Slashdot Mirror
First Blu-ray Movie Titles Announced
JorgeDeLaCancha writes "Sony Pictures Home Entertainment and MGM Home Entertainment have recently announced the release of the first titles on the Blu-Ray media coinciding with the Blu-Ray hardware release in the spring. Some of the films to be released include classics such as "The Fifth Element" and "Robocop" to more modern films such as "Black Hawk Down." Other corporations, such as Fox, have announced similar plans."
I think that this might be the first time that anyone, anywhere has called Robocop a "classic."
Goo goo g'joob.
Until there is a combo hd-dvd/blu-ray player, they can take their discs and go pound salt.
Not a single lindsey lohan movie listed!
the Fifth Element is from 1997, and it's already a "classic?"
Sweet! Count me in for Fifth Element!
Seriously though, I still would need to buy a decent HDTV and the player first. That's a lot of dosh, especially to look at Bruce Willis' face in HD.
(and yeah, I probably spelt her name wrong, like I care)
The film was released in 1997. It hardly qualifies as a classic.
Thalasar
Does the 4 year difference in release between The Fifth Element (1997) and Blackhawk Down (2001) really mark the difference between a classic and a modern film?
Now that everybody's re-bought their favorite movies on DVD, let's move on to the next format! Call me a cynic, but I don't think the average person wants to do this yet. I don't think it's a stretch to say that the average person has had a DVD player in their home for less than five years.
It looks to me like Sony went with the "shotgun" approach with the titles to be released, with at least one title for every type of consumer. I'm not sure how well this will work, since if there aren't enough titles that I want, I'm not gonna buy into the new format. I think they'd be better served to pick a market segment that is likely to be early adopters (i.e. Geeks) and release titles which that target segment is likely to want. Until then, I'll stick to the XViD movies on my 1.25TB array :-D
Fight psychopharmacological mccarthyism. http://www.norml.org/
Hmm.. I can only wonder if Robocop was filmed with decent quality equipment to justify having it on blue ray disc. It's very old movie - it was made in 1989. Isn't it kinda like putting .mp3 files on DVD audio disc? It doesn't make any sense.
Wait, doesn't MGM have rights on the first Terminator?
Does this mean Robocop beat Terminator?
So. The major studios have finally gotten around to releasing real classics on DVD (no, not Fifth Element or Robocop) and now they want a new format. How long will it take to see a Cary Grant or Katherine Hepburn movie on Blu-Ray? The vast majority of truly good movies were made more than 30 years ago, and those are always the last movies to make it to a new format. How many film buffs are really excited about this new format? If The Fifth Element and Robocop are counted among the "classic" movies available on the new format, I'm guessing zero.
So the only early adopters will be the same gadget hungry geeks who invested in Laser Disc players. We all know how well that worked out. I'm really looking forward to watching this fall on its face.
Whaa? New discs from Sony? Sign me up!
- The Matrix
- Batman Begins
- The Bourne Supremacy
- Aeon Flux
- Jarhead
- U2: Rattle & Hum
There are many articles about HD DVD/Blu-ray titles on Google News.TO START
PRESS ANY KEY
Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...
Fifth Element and Robocop arent "modern"? The contributor must not realise that the history of film entertainment does extend beyond the 1980s. Metropolis, Wizard of Oz, etc, those are considered classics.
Stealth? Come on, I don't care what the format is. I don't think there will ever be a market for that movie. The only way they would be able to get anyone to buy it is by hiding it on one of the other dvd's as $sys$Stealth.
"...I'd buy that for a dollar!"
The Sony BLU-RAY movies will require you to give your first bone as collateral to ensure you won't "file share."
nothing pissed me off more than buying the family guy dvd and having them tell me that it is bad to share movies. THANKS FUCKS, I JUST PAID $12.99 FOR THE FUCKING DVD.
Nothing in that list makes me want to rush out and replace my TV, my DVD player, or my DVD collection. Especially since I don't get any credit for a tradein of any old titles that I may already have in DVD format, nor for my old TV or DVD player.
And that's without considering that I live in a fairly small place; my TV is a 54 cm 4:3 job. Does HDTV come in screens that are no taller than that? Something deep inside me says "probably not".
Now, if Warner were to remaster and re-release Babylon 5 in HDTV format (remaster meaning, amongst other things, cleaning up all the obvious glitches in the existing DVD sets; redoing the CGI so it's at a resolution appropriate for HD; fixing the points where the audio and video are blatantly out of sync; and so on), I might be interested. Even then, it'd only be because of the improved quality of picture by virtue of the cleaning up -- there are times when the DVD quality is little better than a VHS tape. It's the same story: there is very little coming out of Hollywood these days (I'm lumping the TV studios in with the movie studios; the same points apply) that really interests me.
Slashcode bug # 497457 - unfixed since December 2001 - Go look it up!
o/~ Join us now and share the software
Well, while you may not want a PS3 there are a few million people thinking otherwise - and they'll all be able to view these discs.
Furthermore, even if you have a non HD TV might you not be interested in the extra exttras the additional space allows for on Blu-Ray discs?
I'm not saying there are a lot of titles on that list I'm willing to spring for... but I will probably re-buy a few selected things and I know I'll enjoy renting them on Netflix (who I assume will be format neutral in this war and rent both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The Blu-Ray/HD DVD standards war is going to cause a lot of problems as consumers are smart enough to stay out of it. Everyone with a few brain cells to rub together knows about the VHS/Betamax struggle and know that the best technology doesn't always win. Since DVDs work fun for all but the most anal film buff I think most people will hold off on buying players. Overall Sony has the edge, it is building Blu-Ray drives into the PS3 and that install base should give them the edge.
I would wager that no single movie has had more digital releases than Fifth Element. From normal DVD to Bitstream to other special ediitons, it seems like a new version arrives about twice a year.
I liked it a lot but also have trouble thinking of it as a classic science fiction movie in the same way Aliens is a classic... but it is pretty unique and it has a lot of elements that show off sound and video features quite well.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I think the movie studios (tv etc) are going to start hitting a wall soon.
Think about it, after hi-def what comes next? (and don't say internet distribution etc only, people want things they can actually own in their hands)
First it was video cassettes, then dvd and now hi-definition.. each with a definitive quality increase over their predecessor. Now however with high definition they've pretty much hit the wall, people don't need or won't want to buy super-high-deluxe-definition unless they've got a projector which projects the video onto a ridiculously large area.
It will reach a point where it'll be "good enough", you can already see a lot of people commenting about how they don't see the point of hi-def dvd (which people will eventually go over to) when dvd suits them fine.
The human eyeball can only see so much.
Oh and my 2 cents... Too much format is bad. Sure openess, etc. is cool, blah blah... but having one true good format really has a big advantage, especially for mass and stuff for consumer. It is easier to have only one player, only have worry for one format that is good. Heck VHS is still not that bad (beside one of my friend that refuse to watch movie on VHS, kinda dumb IMHO ;-))
I have not done any research nor will I know how to answer that question, but to encode it at the best format (?) what will be the capacity needed at first? When we answer that, then maybe it worth changing of format (or I guess later we will need something more, like all language on one media, etc. then maybe there it will worth having a new one, etc.).
