bigboss
Moderator
Clearwater said:
That's your choice, but it's still the wrong spelling. Blu-ray is also present in the dictionary. When I see someone spell "blue ray", to me, it seems like the person is a newbie to the format.
-
CES Hands On - Samsung HW-Q990F review
That's your choice, but it's still the wrong spelling. Blu-ray is also present in the dictionary. When I see someone spell "blue ray", to me, it seems like the person is a newbie to the format.
visionary
Well-known member
I think in terms of market development, it was DVD that made the quantum leap.
All of a sudden we had a medium that didn't degrade, offered a vastly superior picture (cf VHS) and instant access to a specified point in the film instead of fast-forward/rewind aggro.
Blu-ray is, without doubt a further improvement in SQ and, sometimes to a lesser extent, PQ but for many folk out there DVD meets their needs.
If everyone was as demanding/discerning as the typical posters here for PQ/SQ it would take off faster in my view. My day to day employment tells me they aren't
All of a sudden we had a medium that didn't degrade, offered a vastly superior picture (cf VHS) and instant access to a specified point in the film instead of fast-forward/rewind aggro.
Blu-ray is, without doubt a further improvement in SQ and, sometimes to a lesser extent, PQ but for many folk out there DVD meets their needs.
If everyone was as demanding/discerning as the typical posters here for PQ/SQ it would take off faster in my view. My day to day employment tells me they aren't
I think I shall continue with DVD until Streaming films becomes a reality (not that far off in my opinion). The marginal increase in PQ that blue ray brings is not worth shelling out for new and supposidly superior discs. Money doesn't grow on trees in my world.
The name Blu-ray is derived from the underlying technology, which utilizes a blue-violet laser to read and write data. The name is a combination of "Blue" (blue-violet laser) and "Ray" (optical ray). According to the Blu-ray Disc Association the spelling of "Blu-ray" is not a mistake, the character "e" was intentionally left out so the term could be registered as a trademark. The correct full name is Blu-ray Disc, not Blu-ray Disk (incorrect spelling) The correct shortened name is Blu-ray, not Blu-Ray (incorrect capitalization) or Blue-ray (incorrect spelling) The correct abbreviation is BD, not BR or BRD (wrong abbreviation)
ediots said:
I have always had a suspicion, that there is more to this confounded contrivance than meets the eye. :~
professorhat
Well-known member
Clearwater said:
There's nothing "supposedly" about it - the vast majority of Blu-ray films do present better picture and sound quality compared to their DVD equivalents. Whether you want to pay for that extra quality is of course your choice
Clearwater said:
Nor mine, but I generally wait for titles to come down in price to a more reasonable £10 - £12 (or preferably less!) before purchasing them. In my opinion, it would be more of a waste of my money for me to buy a DVD of a new film, only to then buy the Blu-ray later because it's been reduced to a level I find acceptable. So it makes more sense to just wait - I've got plenty of other films to watch in the meantime! I also make use of Lovefilm's rental service to check if a new film is something I want to own or not. As with every other sector of the market, the consumer is having to become more "savvy" to ensure they spend their money wisely.
CnoEvil said:
Don't anyone tell him that the 'V' in the middle of 'DVD' doesn't stand for 'video'...
What really gripes me about BLU RAY is that you can't see much of a difference in PQ compared with DVDs on a normal sized tv. I have a 32 inch Toshiba LCD which I believe is the average used by most consumers. Unless you are willing to buy into a 40 to 50 inch monolith for a home cinema, this new format is quite disappointing.
In what way disappointing? DVD pictures can be very good. If you have a small TV then it would not matter what the format was, the difference can be hard to see. Similarly, if you listen through TV speakers then the large improvement in sound quality is almost impossible to hear. What could the developers of Blu-ray have done apart from recommend that people buy a new TV and sound system to benefit from the improvements.WILLDEWHURST said:
I have to agree with WILLDEWHURST. 32inch is not a small t.v. I simply couldn't fit a 50inch tv in my living room. Perhaps most BLU RAY fans live in mansions or don't have wives with some common sense.
Vinyl records are superior in many ways to digital sources, replacrd by CD with a very clever marketing campaign. The same could be said for DVDs and BLU RAY. Big corporations like to sell their wares.
Clearwater said:
Yikes, hope Mrs Cobalt doesn't read that! We've got a relatively small living room, but I have managed to get a 1.8m projection screen and 9.1 sound in there. Mrs C has been amazed at the distinct improvement in picture quality and also sound. She is the first to accuse me of wasting money (if valid) but (so far) she has always noticed, and been impressed, by any "upgrade" - we always go the blu-ray route so that we can use the projection screen if possible (and the blu-ray is still better option too on the tv).
However, some blu-rays are not good - avoid Blair Witch Project, as was only designed to look and sound like an 8mm amateur film in 4:3 (and anything with Jennifer Aniston - but that applies to all formats
Snowdrop said:
I agree with half your statement but think you are comparing apples and oranges.
Vinyl is superior and a completely different format (analogue) to CD (which was over-hyped).
Blu-ray is a natural,and clearly superior, progression of the digital technology used in DVD (the same way that 24 bit is to Redbook). Saying that, it is still over-priced, which is due to the marketing and the milking of a relatively new technology.
Andrew Everard said:
I'm still trying to figure out what the "8" in "78" is for!
Ps. Anyone know where I can get a new horn for my wind-up gramophone.....the mnemonics on the old one are below par.
DandyCobalt said:Clearwater said:
Yikes, hope Mrs Cobalt doesn't read that! We've got a relatively small living room, but I have managed to get a 1.8m projection screen and 9.1 sound in there. Mrs C has been amazed at the distinct improvement in picture quality and also sound. She is the first to accuse me of wasting money (if valid) but (so far) she has always noticed, and been impressed, by any "upgrade" - we always go the blu-ray route so that we can use the projection screen if possible (and the blu-ray is still better option too on the tv). However, some blu-rays are not good - avoid Blair Witch Project, as was only designed to look and sound like an 8mm amateur film in 4:3 (and anything with Jennifer Aniston - but that applies to all formats
professorhat
Well-known member
Clearwater said:
Erm, live in a two bed ground floor flat with a partner who has a doctorate (so yes, very little in the way of common sense
No we don't live in a mansion either. Actually it's the wife who is going on about a larger television (up from the 40" we have at the moment).
laserman16 said:
I live in a mansion.......... and it's not all it's cracked up to be.
The butler is inebriated and refuses to make the popcorn, while the parlour maid keeps putting the remotes in the wrong order. J)
visionary
Well-known member
CnoEvil said:
need one of them Logitech thingies then or, failing that, beat the parlour maid severely until she put them in the correct order
visionary said:CnoEvil said:
need one of them Logitech thingies then or, failing that, beat the parlour maid severely until she put them in the correct order
Tried the beating thing......didn't work.....she liked it.
Alec
Well-known member
professorhat said:Clearwater said:
Erm, live in a two bed ground floor flat with a partner who has a doctorate (so yes, very little in the way of common sense). Not sure what this has to do with the size of my TV though...
I'm sure your partner has more common sense than I, and I know they are more academically qualified. However, I may venture to suggest (I'm not, you understand, I just might) that holding a Doctorate is not necessarily proof of common sense.
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram