Why not bluRay? [Archive] - Revision3 Forums

AbsoluteMayheM

05-09-2008, 05:55 PM

I'm a movie buff as well as the kind of guy that typically like to be in the now with technology. I have a 360, no PS3 (yet) and I have an upscale HDMI DVD player as well as a HDPVR reciever for my dish. Why does that matter, well it might be hard to believe i dont own a bluray or a HD-DVD player.

I have had a PS3 at my place and watched a few bluRay titles, Illusionist, Underworld and a few other.

I do totally agree the picture is great, but its just not worth the 400-500 bucks for the player, plus the titles are expensive like 29-49 bucks at walmart. Now I know that that may not see "that" expensive, but the price never really drops. However, DVD titles are like $19-29 on release date then usually drop down to like 16.99 or 19.99 a week or two after release, if not lower.

And I do live in Canada. For me if bluRay players were 100-200 bucks and the prices of bluRay and dvd were much closer I might consider going there. But its just not worth it. If I did not already have a 360, I'd get a Ps3.

Another thing to kind of consider, thats not really mentioned when people speak about BluRay sales, and home theatres with DVD ... (now I have a Yamaha audio reciever with fibre op connected for audio) my point is a lot of people bought those $99-200 home theatre in a box dvd systems over the past few years, now they may not be the most awesome home theatre experience, but if you consider how many people have those its a lot, you can not just replace a bluray player for one of those theatreBox packages.

Also consider the number of horrible movies? are they all worth going to bluray? Sure bluRay Starwars and the other typical box set movies are usually worth it, but is "horton hears a who" worth a bluray purchase or any other kids movies for that matter. I can see Iron Man in bluRay but again even then the quality and sound on dvd is pretty bad ass already. The jump from dvd to bluray is not the same as it was from Tape to DVD.

-MayheM

Ryudo

05-09-2008, 06:13 PM

Hate how the supporters(corps) for blue ray were such douchebags after the war was one now raising prices again leading to a sales plunge..now (besides PS3) no one is buying a player.

Personally I still will stand by DVD as it will be around a few years and now with this fiasco may have just given DVD an extra bit of shelf time.

tokenuser

05-09-2008, 06:39 PM

I do totally agree the picture is great, but its just not worth the 400-500 bucks for the player, plus the titles are expensive like 29-49 bucks at walmart. Now I know that that may not see "that" expensive, but the price never really drops. However, DVD titles are like $19-29 on release date then usually drop down to like 16.99 or 19.99 a week or two after release, if not lower.I don't have a BluRay player yet. I was waiting for the dust to settle in the format wars, and they are thankfully over now.

The cost of discs is a problem, but people seem to forget the initial cost of media with the change from tape to CD, and VCR to DVD. We got screwed each time. Prices will come down in time, but the ownership of players needs to increase.

BluRay does look good, but it needs a suitably sized Tv to display it on, and it should be with an HDMI signal. Its like people demanding 1080p on small screens - you don't get a significantly better picture than a 720p screen, so save the $$$. Ditto BluRay ... you aren't going to notice the difference on a small screen, but on a large screen? Wow.

The "Home Theatre In A Box" crowd are an interesting group. They are budget conscious, hence the decision to buy the way they did. Not a big deal. Most of those receivers have SPDIF (optical) audio inputs, and the BluRay can go straight in the back of the TV. Oh - no HDMI? Well, buying a BluRay player and not using HDMI is going to cause you issues ... you would be better off sticking to DVD, and lets face it - as a format its still great.

Dark_Shroud

05-09-2008, 07:04 PM

Wal-mart is the last place to buy Blu-ray at. Best-buy has plenty of Blu-ray sales and will price match to both Amazon.com & DeepDiscount.com. Just make a print out from the sites and take it in with you.

Now on to Blu-ray being worth it. Right now unless you get a PS3 the hardware is low end around $300 or will cost you a grand. The discs contain 1080i/p video and 7.1 surround sound with tons of interactive features. They are very much worth $20 when you also count the scratch guard so they last longer than DVDs.

Right now even HDTV shows can't compare to the overall Audio & Video quality of Blu-ray. BR have a lot of available bandwidth that's way ahead of TV and HD download services.