At less, I don't think I will buy in if there is too much format.
It is like those DVD-R stuff that I never get into yet (I'm archaic now...) -- there was 2 format, now 2 format war again. They should work hard to settle on one format, even if that mean making an hybrid. Make one thing good for the mass.
Enough said.
I have very little desire for a 60" plasma TV at home which is where I would notice any improved quality. Any new DVD standard will certainly come at an increased price. Anyways, I buy far fewer DVDs now than I used to. The prices continue to creep higher and with Comcast Digital, I wait for most movies on PayPerView. There very, very few titles that I watch more than once.
So that pretty much seals which one I'll buy..how about you?
The cost of the discs has little to do with the cost of a box set. If they put a whole season on one disc and charged $2 less for it, people would complain that the cost per disc is too high. And releasing SD content on an HD disc creates another SKU for little benefit.
I'll wait until someone cracks the copy protections on these systems. Hopefully someone clever figures it out quickly. I'm not sure Blue-ray or HD-DVD will survive though. I'm certain the copy protection systems are going to kill the usefulness of both systems.
:-)
I read a while back about a new system much better than both Blue-ray and HD-DVD, but I cannot remember what it was called.. (the name of it started with the letter n). Anybody knows anything about this?
I suspect will see the whole DVD history all over again. First we'll get these 25GB discs, then we'll get 50GB discs and of course the first Blue-ray player won't play anything but 25GB discs so we'll need to buy a new player. Then we'll get 100GB discs and we'll need both a new player and a burner.... then there will be discs only compatible with some players and some burners etc.. then there will be discs with 2x speed, then 4x, 8x, 16x and we'll need to upgrade firmware or buy new players/burners again. In 2007 the new 8 layered Blu-ray discs will be out with 200GB capacity, and we'll need burners capable of burning these as well as players for playing these monster discs.
I'll admit I don't know much about these new formats, but I'm looking forward to making backups of my half TB of live shows in FLAC format!
Until they stop pushing DRM down our throat ....
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I'm more interested in hearing when they start packing full seasons of standard-definition content onto a single disc that they can sell for a reasonable price, instead of the >$100 prices that some sets have been going for. (I.e. $338 for CSI on Amazon [amazon.com])
Don't count on it, it's the profit motive. I can guarantee you with blu-ray/hd-dvd you'll still get a few episodes per disc and they'll still charge you a small fortune to get entire seasons. Same with the special editions and re-releases of old films, they'll re-release them and still charge a fortune even though they've recouped the cost of making the film a thousand fold. It's capitalism.
Ok. The fact that they are putting Stargate Atlantis on Blu-Ray makes it that much more appealing...
Why buy those movies now on Blu-ray, give it half a year and then they will come out with the directors cut, special edition, 3 Blu-ray set.
30% Troll, 50% Underrated, 10% Interesting
Score:5, Troll
The other truth of the matter is, for most intents and purposes, the average person has never exploited how good DVD looks in the first place. They use S-video at best. An anamaphoric-enhanced DVD release (as most theatrical DVDs have been since the 90's), on a progressive scan DVD player with component inputs on a widescreen TV looks damn good. Better than most people will ever wish to have in their home.
The big mistake all of the movie companies are making is that they think we are all itching for something new. We aren't. We don't care. Very few people care about this technology. We'll be well into the next decade before we start lamenting that Wal-Mart is carrying more Blu-Ray/HD discs than DVD. The studios and certain techies keep throwing numbers out there, telling us all what we are supposedly missing...and the joke is going to be on them when these things hit the market with a resounding thud.
Looks like Sony picked another bunch of great titles to launch a new format. Such launch titles for SACD included: The Bangles - Greatest Hits, Keb 'Mo - The Door, The Sopranos Soundtrack, Toto IV, and Train - Drops of Jupiter. They sure know how to pick 'em!
I am assuming there will be more content on HD-DVD discs, we'll see how that pans out though. It could make renting movies nicer as often the extra disc is a separate rental on Nexflix today whereas with more space we might see more movies once again include features on the main disc. There are some featureless movies that I am convinced are that way because the studio did not want to press a second disc, so we may see more movies come with extras that otherwise might not.
As for recording, I think we'll see them pretty soon and that's what I'm really looking forward to. Even if 50GB discs and recorders are more expensive (and they sure will be to start with) the ability to use one disc in place of ten DVD's makes the extra cost worth it. The only question is if the combo will be cheaper than simply buying external drives and dumping out to them, though even then discs are nice because they take up so much less space and can be mailed easier.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Do you really think the cost is that high because of the manufacturing cost of the dvds?
Let me guess, im sure you also believed with the arrival of DVD bands would release one-DVD compilations for a much reduced price, right?
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
I how long it will take until i am able to rent hd titles through something like netflix.
...even though they've recouped the cost of making the film a thousand fold.
You obviously haven't seen the ledgers of the movie industry. They've been running in the red since the 1600s. It's a wonder they're still managing to limp along after all this time.
After all, at any resolution, progressive looks better than interlaced because you have twice the data. Makes pans and other motion smoother, more detail, etc.
Too bad you have to buy a very expensive (right now) TV to watch 1080p. But Sony is pushing it with the PS3. 1080p Video games (if they deliver that) and 1080p video.
I still think Blu-ray will win. While this is a definite plus for them (I assume HD-DVD could do this, but I haven't heard of any of the movies or players being able to), if you combine this with the increased storage capacity, the soon to be massive installed base (the PS3), and the availability (within a few months of HD-DVD, and more importantly: before Christmas)... I think things are getting better and better for Blu-ray to win.
It is too bad the NIH syndrome is so big that the two groups couldn't suck it up and make one format. They didn't learn from Beta, I guess. And now that they have a VERY popular entrenched format (DVD) to compete against where Beta didn't (no previous home-video recording equipment), things don't look good on the whole.
Blu-ray will win. It will be a hollow victory. They will beat HD-DVD, but they will only beat DVDs because the studios will stop producing them/selling them. I don't think ANY high-def format is strong enough to take over DVD without resorting to cheating within the next 5 years, at least.
But that depends on the price of HDTVs. If they stay too expensive, then there is no point. If prices crash, then bring on the high-def movies at home.
And kiss theaters further goodbye.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
I guess I'm gonna wear my tinfoil hat 'til they release the entire Star Wars Trilogy on BD :S
Per Aspera Ad Astra.
Although I partially agree with you, I would add that CONTENT is what will really win it for Blu-ray. *If* the majority of movie studios were on the side of HD-DVD (which they are absolutely not, BTW), then it wouldn't matter if Sony sold a billion PS3s - HD-DVD would still win.
Quoth the article: 'Some of the films to be released include classics such as "The Fifth Element" and "Robocop"'
That's it. I'm really getting old now.
(or is everyone else getting younger?)
bang goes my karma... again...
Ok. The fact that they are putting Stargate Atlantis on Blu-Ray makes it that much more appealing...
Sorry to nitpick but you misspelled "appalling".
Anyone else notice that both movie studios are owned by our best friends over at Sony. Go figure that they are the first to announce a list of movies for Blu-ray. The Sony propaganda machiene at work force feeding Blu-ray. Yipee.
AJ Henderson
I wonder if Sony is giving kickbacks to other studios such as Fox for supporting the format early? Are there licence fees involved to make Blu-Ray discs?
$sys$hd.dvd
They leave the West behind . . .
Ample? That was the whole point. There is nothing ample about Ms Jovovich, but there was especially nothing ample about what Ms. Jovovich was wearing.
Maybe the reason women vary all over the map in the ample department is that from an evolutionary standpoint, men can't make up their minds. When you think about it, ample is all about male sexual fetishism because it doesn't much matter when you switch off the lights. But ample and lots of curves suggests fertility in the style of -- hey, you have all seen those Stone Age "Ashtorath" clay figures looking like Rosanne's ancient ancestor.
But then not so ample and kind of skinny suggests a kind of adolescence -- OK don't get whigged out over the under-aged issue, but in ancient times women did all their child bearing before they reached modern legal age of consent because everyone was dead by age 30 anyway.
Start selling entertainment centers that have more shelves than the average one.
Because jeesh, just what I need is yet ANOTHER console on my overwhelmed ent. center I bought for $20. The stereo, cable box, tivo, ps2, and other stuff.
Oh, and start selling stereo units that can hook up to yet another console.
I dunno, this is quite possbily the most quiet home entertainment format launch I have ever lived to see. But alas I will probably be not using this format in the near future since I don't have an HTDV. It's not worth the extra grand or 2 for a better resolution movie.
What?! There's no porn movies in the list? Thanks but I'll pass...
are still bad, no matter how high the resolution and it is funny to note that the converse is also true. Most people don't give a damn about the resolution. What people are interested in is the thickness of the panels. Most prefer a panel TV over a CRT TV, simply because they take up less space and don't really care about the rest.
Oh well, what the hell...
> Everyone with a few brain cells to rub together knows about the
> VHS/Betamax struggle and know that the best technology doesn't
> always win.
Don't forget about the DVD/DivX struggle. That was a little different though. DivX lost out because people didn't like the idea of their DivX box refusing to play a disk for arbitrary reasons (like "this disk is too old; go buy another of the same flick").
Now, we have a choice between two DRMed evils. My decision: they can both pack sand until somebody deCSSes one of them and I can actually do what I want with my own damn equipment.
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"? Major: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action
Forget Blu-Ray, Forget HD-DVD.... I'm waiting until that Holographic HVD gets released at it's full 1.whatever TB spec.
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
It's a fair point, but some of the studios seem to be preparing to release film in both mediums. This will make content less of an issue and I don't see any one studio has enough 'must see' films to gain a dominant hand. As with VHS/Betamax a key driver will be which way the pornography industry goes.
why the hell would you turn off the lights to have sex? that defeats half the purpose, makes it a hell of a lot less fun, takes away the visual dimension of it, etc.
and even if you do turn the lights off, 'ampleness' hardly goes away, unless you don't use your hands and mouth at all in bed. or don't tell me, you belong to the 'unzip your trousers, pull it out, get it over with and zip back up' school?
DVD is to Blu-Ray as VHS was to LaserDisc....... True it's higher quality, but the market is NOT ready for a format shift in the mainstream.... Blu-Ray will be a niche market for the Home Theater Freaks, just like the Laserdisc....
People bought VHS because Sony was a dick, and Betamax died. Now, it isn't about licensing the format, its about rights management. If the early adopters refuse to adopt Blu Ray, it will die (or at least be losing Sony money).
They've picked a war with our rights on our machines, so we'll let them have it in the standards war. What do we lose if HD DVD wins?
It seems with all the extra bits on these discs they may not hold up to the excessive scratching that Netflix DVDs must endure. I'd say I have send back at least 1 out of 10 discs I rent because of scratches making discs unplayable. Netflix might not be able to get enough viewings out of a movie to make it worth it.
I'm more interested in hearing when they start packing full seasons of standard-definition content onto a single disc that they can sell for a reasonable price, instead of the >$100 prices that some sets have been going for. (I.e. $338 for CSI on Amazon)
Why do you think one has anything to do with the other? Do you think it makes any significance whether they sell you one disc, one disc per season or even one disc per episode? There seems to be some sort of delusion about the massive cost of the media and it was the same thing with iTunes. Do you think an online download is significantly cheaper than a CD, in terms of the total end-user price? Not really. It is all about the price they want to charge you for the content, which is completely media-independent. Bits and bytes and little pieces of plastic all cost next to nothing.
Let me give you a quick lesson in monopoly pricing:
We want to maximize profit = margin * quantity. Production costs of the show are a "sunk cost" and don't go into the equation, marginal costs of producing a disk is ~$0. That reduces it to profit = price * quantity. Since we're in a monopoly quanitity is a simple function of price, so profit = price * quantity( price ). Solve for price. Price = $338.
Costs are only linked to price when there's competition, because you and the competition undercut each other until both are close to the cost. If the costs of groceries (including wages, that is) dropped 50%, you'd see prices drop about 50%. If there was no copyright, people would undercut each other with "copying services" bringing the price to the marginal cost (in this case, ~$0). Note that profits are also ~$0, and so there's no incentive to produce anything since you have production costs and no profit to recover it. That is why copyright was invented.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I think Blu-Ray will win the end for two reasons:
1. Most of the Hollywood studios back Blu-Ray.
2. Blu-Ray's native resolution in 1920x1080 progressive scan, with players currently capable of 720p/1080i video output through HDMI now and 1080p output through HDMI within the next year of so.
I am serious, they will need porn. Everyone knows that the killer app for the VCR was porn. Why go to a scummy X-rated movie theater when you can watch Deep Throat at home? It was my understanding that the first two movies to come out on laser disc were Debbie Does Dallas and some famous Opera. Of course we know which title totally out sold the other. Like it or not Porn launched the VCR, it launched the internet and without it I wouldn't expect there to be much use for HD movies at home. I mean who else is going to pay a premium so that they can pretend like they are actually in the movie.
Of course I am betting that sony will be smart enough to realize that porn sells video technology -- they after all did have experience with Betamax. I am guessing that they just didn't mention the porn titles in this family oriented article. But we all know, no porn no new format! I am not making a joke or saying that I am for or against porn -- I am just stating a fact!
Whether its really that good, I'll just wait and see, besides, when stuff first comes out it costs too much for a cheap bastard like me and later on you'll into problems with later variations on the format. I've learned from DVD, we bought a Sony DVD player when the format first came out and it was like $300 and now, the features are less than what you'd find on a $50 machine, won't play mp3, won't play VCDs, won't play burnt DVDs, it doesn't even work that well as a paperweight. And Betamax too, I still have a Betamax player, yep it STILL works! But the thing is I have all but 5 films for it, pretty useless if you ask me. Point, don't jump at things when they first come out, wait for the rich people who have nothing better to do with their money to do it first.
