Has Blue Ray Failed?

[Anonymous]

Andrew Everard:Noticeable in Japan last week that BD sections in stores relatively small, compared to humungous DVD selection...
thats interesting , i wonder what percentage of movies that have been released on dvd are also on bluray ?? if it were say , 10% , that would explain the imbalance ...

 

[mcjwalters]

I understand that is has been a slow start for Blu ray.
A format war with HD DVD wasn't helpful in producing consumer alliance to the product as well as the prolonged inclusion of HDMI 1.3 to the format. And how can you forget the very very long loading times for discs, if they loaded at all in some examples. Personally, it smelt of a format that wasn't really for the market when released in 2003.

But the VCR took over 10 years to be the popular choice, or look at the audio cassettes, introduced in 1963 but didn't reach saturation point till the early 80's.

 

[landzw]

I had tried to do some research on this topic over last week , as i was more interested in DVD V's Blu Ray V's Downloaded Media and you just can't find figures that match

One thing i did find is that the Box Office ( Cinema ) took more revenue than DVD & Blu Ray Together which hasn't happened for a long time

The sales of DVD over Blu Ray is staggering but sales are falling i think it was mentioned around 5% But Blu Ray sales are up around 235% but this was for the first quarter of the year

Media sales through apple Tv are even a lot more than blue ray but not quite as much as DVD's

But like i said this is just a rough estimate as i couldn't find sales figures that ran in line with each other

But it was obviously showing DVD sales are falling due to downloaded media and blu ray but it looks like it would take 5 years + before blu ray will become the main format of choice , thats if downloaded media doesn't squash it before then

The main thing i see is the problem is technology takes time for us to brace , most of half the people i know still watch CRT Tv's and yet there is already talk of all having to replace our plasma's & LCD's for 3D ,

Something has to give and i think its going to be costly to the main runners

 

[kinda]

It's an interesting one. For a while I wondered if DVD / BD would pan out like CD / DVD-A SACD.

I thought now people had bought into having the slim screens and the players and disks were coming down in price, then BD would take over and DVD slowly disappear.

However, as it stands, all the big films still seem to appear on both at the same time, there's a much bigger DVD back catalogue, and the DVDs are significantly cheaper. Though I haven't gone hi-def yet, when I buy a DVD I do wonder if I'd be prepared to buy a BD if I could get 2 or 3 DVDs for the same price.

The thing is though I know I'd get better picture and sound, my standard definition setup seems very good, and I'm not sure how much more I'd enjoy films on BD, especially considering the fewer I'd see. I've recently watched Breakfast at Tiffanys and Sherlock Holmes at the pictures and made a special point of looking at the picture and assessing if it showed me more detail than on DVDs at home, and I really didn't think it did, or that it would enhance the film much if it had done.

I think if DVDs continue to be produced then it may well pan out to be like CDs. I think they might need to phase DVDs out to an extent, as happened with records, if they really want the shift to come. I don't think they help themselves with talk of further higher def formats and 3D either which has also helped put me off upgrading for the time being.

 

[matengawhat]

well i hope it does survive as i have over 150 hd dvds and now about 50 blu rays don't want another failed format - for me the picture and sound improvements are def worth it - if i'm buying now and can get on blu ray and dvd i am only buying blu rays for movies - still buying dvds for tv series 24 etc as don't feel the price difference is worth it - series 7 of 24 paid £13 on dvd is about £50 on blu ray.

prices difffer vastly between stores but if you keep your eyes open you can get deals - for example i paid £18 for both district 9 and term salvation on blu ray thats what i would prob have paid for it on dvd

i also am impressed with the films that have come out where you get the movie on both blu ray and dvd - like the proposal i bought the gf for xmas

i think the biggest threat is now from uncertainty again of new products and the whole 3d thing - i def would not be buying a new tv in the next 12 months until everthing is finished and specs finalised

 

[Anonymous]

Also don't forget LOVEFILM!

I for one am not forking out to buy blurays quite yet (until they get cheaper).

BUT

I'm really enjoying the steady stream of them coming in from my Lovefilm rental list. I've got a great, never ending list built up which is all in Bluray. It really is worth watching the likes of Startrek and Moon in the best format around!!

 

[chudleighpaul]

I live in London, but the nearest HMV is Oxford Street which takes me 45 mins, so this is not practical.

I really have no alternative but to use the internet which means I have to wait a few days for delivery, impulse buys are out of the question unfortunately.

 

[Anonymous]

kinda: The thing is though I know I'd get better picture and sound, my standard definition setup seems very good, and I'm not sure how much more I'd enjoy films on BD, especially considering the fewer I'd see.

I think that's a very good point. Obviously I like seeing the film with the best picture possible, but I'm not sure that the difference between dvd and blu ray makes me enjoy the film itself, any more or less.

Then again, there are many bargains to be had if you hunt around. I think paying between £7-10 for a BD is pretty good. I don't usually pay full price, unless it's something I really want to see.

N.B. Whilst sound will be a consideration for others, it isn't for me, in the absence of surround sound. Therefore my comments are only in reference to picture quality, and I judge the format on that basis. No doubt others will derive greater benefit from blu ray over dvd due to their systems surround sound and HD audio capabilities.

 

[manicm]

For me it was between the devil and the deep blue sea - quite literally as in my country Widescreen CRTs were never available.

So for DVDs most of us were using 4:3 CRTs!

Now, that nothwithstanding, and in the light of my Full HD LCD/BD purchase I have to say CRT/DVD will give BD/LCD a close thrashing anytime, anyday, anywhere.

My dad now has my Pioneer DVD/cheap CRT - and the picture is still as brilliant and breathtaking since I bought it 7 years ago - not a grain of noise to be seen on any half-decent movie, and pin-sharp to boot.

I now know why even high-end shops demo Blu-ray with animated movies - cos they hide noise - which from what I've seen isn't eliminated from LCDs, and to a lesser extent Plasmas.

Would I have gone the HD route had I a widescreen CRT? Absolutely No.

 

[matengawhat]

i watch my movies using a 1080p projector on to a 106 inch screen and can say that blu ray is def worth the extra over dvd the picture is so sharp

also the sound in my opinion is far better - just buy blu rays on special offer

 

[Anonymous]

One other thing is a Bluray player will do a dam good job of upscaling DVDs my copy of Gladiator looks a lot better on my bluray then the DVD player so a lot of punters will not buy the same title again in Bluray.

 

[chudleighpaul]

I replaced my Denon DVD player which upscaled to 1080p and gave really great results from DVDs. My Panasonic Blue ray player gives stunning pics. I have not yet tried HD sound as I am waiting for some 5.1 audio leads to be made up.

My first DVD player was a Samsung 709 multi region for which I paid £250 back in about 2002 . The Panasonic Blue ray cost £240 in multi region form, so taking into account inflation the blue ray player is cheaper and much better.

My point is that for Blue ray to succeed it must capture the mass market. I am worried that Joe Public might decide that DVD used with an upscaling player, of which there are many under £100 is good enough.

 

[robjcooper]

Don't forget, this is the same mass market which buys an HD TV, plugs in an aerial and thinks they're watching hi-def pictures. If Blu-ray players become available in Asda, Sainsbury's and the other supermarket chains for well under £100 (as they did with DVD) then that could be the tipping point as only then would the mass market have a chance to see what their HD TVs are actually capable of.

Rob

 

[manicm]

IMO, upscaled DVDs are no match for BRs. e.g. LOTR - it looks awful upscaled on my LCD.

Can't wait for the BR release in April.

 

[chudleighpaul]

I go into peoples houses and they have a Sky box connected to a widescreen TV without having reset the Digibox output to 16:9.

Every body looks fat and the owners sit there and say what a great picture they are watching. Believe me, never underestimate the stupidity of Joe Public!!!

 

[Anonymous]

manicm:

IMO, upscaled DVDs are no match for BRs. e.g. LOTR - it looks awful upscaled on my LCD.

Can't wait for the BR release in April.

I saw a bit of LOTR playing on a 40" LCD from a Sony DVD player in my local Sony Centre and it looked superb.

 

[Anonymous]

manicm:
IMO, upscaled DVDs are no match for BRs. e.g. LOTR - it looks awful upscaled on my LCD.

Can't wait for the BR release in April.
i dont think you can generalise , i watched "american psycho" on dvd today , and it looked better than some blurays ive seen , which cant help bluray sales ...

 

[professorhat]

hilly10:One other thing is a Bluray player will do a dam good job of upscaling DVDs my copy of Gladiator looks a lot better on my bluray then the DVD player so a lot of punters will not buy the same title again in Bluray.

Ah, but see the Blu-Ray version of Gladiator side by side with the DVD and you'll see how washed out the colours look on the DVD.

 

[Frank Harvey]

hmtb:I saw a bit of LOTR playing on a 40" LCD from a Sony DVD player in my local Sony Centre and it looked superb.

The picture on the LOTR DVD's is actually quite bad. Any DVD can look good on close up shots, but check out any scenes where anything further than 20 feet from the camera and it's like watching VHS.

 

[Anonymous]

FrankHarveyHiFi:
hmtb:I saw a bit of LOTR playing on a 40" LCD from a Sony DVD player in my local Sony Centre and it looked superb.

The picture on the LOTR DVD's is actually quite bad. Any DVD can look good on close up shots, but check out any scenes where anything further than 20 feet from the camera and it's like watching VHS.

yes i love lotr , but i havnt watched it in ages because it doesnt look very good , thats one bluray boxset ill snap up , if it ever comes out ...

 

[strapped for cash]

I don't think Blu-ray has failed at all.

Amazon report that sales of standalone Blu-ray players (i.e. not PS3) are actually beating sales of DVD players; while, as Professor Hat points out, Blu-ray's standing in the market is actually better than DVD at the same point after launch of the format. It will just take some time. High-definition television ownership has also increased a great deal during the last year (especially in the US); and owners will eventually want to get the very best out of their TVs. As prices continue to fall, and more titles become available, Blu-ray's market share will increase. The really intersting question is whether high-definition technology means we will get more and more blockbuster films, with older or more obscure films with poor prints that don't translate well to Blu-ray being pushed even further out of the market?

 

[Big Aura]

But I think that the upscaling effect will actually cost the format. I have 200 DVDs and had a similar library of VHS. I updated a large number of titles once DVD came out (I paid IRL£35 for The Exorcist!).

With Blu-Ray, I won't be re-buying titles (except for Star Wars, when it finally hits the format) and possibly God Father trilogy - the difference between VHS and DVD is much more pronounced than between DVD (Upscaled, with DD 5.1) and Blu-Ray.

 

[manicm]

Big Aura:

But I think that the upscaling effect will actually cost the format. I have 200 DVDs and had a similar library of VHS. I updated a large number of titles once DVD came out (I paid IRL£35 for The Exorcist!).

With Blu-Ray, I won't be re-buying titles (except for Star Wars, when it finally hits the format) and possibly God Father trilogy - the difference between VHS and DVD is much more pronounced than between DVD (Upscaled, with DD 5.1) and Blu-Ray.

God Father BR is out - but don't even bother - check up the reviews on Amazon.

Apparently the original film material deteriorated to the point that they could not do much to improve it, if at all.

I have the tin-box DVD version and will just put up with it.

 

[professorhat]

I have the Godfather Trilogy on both, but have only watched the first film so far on Blu-Ray. I'd say, if you're a big fan of the films it's worth the upgrade. The problem with most people who post an Amazon review I find is, they're expecting every single Blu-Ray release to look absolutely pristine, like Star Trek or other brand new films which clearly isn't going to happen on films which are over 30 years old. The Godfather has a reasonable dollup of film grain which, in my opinion, places the film exactly as it should look. If it was hyper pristine, I just don't think it would look right - a criticism many people have made about the Blu-Ray of Public Enemies though I've yet to see this. However, it's aspects such as colour depth, contrast and good clean detail where the Blu-Ray wins over.

So if you're looking for absolutely pristine picture, don't go for it as you will be disappointed. If you're after the best looking version of the collection currently available, in my mind, it's worth the upgrade. This isn't even taking the sound into account.

 

[Anonymous]

professorhat:
I have the Godfather Trilogy on both, but have only watched the first film so far on Blu-Ray. I'd say, if you're a big fan of the films it's worth the upgrade. The problem with most people who post an Amazon review I find is, they're expecting every single Blu-Ray release to look absolutely pristine, like Star Trek or other brand new films which clearly isn't going to happen on films which are over 30 years old. The Godfather has a reasonable dollup of film grain which, in my opinion, places the film exactly as it should look. If it was hyper pristine, I just don't think it would look right - a criticism many people have made about the Blu-Ray of Public Enemies though I've yet to see this. However, it's aspects such as colour depth, contrast and good clean detail where the Blu-Ray wins over.

So if you're looking for absolutely pristine picture, don't go for it as you will be disappointed. If you're after the best looking version of the collection currently available, in my mind, it's worth the upgrade. This isn't even taking the sound into account.

watching it now on dvd , i dont think that bluray will be "sleeping with the fishes" anytime soon......