Mal

05-09-2008, 07:11 PM

The thing about Blu-ray Disc is that distributors must maintain their price. They can't afford to make the same mistakes that they did with DVD, where profits peak and immediately die straight after a release. They need to keep them at a certain level of price where they aren't forced to reduce their profits in order to compete with titles from other distributors.

shadowtech

05-09-2008, 07:35 PM

Meh, I drank the kool-aid and I'm pretty satisfied.
Yeah the prices are expensive (more expensive than HD DVD, as I remember), but damn, you can't beat that quality. I suggest: drink the kool-aid or remain in the DVD camp...for now.

cablegeek

05-11-2008, 03:14 AM

I say buy a player that upscales dvd to 1080i and wait untill prices drop. in this economy prices for blueray are to high and players are out of reach for most cosumers at this time.

burkhartmj

05-11-2008, 04:14 AM

standard ruler for BR being worth it is if you have a screen around 40 inches and up. Anything lower than that and upconverted dvd is almost [ALMOST] indistinguishable. Since I'm of the mindset of using a PC for everything [media center PC FTW], I will probably be one of the last gadget obsessed techies to begrudgingly adopt BR, especially since I was rooting for HDDVD, but hey, no hard feelings....kinda. Currently I'm pretty satisfied with HD downloads and stuff being run through my htpc.

tokenuser

05-11-2008, 12:05 PM

tobyweston

05-11-2008, 12:16 PM

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/136317
UK, but you get the idea ;)

Pricy though :(

tokenuser

05-11-2008, 12:56 PM

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/136317
UK, but you get the idea ;)

Pricy though :(Same model is US$300 at Newegg in the US ... but still a lot cheaper than just a standalone player.

A BR-ROM drive will set you back $129.

tobyweston

05-11-2008, 01:03 PM

Yeah, been pondering about whether to buy it or not. I think will wait till it drop belows half that price. Prices will drop soon enough.

Hopefully :P

tokenuser

05-11-2008, 01:16 PM

Yeah, been pondering about whether to buy it or not. I think will wait till it drop belows half that price. Prices will drop soon enough.

Hopefully :PI like the idea - but you are still up for media at US$15 for a blank disc. On a $/MBcomparison, its not too bad, but still a little sticker shock.

tobyweston

05-11-2008, 01:26 PM

I like the idea - but you are still up for media at US$15 for a blank disc. On a $/MBcomparison, its not too bad, but still a little sticker shock.

Agreed, be along time till BR discs are as cheap as CDs are nowadays

Dark_Shroud

05-11-2008, 05:39 PM

standard ruler for BR being worth it is if you have a screen around 40 inches and up. Anything lower than that and upconverted dvd is almost [ALMOST] indistinguishable.

I have a 32" and I sure as hell can tell the difference between an upscaled DVD & a Blu-ray. There is no almost about it, it's a big margin of difference.

Even upscaled, DVDs do not have near the amount of bandwidth that a Blu-ray movie uses. The same goes for HD downloads or HD video onDemand services. Yes they all look better than SD but unless you have poor eye sight or poor equipment they can't compare.

swtzrs

05-11-2008, 06:01 PM

If Blu-ray gets below the $200 price point, I'll might buy one when I have to replace my current DVD player. However, that is not likely to be for quite a long time. Fact is, I'm perfectly satisfied with DVD picture quality on my 40 inch LCD. Yes, Blue-ray is definitely a better picture, but I'm not quite seeing the night/day difference that I saw when I went from VHS to DVD. It's the same reason I never bought a Super-VHS player.

However, I have another reason I'm not too eager to jump to Blue-ray. I have about 5 boxes full of VHS tapes of movie that I love, but I can barely watch them anymore because they look pretty awful compared to my DVDs. I don't want to do the same thing with my DVD collection.

Sometimes, not having your eyes opened to the highest quality is a good thing. I watched tv shows and movies on the same 24" CRT for twelve years and while the sound got bad and the picture was screwy, I managed just fine with it. Then I bought the 40" LCD and put the 24" CRT in the bedroom, and I can't watch it - it just looks horrible to me now. I wonder how I managed to ever have a good viewing experience on that set.

So, those of you who are reading closely have probably noticed the complete hypocritical nature of my thoughts here: "First you say you don't see a major difference in quality - then you say you don't want the increased quality to ruin older things - YOU CAN'T ARGUE BOTH WAYS, DUMMY!"

I know... I'm a total paradox of opinions... but either way, Blu-Ray loses. I really think this format is headed to the early grave alongside Super-VHS and Laserdisc.

mikec

05-11-2008, 06:17 PM

I really think this format is headed to the early grave alongside Super-VHS and Laserdisc.

Actually S-VHS lived a long life when used in the low end video production world. I don't think consumers and TV's were ready for component video when the format came out in '87.

True JVC and Panasonic would have made more money if the consumer base was bigger but they sold enough to colleges and cable companies to pay the bills.

joemarus

05-15-2008, 03:13 AM

burkhartmj

05-15-2008, 04:36 AM

I have a 32" and I sure as hell can tell the difference between an upscaled DVD & a Blu-ray. There is no almost about it, it's a big margin of difference.

Even upscaled, DVDs do not have near the amount of bandwidth that a Blu-ray movie uses. The same goes for HD downloads or HD video onDemand services. Yes they all look better than SD but unless you have poor eye sight or poor equipment they can't compare.

All I know is that on my 20 inch 1680x1050 screen, at standard computer viewing distance [2 feet max], with 20/20 eyesight, I can see a difference, but not enough for me to care. Have viewed Batman Begins in DVD, 720p, and 1080p [obviously too big for my screen res but whatever], and the difference was nowhere near the price a player would cost. And since most 1080p panels are larger size anyway, I stick by my rule of thumb.

If you notice enough of a difference to warrant the price, who am I to say anything, I'm just stating what I've heard and experienced firsthand.

Dark_Shroud

05-16-2008, 04:13 AM

What I'm worried about is will I have to buy a new receiver in order to take advantage of the new HD Audio soundtracks on the Blu-ray discs. My receiver only decodes the usual Dolby Digital and DTS soundtracks, but I see that Blu-Ray discs have these newer formats like Dolby Digital Plus and Dolby TrueHD. Will those "downmix" for older Dolby Digital decoders?

I'm going to assume that you have your PS3 connected Via HDMI. Either way use this setting for the audio output, set it to LPCM. This setting will make the PS3 do the decoding work instead of your receiver. So you shouldn't have any problems. This configuration has been recommended by individuals from Dolby Labs.

MD2389

05-16-2008, 05:26 AM

A BR-ROM drive will set you back $129.

Which is by far the cheapest option available. Most modern video cards support either component, and they all have DVI ports so it shouldn't be much of an issue to pump the video to the TV. (Hell, some cards even support HDMI.) The only problem here be whether or not you had the horsepower to play a blu-ray movie.

RenegadeY2K8

05-16-2008, 08:43 AM

if HD DVD got the 51GB triple layer out before its death it most likely would have been winning by now

i have no respect for sony right now

darknessgp

05-16-2008, 03:29 PM

if HD DVD got the 51GB triple layer out before its death it most likely would have been winning by now

i have no respect for sony right now

I doubt that... though, we may never know and it really doesn't matter now. No respect for sony? Why exactly?

As for blu-ray, I'm wondering why prices haven't dropped yet, I guess Sony doesn't realize that the majority of consumers don't really care enough about HD to drop twice or more the money for blu-ray when they already have DVD.

KilroyPerrywinkle

05-17-2008, 06:16 AM

This whole thing seems very stupid to me. If BR becomes the new standard in 5 years you'll be getting players free when open a new checking account. So whats the big deal?

MD2389

05-19-2008, 08:10 PM

I doubt that... though, we may never know and it really doesn't matter now. No respect for sony? Why exactly?

As for blu-ray, I'm wondering why prices haven't dropped yet, I guess Sony doesn't realize that the majority of consumers don't really care enough about HD to drop twice or more the money for blu-ray when they already have DVD.

Actually, the blu-ray movies are maybe $4 or 5 more expensive than the 2-disc editions of most movies. (atleast they are here) That being said, I only buy the BR version if its a movie I know I will like.

darknessgp

05-19-2008, 10:52 PM

Actually, the blu-ray movies are maybe $4 or 5 more expensive than the 2-disc editions of most movies. (atleast they are here) That being said, I only buy the BR version if its a movie I know I will like.

true the movies aren't all that more expensive, though I'm mostly referring to the players. They are really expensive right now and for no real reason, other than Sony knowing that their is no competing format and just keeping it high to turn more of a profit.

burkhartmj

05-20-2008, 07:06 AM

true the movies aren't all that more expensive, though I'm mostly referring to the players. They are really expensive right now and for no real reason, other than Sony knowing that their is no competing format and just keeping it high to turn more of a profit.

Well, also for people trying to get their whole library in HD, 4 or 5 bucks more per movie can make a huge difference.

And currently only BR computer drives have hit the pricepoint that the players need to be at to increase marketshare. DVD didn't get popular at all til players got below 200, and not common til under 100, the same is true for BR, evidenced by the fact that BR player sales keep dropping even without a competing format taking any marketshare.

Sony seems to think that just because it's the only one left standing, it can keep prices high, but all that's doing is opening up the field for the handful of belated HD formats prepared to hit the market for alot less money than BR.

AbsoluteMayheM

05-20-2008, 04:56 PM

Sony might be keeping the players high to sell PS3 units. Which might be smart really for PS3 sales, but even if they dropped to the PS3 sale prices, I dont think BR players are going to really sell until they are at the 100-200 region.

Sony might be just making the PS3 look like it has more value, which it currently does.

-MayheM

Dark_Shroud

05-21-2008, 01:50 AM

Just to throw this out there. It isn't just Sony, Sony doesn't own Blu-ray. Sony only owns some of the patents. It's the Blu-ray Disc Association that's running things, and the head of the association is from Philips Magnavox not Sony.

I have Blu-ray because I bought a PS3, it was one of the features that convinced me to get a 60gig at launch.