Blu-Ray is dead?
Oct 29, 2008 at 10:19 PM Post #31 of 218

mbriant

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 21, 2001
Posts
9,536
Likes
29
Quote:

Viewing distance is huge factor, mostly people keep their computer screens closer so improvement is much more prominent. Likewise, watching an HDTV (depending on the size/res) from really far away will make the differences appear minimal.
__________________


Very true. When you sit close to a big screen HDTV, the detail, combined with the size impact, blows a computer screen out of the water. IMO
 
Oct 29, 2008 at 10:24 PM Post #32 of 218

mape00

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Posts
224
Likes
11
"Second, the advent of low cost up-sampling DVD players dramatically cut the video quality advantage of Blu-ray DVDs. Suddenly, for $100, your average consumer can put good video on their HDTV using standard DVDs. When Blu-ray got started no one dreamed this would happen."

I think he's the one smoking dope. Srsly.

Threre are multiple reasons blu-ray isn't a mass-market product yet. But first and foremost it's because it's too expensive compared to DVDs or going to the cinema.
 
Oct 29, 2008 at 11:26 PM Post #34 of 218

fhuang

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Posts
1,927
Likes
45
Location
Hong Kong
frankly, i don't really have more spare money to spend on blu-ray dvd. one hobby is more than enough. plus i really don't think the difference is large enough for the extra cash. i too have good eyes too. i can still read road sign from far and i used to play goalie and able to hit any fastball(curveball, not so much
tongue_smile.gif
).
 
Oct 29, 2008 at 11:45 PM Post #35 of 218

pichonCalavera

New Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Posts
33
Likes
10
For me, DVD is good enough for the time being, even tough I've seen Blue ray discs in action and they look better than standard DVD's. DVD is cheaper, video quality is great enough, and most importantly it already has an immense library of movies, TV shows, and music concerts... even more than VHS when DVD was entering the scene.
 
Oct 29, 2008 at 11:45 PM Post #36 of 218

earwicker7

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 18, 2007
Posts
1,741
Likes
11
It's funny that this subject came up... I have a friend that works for JVC, and over the weekend, the subject of Blu-Ray came up. Here's the straight dope from an industry professional:

Blu-Ray is really not doing well. The only people with Blu-Ray players are PS3 owners, and they didn't buy the PS3 for Blu-Ray, it just happened to come with the package. Nobody is buying stand-alone players regardless of price drops. Some of the PS3 owners are purchasing Blu-Ray discs, but it's not enough to make the format a success.

The moral of the story, according to a guy who's been in the industry for a decade or two, is that Americans don't go for quality when it comes to audio/video. He says it is amazing to see the difference between JVC America and JVC Japan's products. For example, when JVC brought their top-tier headphones to the JVC America office, they were unable to convince anyone in the US to distribute them. It was considered to be a mega-niche. You have to go through JVC Japan to get them. JVC America considers their $100 stuff to be top-of-the-line.

By the way, anyone who can't tell the difference between up-sampled and high-definition needs a new eye doctor.
 
Oct 29, 2008 at 11:51 PM Post #37 of 218

Al4x

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Posts
2,233
Likes
11
Quote:

Originally Posted by mbriant /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Very true. When you sit close to a big screen HDTV, the detail, combined with the size impact, blows a computer screen out of the water. IMO


funny, i find it the complete opposite lol
 
Oct 30, 2008 at 12:16 AM Post #38 of 218

marvin

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Posts
2,580
Likes
17
Quote:

Originally Posted by mape00 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
"Second, the advent of low cost up-sampling DVD players dramatically cut the video quality advantage of Blu-ray DVDs. Suddenly, for $100, your average consumer can put good video on their HDTV using standard DVDs. When Blu-ray got started no one dreamed this would happen."

I think he's the one smoking dope. Srsly.

Threre are multiple reasons blu-ray isn't a mass-market product yet. But first and foremost it's because it's too expensive compared to DVDs or going to the cinema.



I think you've never seen an early fixed pixel HD display connected to a consumer level DVD player of the time. It often looked terrible enough to force a quick return of the fixed pixel TV in favor of a CRT. It wasn't until the introduction of high quality scalers and deinterlacers into the consumer market that fixed pixel displays finally looked decent with DVDs.

If BluRay had that kind of competition now, it would be an unqualified success. Now, properly deinterlaced and upscaled DVD looks good enough at average viewing distance with most material that BluRay's quality edge is greatly blunted.
 
Oct 30, 2008 at 12:41 AM Post #39 of 218

Zanth

SHAman who knew of Head-Fi ten years prior to its existence
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Posts
9,570
Likes
39
Here are some of my thoughts:

1) I own a PS3 and 3 Blu-ray discs.
2) I don't yet own an HDTV but was eying one for my wife as a Christmas gift
3) I own a 30" Dell monitor and a 24" Dell monitor. Both are way beyond 1080p. Regular DVD's look like CRAP on these monitors. Blu-ray discs? Spectacular. PS3 + Dell monitors at max PS3 res + Blu-ray = sublime.

HDTV's in Ottawa anyway, are FLYING off the shelves. My city is a bit of an odd microcosm. We aren't hit as hard financially as many other major cities in North America because we are a major government town. We have the most lawyers and politicians per capita outside of Washington DC. We have the second most PhD's per capita in the world, second only to San Jose and we have the most degreed people in the world. It seems that a combination of the above and the fact that we are the Silicon Valley of the North means that the citizens here can continually afford toys. HDTVs are among them. Video game systems another. PS3s sold very well here and I think many purchased HDTVs to go along with them. Blu-ray discs at our local Best Buy and Future Shops are hard to keep in stock and the prices are INCREDIBLE!

2 disc sets with 4 films with no extras = $20. These are great package deals with A list actors and top 100 films. We have complete tv seasons for 20-30/season, the same or cheaper than the DVD counter-parts. First week release prices of Iron Man for instance? $4 more than the DVD.

The prices are very competitive and the extra resolution worth it to most around here it seems. Certainly our little 1 million people town isn't the world market but it is a good indicator that a strong economy and an educated population can and will buy the good stuff.

I'm not an obsessive videophile at all. I barely watch tv let alone movies so I'm not overly concerned with the technology overall, but there are films I want released (LOTR, Star Wars etc.) and that I'm willing to buy and replace my DVDs of only a handful of years old. Still, the quality seems to be quite a bit better in terms of gains/dollar than SACD or DVD-A was vs. RBCD. Instead of going SACD or DVD-A (until I got the PS3), I went vinyl because I think LP's generally sound better than SACD or DVD-A and significantly better than RBCD. But with video, no way analogue is a win win there. Laserdisc died, VHS was awful and Beta had no releases (much like Laserdisc). DVD was an incredible value and Blu-ray is nearly as perfect a 2D image can get. Any new revolution in video will come in 3D display technology. Blu-ray I believe will be the end of optical formats unless 3D hits the shelves. Can videophiles keep the format alive? If we look at laserdisc, the answer is no. But then, DVD was so much better than laserdisc that it isn't a fair metric to use. Blu-ray provides more gain over DVD than DVD had over laserdisc (though less than DVD had over VHS).

Regarding this article...too much hyperbole in my opinion. LCD and Plasma tv's are incredibly cheap for massive displays. <$1000 for 42" name brand 120 Hz units. Incredible! <$2k for 46" and around $2k for 52" units! These are prices I saw in the flyer for local shoppes just yesterday! Sony Bravias! This is with the CAD falling to 75% of the USD in a month when we were essentially at par! I can't imagine what amazing deals one could find online in the US this Christmas. At those prices, with a great amount of PS3s worldwide and a decent amount of Blu-ray players, the Blu-ray discs will move and by next year, make a huge dent in DVD sales.
 
Oct 30, 2008 at 1:40 AM Post #40 of 218

kg21

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Posts
1,061
Likes
10
For people saying "the image quality is not that much better than upscaled dvd" there are different tiers of blu-ray. It starts with tier 0-reference and goes down from there. Some of the lower tiers are actually considered "barely better than vhs" these are the very old ones. If you watch any tier 0 or tier 1, you will see the true potential of bluray.
The New PQ Tier thread for Blu-Ray - AVS Forum

the best one i've seen in bluray is ironman which came out last month.
 
Oct 30, 2008 at 2:14 AM Post #41 of 218

hew

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 14, 2007
Posts
1,545
Likes
10
I sense that the next paradigm shift in video replay is not to some physical format like blu-ray, its to video on-demand via cable or the web simply because convenience trumps quality any day for the masses. If you dig deep enough you will probably find that most consumers shifted to dvd from vhs largely due to convenience. Yes, the consumer will buy into massive hdtv screens for their living rooms but they will be watching downloaded programs or programs stored on some hard drive and not on some disc, irregardless of the improved quality.
 
Oct 30, 2008 at 2:25 AM Post #42 of 218

mbriant

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jun 21, 2001
Posts
9,536
Likes
29
Quote:

If you dig deep enough you will probably find that most consumers shifted to dvd from vhs largely due to convenience.


...and a pre-established acceptance/familiarity/comfort level with CDs.
 
Oct 30, 2008 at 3:17 AM Post #44 of 218

vagarach

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 6, 2005
Posts
1,562
Likes
12
Upscaled pictures look really good, but only when you have a very good transfer, otherwise the results are bad, even from 10ft away.

Bluray content needs to drop down to DVD prices, they can't charge you $10 more because there's $10 more definition in the picture!

So many titles on that tier0 list are 100% CGI, it doesn't take rocket science to use 100% digital imagery (not a digital or film capture of physical light) and turn it into a perfect 'transfer' because there isn't anything TO transfer. Maybe film titles with perfect transfers can charge $30, but not the rest.
 
Oct 30, 2008 at 3:45 AM Post #45 of 218

necropimp

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 14, 2005
Posts
2,254
Likes
11
Quote:

Originally Posted by earwicker7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Blu-Ray is really not doing well. The only people with Blu-Ray players are PS3 owners, and they didn't buy the PS3 for Blu-Ray, it just happened to come with the package. Nobody is buying stand-alone players regardless of price drops. Some of the PS3 owners are purchasing Blu-Ray discs, but it's not enough to make the format a success.


your "industry professional" clearly does not know what he is talking about
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top