You forgot:
Serenity
Doom
40-Year Old Virgin
Cinderella Man
The Chronicles of Riddick
U-571
Apollo 13
Van Helsing
You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill
"i.e." should be "e.g."
sorry, but it really bugs me when people do this wrong.
i.e. == that is; e.g. == for example
The ONLY reason I will buy a blu-ray pc drive is for massive backups. These corporations can kiss my HD butt when it comes to buying an HDTV, getting that fancy HD set-top box and premium cable service, if I can't make copies for myself. F-off DRM. Go after file-sharers, you corporate dick-heads. [ahhh...did I mention I'm really pissed off?]
Sure you MIGHT notice the difference assuming the master used was of pristine quality AND you are viewing the 1080p video using top notch equipment on at least a 100 inch screen. For most folks watching on 50 or even 60 inch HDTVs (assuming these were 1080p capable), 1080p and 1080i would probably be not much different from each other from a viewing distance of 10 to 12 feet.
1080i / 720p is good enough for most people with real world budgets. Also most HDTV broadcasts are currently in 1080i or 720p... Broadcasting shows in 1080p will require much more bandwidth.
I'm in a rush to buy some Sony movies on their new DRM-riddled media........ /mark me redundant just to make yourselves feel better
Know what killed BetaMax?
Porn, and that is what will decide Blu-Ray/HD DVD.
Whichever format has the cheapest production equipment and licensing fees will be the one that the Adult Film Industry picks. Betamax was by far the higher quality format but the hardware cost so much compared to VHS that the AFI whent with VHS and the rest is history.
It's amazing how many people believe this little fantasy.
How the hell do companies manage to print public domain
works and make any money if your little theory was even
remotely true?
Copyright fanboy.
Today I noticed Amazon seems to have picked the HD-DVD side, they have a whole section hyping it. Meanwhile, a search for "blu-ray" yields just a half dozen eBook articles scattered amongest unrelated items and a "Did you mean 'Blue Ray'?"
Maybe it will be the retailers, and not the content providers or consumers, that really pick the standard that wins. Would the average consumer pick a Blu-Ray player if Wal-Mart chose to only sell HD-DVD titles?
Wha? The Fifth Element and Robocop are classics? I'd swear anything with Bruce Willis is, by definition (due to age, if not quality), not a classic.
Dude, just use a 21" monitor, LCD, and use the rgb out or hdmi out to it.
Surely that is a lot cheaper than a so called 'official hdtv' lcd tv for 5x the cost.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
There are degrees of apparent privacy. Before home video, there were theaters, and therefore home video market when available was greatly influenced by porn availability. You have to go to a public store and be relatively public or receive a potentially conspicuous package, but have to wait and still risk embarassment. The home video market exploded, decreasing the theater market to nil and growing the overall market for porn in general.
Nowadays, how sizable is the home porn video market compared to the more anonymous, the more instantly 'gratifying' internet porn market that has presumably overwhelmed DVD/VHS distribution due to the immediacy and anonymity the computer offers. If nothing else, seeing all the computers I've dealt with where people stick porn in places they perceive as obscure suggests they have higher confidence in hiding files on a computer than hiding tapes or discs in their home. Even for the television channels, I would wager people feel safer buying some porn network/pay-per-view and hiding the charges on their credit card they find easier than hiding discs/tapes.
In essence, as amusing it is to think of porn as a huge market force in such a context, it probably isn't realistic to consider it a 'killer app' this time around. However, I doubt Sony will be so prudish this time compared to the Betamax fiasco, just to be on the safe side.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
But in the UK, I can't name one friend, or their family, or friends' of friends, or anyone I personally know that actually HAS a HD compatible TV. Furthermore, I know fifty percent of the adults (read: 30+) still mostly use video to play their movies. Us young'ins use DVDs. Now, maybe it's a different culture thing, the middle classes here are very cautious about what to buy, and what benefit it will give them, and at the moment, a HD or Blue-Ray player will give them what? A headache? A placebo of better entertainment?
/. crowd do? DRM is very much hated, and much self loathing, and possibly attempted suicides, would occur if we gave in, but if we MUST, we'd download it. Why not? Connections are getting faster and faster, and in a few years, downloading a movie won't take too long, it could be a continuous background operation. All that's needed, is a good provider, the iTunes for video. This could easily spread beyond us with the pushing of "media centre" PCs, which are in turn connected to the internet.
We can also look at the adoption of formats over time:
Film reels -> Video
Film reels were expensive to produce, difficult to set up, difficult to get working properly, difficult to display well in the home, had to be stored in certain conditions, etc. Video makes it simple, put it in the box, press play. When you're done with it, put it in the other plastic box and keep it on a shelf. Video player linked straight to the TV with minimum fuss, AND could record shows for future enjoyment.
Video -> DVD
Less obvious advantages, but there were still key points. Picture quality got a significant jump. Videos wore after plays and became faint, developed static. My little brother managed to watch Toy Story enough times to make it difficult to see anything on that tape. With DVDs, our little to wide screens were filled with wondrous bold colour and crisp images. The cases were thinner, could be more easily handled, didn't cost much more, and one of the great banes of video...nothing needed WINDING. In any direction.
DVD -> HD/BR
If you happen to own an absolutely MASSIVE television, which is also new you'll get a clearer picture, on the downside there's guaranteed "paranoid" grade DRM, and your Blue-Ray player might explode if a previous story was correct, if it thinks your copy isn't genuine. There'll be adverts I doubt you can skip in any way, and who knows what other crazy restrictions they'll impose. The only up side is, once we get burners for these formats at affordable prices, backing up will be a breeze, although, I'm sure there'll be some catch because an evil pirate might try to burn a movie onto one, and in turn make Bruce Willis a poor beggar, desperately trying to find a movie studio with enough money left to take more actors. Meanwhile, the US is devastated in nuclear attacks because the DVD tells me, explicitly, "Piracy funds terrorism."
I know fairly high tech people, I'm a geek, I hang around with a lot of other geeks, it's what I do. We all own fairly old TV sets, because we don't need anything new. The normal population also owns fairly old TVs, or new but yet not too extravagant TVs. The odd widescreen here and there, but they're happy watching their picture now, DVDs are still clear and crisp.
What will we, as the
But you know, most people, will still go out, and buy their occasional video...
Basically, they need to sell something no one I know needs. I'm sure marketting will find a way.
After all, DRM is a feature,
``Marcel
(It's 3:30 in the morning, and I blame all grammar/spelling/rant inconsistencies and mistakes on that.)
What's going to decide a winner is going to be pricing for the average user, not the adult film industry: most people will go to Best Buy and look at a HD & Blu-Ray player side-by-side, compare features, and above all compare the price of the players and the costs of the disks themselves. Furthermore, I can also almost guarantee you that most people are already happy with the quality of DVDs, and only enthusiasts are going to be early adapters. There's no rush to get the latest & greatest if what's out now is good enough.
Finally, a home movie machine was *new* back then: the entire concept of watching a film (porn, in this case) on your TV was novel. Customers flocked to the stores to purchase VCRs for this very reason (well, not specifically for porn, but you get the idea). The release of next-gen players isn't going to cause as big a stir in the marketplace as it did then, simply because the idea of watching films at home is so common, and because one can watch porn with or without a next-gen DVD player.
