players won't play DVDs. Could be true in some cases, though I'm sure the next Oppos will play them.

  6. #31
    Highly Evolved Orangutan JKL2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    16,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Progbear View Post
    Well, unless you have an extremely expensive high-end TV/home video setup, the difference in quality between DVD and Blu-Ray is going to be basically nil. Since most consumers have SD setups, DVD is good enough. So obviously people aren’t going to buy Blu-Ray as much.

    Plus, Blu-Ray is an idiotic name.
    What? Blu is much cooler than Blue.

  7. #32
    Highly Evolved Orangutan JKL2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    16,529
    Quote Originally Posted by 3RDegree_Robert View Post
    When they scan the original film and clean up all the dust and junk and make it 1920 pixels by 1080 pixels instead of just 480 pixels...if you have an HD tv (as I contend most people do these days) you really have to not care or not have very good vision to not notice the difference. The only time Blu-ray won't look better than DVD is when the source footage is video. Video cannot be made to look better (like a 90's television show shot on video like Highlander or something) but film can be scanned at 4k (has been for a decade now) and can look amazing.
    What he said!

  8. #33
    Highly Evolved Orangutan JKL2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    16,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimjack View Post
    Might as well speculate/debate as to which type of horse will ultimately prevail in winning postal delivery contracts with the government. Physical media "wars" in audio and video are over with no winner. It's all about streaming.
    Not if you don't want companies like Netflix and AMC to have a firm grip on your junk. I'm intrigued by Robert Pashman's burning his own BRs, because I still need to burn "illegal" downloads occasionally. To keep The Man off my junk that is, not the little guys. I don't mind if they affix themselves to my junk for a bit.

  9. #34
    facetious maximus Yves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,621
    Quote Originally Posted by Klonk View Post
    Definitely need 120hz to watch our teams without motion blur...while they continue to lose!
    Hockey is the main reason for wanting to upgrade. It's just that I have 2 perfectly good TVs right now and I can't justify just chucking one out in order to upgrade. I look at them all the time though....
    "Corn Flakes pissed in. You ranted. Mission accomplished. Thread closed."

    -Cozy 3:16-

  10. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Re-deployed as of 22 July
    Posts
    0
    There are no 2-disc BD film sets because they are unnecessary. A SD BD can hold up to 23 hours of film, a HD BD can hold up to 9 hours. I have BD films that have over 2 hours of extras on the same disc as the film.
    BD is also future safe in that it supports expansion from the single and double layered and the current 25 and 50 GB disks up to 100 and 250GB - multi layered.

  11. #36
    Highly Evolved Orangutan JKL2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    16,529
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterG View Post
    There are no 2-disc BD film sets because they are unnecessary. A SD BD can hold up to 23 hours of film, a HD BD can hold up to 9 hours. I have BD films that have over 2 hours of extras on the same disc as the film.
    BD is also future safe in that it supports expansion from the single and double layered and the current 25 and 50 GB disks up to 100 and 250GB - multi layered.
    Did someone ask why there are no 2-disk Blu-Ray sets?

  12. #37
    Member nosebone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Stamford, Ct.
    Posts
    1,528
    I have some older BR's that come with a DVD copy.

    This was before BR players were available for under $100, I suppose
    no tunes, no dynamics, no nosebone

  13. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gloucestershire
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Klonk View Post
    Really isn't any noticeable difference between 240 Motion capture and 120. I just bought a 4k TV last month. 4K will be the norm sooner than you think. There is already a race with streaming providers to get the biggest UHD library. The picture is ridiculously good!

    You can't even argue about the difference in quality between BR and DVD. BR blows it out of the water in every way. Especially with sound if you have a nice surround system.
    ^^^ This.

    With a good quality surround system the difference in audio quality between BR and DVD is very noticeable and, as I mostly purchase music discs, I would always look for the BR option first.

  14. #39
    facetious maximus Yves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,621
    Just for the record, there ARE 2-disc BluRay movie sets. I own the 15-disc Lord Of The Rings set and each movie comes on 2 BluRay discs. They could have crammed each movie on its own disc but for maximum picture and sound quality, each movie was split onto 2 discs. All the bonus material is in DVD format.
    "Corn Flakes pissed in. You ranted. Mission accomplished. Thread closed."