In sum: a divided marketplace for porn consumers and the fact that we've already got porn machines at home means that the adult film industry isn't going to be the deciding factor over which format becomes the de facto standard. On the contrary, it's my contention that pricing of players & movies, as well as availability of film titles, will ultimately be the deciding factor in which standard gets adopted - but unless either HD or Blu-Ray drops out of the marketplace, we're not going to see a clear winner for a while, simply because most people will continue to buy films on the cheaper and more widely-available format, DVD.
Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
Yup, and even smarter consumers wait for the players to be in the sub $150 USD range and the non-DRM burners to be in the sub $300 range too.
I have seen HD and said "Feh..." The DVD format has a looooong way to go.
What some people don't understand, and most manufacturers wish were not true, is what could be called "technology fatigue." When DVD became hot people ran out and replaced their VHS libraries with DVD ones - the technology was that impressive. But for now and for a long time to come, they are satisfied. This is the old Betamax v VHS thing - the lesser technology won because it was good enough. Okay fine, DVD is not HD and some technology will eventually come along that is - so what?! Unless the guy that works at the Quickee Mart graveyard shift wants and can afford the technology and lots of it, your new gewgaw will fail in the marketplace.
And seriously, how much definition is really necessary? Does everyone want to see what porn star's cocks and cunts really look like that up close? I think the herpes blisters and genital wart growths might be off-putting...
Now when you upconvert an interlace source (which film is not) to progressive you can get terrible artifacts, but this also depends on the quality of the upconvert hardware/software. Some HDTVs are un-watchable trying to view NTSC, others actually improve the image HUGELY, it all depends on the upconvert algorithms and horsepower assigned.
If you have ever seen 1080I shot live like some of the BRAVO performances you will see that that the image is stunning fluid and better quality than 24fps film. 1080p will be even better when there is a lot of rapid motion of the whole scene. 1080I looks great when filming plays on BRAVO because they avoid exactly this sort of camera motion. 24fps stutters when you scroll and interlace breaks up into a nasty comb effect. 1080P avoids both. And yes this is why gamers are obsessed with frame-rate. Games tend to be nothing but fast motion and pans. Even 120fps isn't overkill for rapid motion. Granted your eye can't see changes at 120fps, BUT -- and this is a big but -- when you have large field rapid motion your eyes will track the apparent motion. The edges will blur as your eye tries to smoothly track a moving image that is actually a series of stills at the frame rate. The only way it could look un-blurred is if your eyes actually tracked them in with a motion that was a series of skips at the frame rate (not even vaguely humanly possible).
For 24fps film 1080I is much better than 720p. 720p is probably a good choice for sports however for all the reasons listed above. OTA transmission doesn't have the bandwidth for 1080p however (at least not with mpeg2). 1080p if pretty close to nirvana for me, past here the gains are so insignificant as to be pointless. But you can always go higher on the frame rate. Shooting stuff in 60fps or higher would likely lead to new filming styles as current ones purposely avoid things that make 24fps look bad.
The film industry should film everything in 60fps whether film or video (and progressive scan only for video). 1080P will look glorious once there is actually material available. This may be the ace in the hole that put Blu-Ray over HD-DVD in a couple of years. But only if content providers wise up and start making 60fps content.
Letter To Iran
there's also a list of HD-DVD titles coming up soon. But it includes release dates. I think The Matrix being part of that lineup could bode well for every geek still deciding and not bothering to wait it out and let half of the early adopters get screwed over. Who doesn't want to watch Neo pwn Agent Smith in high-def?
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
The thing that really annoys me about some DVDs today is that you can't skip certain protected content on many players. There's simply no reason that's necessary. Sure, put the studio logo up or whatever by default when I first put it in the drive, but don't disable the damn menu and skip forward keys.
I haven't yet encountered the rumoured 15-minute ones (I've heard several claims about trailers on recent Disney DVDs being this bad) but I've certainly run into annoying legal notices in multiple languages that can take a minute to play through every time you load a disc. Can anyone tell me which distributers/specific movies do this now, and/or any reliable information about what we can expect here from Blu-Ray and/or HD-DVD?
On a related note, does anyone know whether they've abandoned the whole multi-region thing with either or both of the new standards?
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I agree that it's a technical step up, one I'm looking forward too in fact. But HD-DVD makes sense because movies are shot on film, which gives the studios a ton of stuff to release on HD-DVD - almost the entire Hollywood back catalog. That doesn't apply to HDR, and won't apply until movies have been hi-contrast for a long time.
The reason I want HDR is gaming.
ok.... they say BluRay is so great byt I can run existing DVD's @ 720 right now!!!!! It's going to be like a drug and these companies are going to screw us with DRM -------- JUST SAY NO!!!!
Since DVDs work fun for all but the most anal film buff I think most people will hold off on buying players.
As an anal film buff, I take issue with this comment. The studios that produce the best anal films have all announced that they will stick to DVD content until a clear winner has emerged in the standards war. So, I will still be buying anal-DVDs in the foreseeable future.
Regards,
Anonymous Coward
gopher://cramer.plaintext.cc http://cramer.plaintext.cc:70
Yeah, but Blu-ray discs comes in a shiny blue box!
(Seriously, as much as I despise this "format war" and especially Sony, I think Blu-Ray has a much better marketing catch.
{ - Generic Guy - }
...until DVD Jon (or someone like him) comes along and unlocks the doors, they can continue to pound their various inorganic compounds.
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
If you're using component video, the DRM on these HD/Blu-Ray discs downgraes your signal anyway. The only way to get full-res is over the (encrypted) HDMI* hookups.
*HDMI - Oh I'll bet you are an early HDTV adopter, one whom doesn't have this late-entry DRM'ed connector! Isn't that nice of the content and electronics industry, to screw over the people who've helped them the most.
{ - Generic Guy - }
While you can compress mpeg2 video off of a dvd with divx so that it will fit on 2 cd's, the "quality" of the encoded video does not match the quality of the original mpeg2 video on the DVD.
The compression codecs being used in the next gen formats are roughly 3-4x more efficient than mpeg2 at the same quality level, which is still a substantial improvement.
Your size estimate for a typical movie is also on the low side -- most 480p DVD's I've ripped encode video at about 6mpbs, which puts us at around 6gigs per movie (accounting for things like audio) and 3 hours of space available on a dual layer dvd. The TV show I'm ripping right how is at 1.9gb for a 41 minute episode.
That would translate to 9 to 12 hours of space on a traditional DVD with the new codecs, and approximately 27 to 37.5 hours of space on a single layer bluray disc.
You should definately be able to fit a full season of sd content on a blu-ray disc; the question is, does the format permit storing content at sd resolutions?
Fully utilizing dvd quality is probably at the wall for the majority of people already.
Encumber it with draconian DRM and high prices and I don't really think BD/HD is going anywhere.
Long live DVD.
In other news, bittorent traffic has spiked following the release of HD movies...
Ok, so blu-ray discs hold what, 60G, 80G? I'm betting they aren't going to use that capacity to put a whole season of a TV show on one disc, or to put a trilogy of movies on one disc.
No, instead we're going to have super-mondo-uber high-res that won't matter unless you can afford a $20,000 monitor AND have 20/20 vision.
And since blu-ray has a java interpreter, we'll have five zillion "bonus" features, menus that make you play duke-nuke'em to actually get to the movie, and probably internet-enabled copy protection that phones home every time you touch the remote.
Tell me why I'm supposed to jump for joy at this?
According to what I have read, Sony will be using MPEG-2 for their own releases, which unfortunately includes Fifth Element - one movie I was definitely interested in.
I have issues with MPEG-2. For starters, it's well-known that MPEG-4 AVC allows one to get roughly three times as much video as MPEG-2, which translates into better quality for the same bandwidth. More to the point, MPEG-2 (on DVDs, at least) introduces painfully apparent artifacts which I would very much like to see disappear. I've watched many videos encoded with H.264 now, and I can say that the artifacts I associate with MPEG-2 (and inferior versions of MPEG-4, for that matter) are essentially nonexistent with this new codec. I refer generally to "ringing" and such, but more particularly to my two biggest beefs with MPEG-2:
1) Terrible, terrible black detail. Take a look at any Fifth Element DVD you'd care to name. When the two Mangalore ships thrust away from the camera towards the lone Mondoshawan ship, their engines generate a bit of smoke/mist which fades quickly. On the DVD, thanks to the poor black detail characteristic of MPEG-2 encoding, this fading smoke looks like somebody's breath mist disappearing from a window. In a proper HDTV encoding or on film, the smoke fades like one would expect smoke to fade. This is just one readily identifiable example among countless manifestations of this problem with MPEG-2.
2) Something I think I will call "traveling contours". This one can be blamed on MPEG-2's poor detail across the entire spectrum, chroma and luma. You can see it readily enough if you watch video of any slowly fading in/out moment. Rather than the scene fading uniformly, the codec thinks the whole scene is moving along edges defined by differences in brightness, and because of the low resolution of both chroma and luma, you can actually SEE the boundaries between these edges. Also apparent in non-fading scenes like sunsets.
It is because of problems like these that I will not be purchasing any of Sony's BluRay products until and unless I have determined to my satisfaction that their implementation of MPEG-2 has somehow overcome these issues - and not merely by virtue of being higher resolution. That's not good enough.
D'oh. Thanks for the correction.
o/~ Join us now and share the software
I'm a filmmaker, and I can't say that I look forward to shooting at 60P. Actually you can already (most economically at 720, but if you're willing to spend the $ and put up with a 2-piece camera system you can at 1080), but for dramatic films higher frame rates are only used for slow motion.
There have been film-based higher frame-rate systems in the past as well, but they never caught on. The problem, as I see it, is that frame rates above about 40fps or so look TOO real. Sets, even well built ones, look like sets -- your brain isn't as easily fooled at 60fps. Even acting tends to look worse -- it's strange, but all the visual cues that are used to convey action and emotion work differently. I suspect that it's possible to develop new film making techniques that would work for high frame rate cinema, but I doubt that it will become universal any time soon. Perhaps eventually when the current generation with its conditioned responses to 24fps drama passes on...
Where I definitely DO see 60fps HD fitting in beautifully is for "experience" kind of things -- rides and simulations and such. It really gives that "looking through a window" feeling that can become really transparent in that situation.
-- It only takes 20 minutes for a liberal to become a conservative thanks to our new outpatient surgical procedure!
I wonder what kind of DRM Sony will put on these?
2 cents,
Queen B
HDGary secures my bank
o/~ Join us now and share the software
How the hell do companies manage to print public domain
works and make any money if your little theory was even
remotely true?
They make it up in volume. Been to Target recently? They have a ton of public-domain movies and shows on DVD selling for a quarter each. Yes, that is 25 cents. Used to be $1 but now it is 25 cents. You can't get much stronger proof than that for the OP's original claim about monopoly pricing.
Great, now we can re-purchase all of our A/V equipment and movies so we can see all those film artifacts in High Definition. There's going to be nothing quite like having the big black blotches coming to your screen in 720P and up...as well as the original analog audio scores that are going to be giving you a high fidelity tape hiss along with that blotched up screen. Higher resolutions of cruddy productions will just give us high resolution crud!
Not true. With 1080i, you have to put up with the judder artifacts caused by 3:2 pulldown, as well as flickering, temporal/spatial aliasing, etc. A 1080p display can be set to display at 1080p@24fps, so you'll have exactly the same framerate as if you were watching film directly. It's a big improvement over watching it with 3:2 pulldown and display interlacing.
You must go to the crappiest theatre if you see motion studder.
Sorry, but it works both ways. Converting progressive material to interlaced will also give you numerous bad artifacts, and these can't be eliminated no matter how good the hardware/software doing the conversion happens to be.
It's not that simple. It goes back to interlacing vs. progressive. If the film has a lot of fast panning and action, it will break-up if displayed interlaced (1080i). If it's mostly slow pans and smaller movement, then it's better at a higher interlaced resolution (which is also debatable because you also get aliasing, flicker, etc).
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
...Western Digital, Seagate, Maxtor, etc. They will love this war, because they will be the refuge torrent-lovers will take amid the DRM-filled chaos.
May &deity; bless them all (though I still don't abhor Sony so much as to ignore Metal Gear Solid 4's looming presence on its PS3...).
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
So tell me, why did my DVD collection suddenly become obsolete just because of this blue ray thingy?
Unless the new fangled gadget of the month can also play my DVD's - they can screw off... I already have pretty much everything I want on DVD or AVI/MPEG... I'll just do what I did with music - never buy it again... Having everything I wanted on CD already, I've done pretty well thus far with that decision... and the new stuff I'm interested in isn't that top 40 dog food, it's stuff from bands that release their tunez on mp3 formats...
Fuck the mpaa and riaa...
What About Buckaroo Banzai?
Now THAT's a classic!
Pity Peter Weller did all of those Robocop movies when he could've made more Buckaroo movies!!!!
Maybe I should change my sig to: "Whereever you are, well that's where you're at!"
WooooHooo Buckaroo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
Paying $20 just because they felt they could put a movie on 3 discs with the filming crew jerking each other off while commenting about how great a job they THINK they did isn't my idea of well spent money.
Nor is it mine, which is why I try to only buy movies I really like. But some things really do have worthwhile extras, like interesting commentary or features.
Everything else is a rental.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I don't know how you plan on renting them from netflix if they require your player to be connected to the net and register every disk you use with that player so you can't use it in another.. i mean that is what they are planning.. and if they make an exception for the rental places that is jsut the means for people to pirate it so it makes it all pointless..
Get a grip man. That is not what they are going to do, 1st law of consumer electronics is that players HAVE to work standalone. Neither of the new formats are going to require you to register anything - to play the movie that is...
What you are thinking of is HD-DVD's Managed Copy, which has tracking and DRM out the yin-yang. Then they are going to be VERY interested to make sure it's only going one place and require a GPS embedded in your left nostril reporting where that copy is at all times. The "Managed" part is where a "Man" comes and "Ages" you if you so much as blink funny with the copy in your possesion. Or something like that.. or at least that's what a friend of a janitor working at a refuse hander for a thierd-tier studio told me.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Remember how DVD-Audio and DIVX died.
Well lets encourage this new DRM encumbered format to do the same.
I'll wait until:
- I could play and write this media in Linux.
- I could backup (perhaps multiple) DVD9 movies to this [HD]DVD20.
- A DVD Video player that supports [HD]DVD20, but in standard DVD Video format.
- Some movies would be sold in DVD20 format (standard DVD-Video, perhaps enhanced with MPEG4/DivX or higher res.) , some in HD-DRM+++-DVD format.
- Hopefully people would not buy the DRM+++ format, as you can't play them in on a PC.
- Only the DVD20(DVD40?) format survives (hopefully)
I know Blu-Ray comes with DRM, but does it come with the Rootkit too? ;)
They should make a player CD/DVD/HD-DVD/Blu-Ray that would be good.
I think it is best stay away from these players. Too much copy-prevention and restriction.
DVD is good, it is not time for a new standard already, especially since there are two formats competing to be the standard. Just avoid it all.
I actually loved LD, but the hard facts of the matter are that it didn't catch on with the mass market because they were satisified with VHS.
That's actually a pretty interesting analysis, but wrong for two reasons:
1) Blu-Ray is going to be embedded in a very popular game system, which will in turn mean a lot more owners of players much more quickly and thus more people buying discs. With a greater market acceleration it will pick up fast enough to live unlike LD where it was hard for a long time to convince people to buy players. In fact this same reason (DVD drives in two of the major game systems, XBox and PS2) were part of the reason DVD did not suffer the LD fate.
2) The industry is moving on without you. ALL of the major players, movie studios and electronics makers alike are behind the new format. That means in a few years the only players you'll be able to buy will be BluRay, and likewise for new discs. So people will basically shift because they have to. Unless online video takes off in that timespan and leaves HD media languishing, but I don't think bandwidth providers in the US can get their acts together enough to make that a real possibility.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'm afraid I'm going to have to wait until they also release in Blu-Ray - two years at the outside.
:-)
The number of people buying discs because of the PS3 is going to seal the deal later this year, and studios on the HD-DVD side are going to be singing another tune really quickly if no-one is buying discs in the format they have sided with.
Serenity seems to be cursed; gets aired on Fix, gets under-promoted by Universal, and then as a kicker gets on the wrong side of a live media war.
And yes, I'm sure it's the loosing side AND the wrong one thank you very much.
P.S. - I was even at the Flanvention so no cracks about how I am not a true fan to wait for a format change.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
They've picked a war with our rights on our machines, so we'll let them have it in the standards war. What do we lose if HD DVD wins?
Screw that - both are laden with DRM so it's like choosing between an eagle and a crow for which gets to peck out your eye first in that regard.
So instead turn to sweet, sweet technical specs - If DRM is going to render content questionable then I want my next-gen media to support as much storage as possible for backups. Blu-Ray is the winner in that field.
Beyond that it won't matter anyway as PS3's flood the market. If the 360 had launched with HD-DVD we would have had a fight, but even the inevitable re-release of the 360 with built-in HD-DVD around the time of the PS3 launch is simply too little, too late. Not enough people are going to buy the $200 external 360 HD-DVD drive to matter.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You just helped make my point.
Its the cost of the equipment, not the quality that will decide this. The porn industry is just the most likely be first adopters of the cheapest of these two and that will help generate the mass volume that is needed to set the de-facto standard. Think Wallmart is going to start selling anything for which there is not a market, or only a small niche market? No way, until there is a large established market for one format or the other Wallmart is not going carry much of a selection of titles for either of the formats unless they get such a massivly good deal from the MPAA or whoever for the handfull of titles that are going to be available in the near future.
Though on consideration you are likely right about the porn industry not being as much of a player in this battle. During the BetaMax/VHS conflict they saw a distribution channel into peoples homes, now they are far ahead of the MPAA and the rest in embracing the Internet as a distribution channel, they may even effectivly ignor the new formats.
Funny thing is this all may turn out to be a non-issue, something new will likely come along before the BluRay/HD DVD conflict gets settled that is so great that people stop buying either of them to wait for this new format to hit the market. What it will be I'm not even going to try and guess. But now I kind of doubt that either of these will become as much a standard as DVDs are now, they will both have a share of the market but niether will suplant the other as DVDs are replacing VHS tapes.
You're right, but Sony will continue to use MPEG2 on their Blu-Ray discs because they own a larger stake in MPEG2 than h.264.
Betamax in no way died. It was used in the television industry for sure, last time i checked (although many networks are likely to have moved to digital HD-quality recording by now.) It may not have been able to win the consumer standards war, but its superiority lead professionals to prefer and use it.
I'll be your candy shop of infinite deliciousity if you'll be my discotheque of endless rump-shaking.
> Sony will continue to use MPEG2 on their Blu-Ray discs because they own a larger stake in MPEG2 than h.264.
That might be part of it, but (1) MPEG2 and the tools are better understood, (2) They need to make a MPEG2 for HDTV anyway, so they can save costs, and (3) for films, they've got the space on the disk, so who cares.
I'm sure if Sony wanted to ship an entire season of TV shows, they would use one of the advanced codecs despite the costs.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
"Begun, the format war has."
I hope HD-DVD or BLue-Ray DVD disc support or comes at 1080P resolution
and the audio better be 7.1 DTS or 8.1 DTS
I won't argue that artifacts can be magically fixed through manual or automated processes, but people make careers of restoring old media. Fixing thousands of frames in movies would definitely be harder than fixing faded and cracked old pictures, and fixing audio would make my head spin. The automated processes used to digitally "restore" movies have been known to occasionally blur out things that are not artifacts or leave some artifacts behind. Removing hiss from audio is likely complicated as well and may lose some (hopefully unimportant) sounds. The Criterion Collection has fabulous restorations of actual classics on DVD. With any restoration youll have errors still. If a majority of the viewing area is improved or maintained with a major increase in resolution people will prefer the new high definition format. If analog-sourced audio is converted to digital at a higher sampling frequency the sound will be reproduced more accurately than previous digital formats and people who think they can hear the difference will prefer the new high definition format.
I will agree with you, however, that improvement in audio and video quality could never make a bad movie magically turn good.
I'll be your candy shop of infinite deliciousity if you'll be my discotheque of endless rump-shaking.
Most people are not willing to buy a format that will only play back in specific players when they listen to CDs on a regular basis in their cars, stereos, walkmans and such. DVD Audio albums are still being made, just not on the scale of CD Audio. Super Audio CD albums are being made as well, also not on the scale of CD Audio. Both formats have DRM and do not have methods of circumvention as easy to find and use as DVD Video's DRM. The format war between these two is moot because online audiophiles seem to buy either of them and they aren't a big enough force to bully the market. But, in closing, DVD Audio didn't die. It stagnated.
http://slashdot.org/~TheStonepedo
They did not redefine cinema in any way, they were very enjoyable movies, but ginema did not change dramatically in any way after those movies came along.
I you want a classic look for Metropolis, Citizen Kane, The Godfather, Ragging Bull or Pulp Fiction.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Screw the new formats, and screw the DRM that comes with it. I get my HD movies off usenet just fine, thanks. I _usually_ own the DVDs, too. (Sometimes I just want to check something out, and can't be bollocksed to traipse to the video store through a foot of snow.) But then, DVDs don't look as impressive and 'secksiful' on a ten foot screen anyway.
:P Between that and my unlimited download, unlimited speed, 70+ day multipart binary retention, premium usenet feed... I COULD DOWNLOAD ENTIRE INTERNETS!
I have to agree with what someone above said, there's not going to be any more 'formats'... It's all about portability and access of the 'files'. We're at a point now, where sooner rather than later, buying movies and music is really going to be a matter of licensing rather than owning something tangible.
This will be both good and bad. There are some people, me included, who aren't really going to notice the difference... I've actually downloaded DVD ISOs of discs I own, because I couldn't find the damned thing, or downloaded anime preformatted for my PSP. (Or at least, a DVD rip I can transcode.) So, with that becoming sort of the norm, I won't lose much sleep over it. (Besides, I treat physical media terribly to begin with.) But for some people, this will just break them, on a fundamental level. Sucks to be them, but they're simply not fit for the digital world. And I won't lose much sleep over them, either.
Now if only I had Verizon FIOS, and its 15mbps downstram for $40 a month.
No wait, better yet... If only I lived in Japan and could share a 1gbit fiber line with twenty other people for $50 a month....damn, the very thought brings a tears to my eyes... *wrings out his eyepatch*
Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
Blu-ray quality will be higher but not high enough to justify spending thousands of dollars on newBlu-ray DVDs.
...
From VHS to DVD it was a significant technological jump. From DVD to Blue-Ray - nope.
The only way they can force the change is through stopping DVD editions and this means they would angry customers
and loose most of the market for couple of years
Your last point is very telling. A lot of older actors are stuffing their pension plans now, because when HD TV goes mass market they are going to be to painful to watch.
Ah, gotta love it. "Our format is far superiour to HD-DVD; please ignore the fact that we're using a 12 year old video codec ..." (well, *I* find it to be amusing :))
Your misssion, should you decide to accept it, it to eviscerate the new content protection system in record time so that humanity may transcode HQ video into wmv free realms and enjoy screencaps of Milla Jovovich in her skivvies at unbefore seen resolutions. The MPAA will self-destruct in 3 seconds.
Sometimes at night I imagine the darkness is filled with horrible things with too many teeth, like Julia Roberts.
You can already fit a 2 hour plus film on a DVD, so this is completley usless for movies. It would only be useful for really big series, like The Simpsons, where you could fit several DVDs to one Blu-Ray.
-- There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, And those who don't.
Whichever format Peter Jackson supports with the "movies" he recently made will be the early frontrunner. If he supports both then woah heh!
I tried to think of a good sig, and this wasn't it.
Interlacing may not look nearly as bad on LCD (or similar) as it does on CRT, but you still have the degraded image quality because of the necessity to reduce flicker and because of wasted storage space on interlacing instead of improving the quality of the image. Compression artifacts show up more easily on interlaced video because the algorithms to deal with compressing video are more beneficial when you're compressing data that is directly adjascent, as with progressive video, rather than data which is just supposed to match other data nearby, as with compressing fields individually in interlaced video.
In the end, no matter what, you will definitely have a higher perceived quality from watching non-interlaced video than interlaced
Twinstiq, game news
Doug Trumbull (special effects expert best known for "2001 Space Odyssey") developed a 60 fps filming system calledShowscan back in the '70's. The films were said to be startlingly realistic, but he never managed to convince the studios that it was worth the expense of converting. Of course, with digital projectors, this would be much easier to do today.
Without going into personal details, Bernie Mac's standup routine in the Spike Lee "Kings of Comedy Movie" will disabuse you of those romantic notions regarding married sex life.
I think it's safe to say that the cost of a season is in no way related to the media it's distributed on. If prices change at all, they will likely increase to reinforce the idea that you're buying higher quality. As long as suc^h^h^hpeople keep shelling out absurd amounts of money for something they could have for free if they'd had the foresight to record the programming, you can expect prices to remain steady.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
A lot of those movies were pretty good, but hardly any are the all time great movies.
I guess they're not going to release the good stuff until it's a more established format, but how are they going to persuade people to buy a player if that's what the launch lineup is? Why no Godfather, or Jaws? Or at least a few of the oldies that will keep selling forever, like Casablanca and 2001.
In the end, is more resolution really going to make films any "better"? Is someone watching a properly connected DVD player with "Pulp Fiction" in it going to have a more profound experience because they watch the same film in one of these new formats?
Actually yes. Have you really sat down and watched a movie or show in HD? I am telling you that it is a very different experience, it's like having to have glasses all your life and suddenly getting Lasik. Now some movies probably will not take kindly to this extra clarity, but ironically much of the old film stuff when it was still shot on location and with detailed sets will look amazing. The thing is that all the extra detail makes scenerly look good, bu the real benefit is in really seeing peoples faces more clearly, and thus having a stronger emotional connection to the characters.
Probably not, but I like control over my property. Blu-ray especially, which may HAVE to be connected to the Internet or to a phone line just to maintain functionality, like a damn TiVo.
I have had enough of this paranoid crap from Slashdot readers. Find ONE article, story, or standard that says this is going to be the case! Post a link, I dare you. Simply put; You and anyone who believes that Blu-Ray players will require a network connection to function are in my estimation running at the same level of mental ability as someone wearing a tinfoil hat to protect aganst mind-control rays.
It's true players will have network connections, because then then can offer you things like live trailers for upcoming movies. But to requre it to function? That would be SUICIDE for a consumer electronics device trying to make it into every home. It Will. Not. Happen. Can't be any more clear than that.
Your mistake is not understanding what people do and do not like WRT DRM. Prople do not like DRM when it stops them from doing something they want to do - which is why the ITMS has been sucessful despite having DRM. DVD's have been a success because people don't mind putting in a disc and just playing it - there's nothing else the majority of users wish to do beyond that. So the already DRM encumbered DVD system has not had any major hiccups in adoption - in the US.
Now abroad there WERE hiccups. People not in the US did not really appreciate higher prices and longer release times for DVD's - and so against the wishes of the studios region-free players are sold widley anywhere across the world but the US.
The lession for you, and others, is that in the end the consumer really does win. It sometiems takes a little time but when something is worthwhile, consumers will make it work how they like.
People will buy Blu-Ray, and DVD's will be phased out in about five years. It's pretty much as simple as that.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I thought I was the only one to see Julia Roberts in that light. But I'm gonna Google for Milla Jovovich - maybe she has fewer teeth. Yes, she does have fewer teeth. But gotta be fair so now I'll Google for Julia Roberts - she still has all these teeth - I saw the following quote, "Everyone has come to recognize Julia Robert's million-dollar smile." Just shows that there's no accounting for taste. I'm with you - Milla Jovovich even has better looking skivvies.
How many beans make five, anyhow ?