    -Cozy 3:16-

  15. #40
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Re-deployed as of 22 July
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JKL2000 View Post
    Did someone ask why there are no 2-disk Blu-Ray sets?
    I was addressing the comment about BD
    losing some imaginary video war.

  16. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Re-deployed as of 22 July
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Yves View Post
    Just for the record, there ARE 2-disc BluRay movie sets. I own the 15-disc Lord Of The Rings set and each movie comes on 2 BluRay discs. They could have crammed each movie on its own disc but for maximum picture and sound quality, each movie was split onto 2 discs. All the bonus material is in DVD format.
    Well, by your own admission that is a 15 disk set, not a two disk.

  17. #42
    Highly Evolved Orangutan JKL2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    16,529
    Quote Originally Posted by nosebone View Post
    I have some older BR's that come with a DVD copy.

    This was before BR players were available for under $100, I suppose
    Some are still being released that way. I know, crazy! As crazy as the CD/vinyl releases. Totally dumb, IMO.

  18. #43
    Ember
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Delaware County PA
    Posts
    897
    My contention is that most of the people who find little benefit to Blu-ray are those who watch their screens from too far away.

    Here is an illuminating chart that illustrates the optimal seating distance at various screen sizes and resolutions. People sitting 10 feet away from their 42" HDTVs are simply not going to be able to see much difference between a 1080p Blu-ray and a 480p DVD. Watch 1080p at the proper viewing distance, an a well-calibrated screen in a properly illuminated room, and you will have no further questions about the benefit of true HD.

    resolution_chart.jpg

  19. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by glawster2002 View Post
    ^^^ This.

    With a good quality surround system the difference in audio quality between BR and DVD is very noticeable and, as I mostly purchase music discs, I would always look for the BR option first.
    There is no distinguishable difference in 2-channel audio quality between DVD and B-Ray.

  20. #45
    Ember
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Delaware County PA
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by Facelift View Post
    There is no distinguishable difference in 2-channel audio quality between DVD and B-Ray.
    If the DVD's audio is lossy Dolby Digital and the Blu-ray's audio is lossless PCM, the difference can be very easily distinguished. It's not the basket, it's what's in the basket.

    When we get to multichannel audio, where DVD's best is compressed, lossy Dolby Digital or DTS while Blu-ray offers lossless PCM or DTS-MA, there's little left to discuss. The lossy audio may be "good enough" for many listeners, but the differences are striking and quite easy to hear.

  21. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by rdclark View Post
    If the DVD's audio is lossy Dolby Digital and the Blu-ray's audio is lossless PCM, the difference can be very easily distinguished. It's not the basket, it's what's in the basket.

    When we get to multichannel audio, where DVD's best is compressed, lossy Dolby Digital or DTS while Blu-ray offers lossless PCM or DTS-MA, there's little left to discuss. The lossy audio may be "good enough" for many listeners, but the differences are striking and quite easy to hear.
    I guess that's why nobody can tell the difference in a blind A/B test? I'm not talking about multi-channel, just regular 2-channel.

    There simply is no distinguishable difference.

  22. #47
    Ember
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Delaware County PA
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by Facelift View Post
    I guess that's why nobody can tell the difference in a blind A/B test?
    The difference between what and what, precisely?

  23. #48
    Member since March 2004 mozo-pg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    9,688
    I'd love to have UHD TV but I bought a 70 inch Sharp TV and I'd have a really hard time to provide a good reason to invest again.

  24. #49
    Member rcarlberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    7,765
    Quote Originally Posted by rdclark View Post
    Here is an illuminating chart that illustrates the optimal seating distance at various screen sizes and resolutions.
    That chart is flipping nuts. Who sits three feet away from a big screen TV??? And I disagree with the contention that you can't see the difference from farther away.

    You can. It's just not as obvious

  25. #50
    Member rcarlberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    7,765
    Quote Originally Posted by mozo-pg View Post
    I'd love to have UHD TV but I bought a 70 inch Sharp TV and I'd have a really hard time to provide a good reason to invest again.
    New ones are not only demonstrably better resolution, but cheaper too.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •