Stop buying DVDs now you idiots!

[I'm Jim Too]

I'm a professor! Why is no-one listening to me?
Forgot to mention this (http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991952) earlier.
Time to start saving those pennies childs

[AngryPaul]

Uhhhhhhhhhh.......... I dont no what to say, I'm stunned

Probs wont bother gettin one anyway cos I only use
DVD for playback anyway and dont really want one for recording so I think I'm safe! :D

[Chookmeister]

Well, I think we'll be seeing plenty of use in our DVD players yet. If we can get a feature length movie to fit on a DVD at the maximum quality that a TV can reproduce, then we're fine. The MPEG-2 encoding is working just fine too - I see no need for having uncompressed video. Obviously they'll be great for recording hours and hours of video, but there'll still be a market for DVDs for a long long time, I'd think.

[streety]

Very interesting. I thought that dvd's were gonna be safe for a while.
Have a "+"

[Dibbie]

Yeah and the mini-disc was the replacement for the CD I seem to remember.

The point is that media will keep evolving but the blu-ray is only a hike in space/disk rather than a leap in quality (per se). The outcome will allow for so called "Superbit" edition DVDs to carry extras too.

[Twatybollocks]

I can see why they have gone for it, with everyone needing to buy a new Blu-Ray player and with the movie studios having to re-release everything again, the potential for loads of cash being earned are enourmous.

But it is risky and people may not be willing to fork out for a replacement player or be annoyed at having to replace their DVD collection and it may end up only being as popular as laser discs were.

I can see this really taking off in the next generation of game console and PC market though.

[Twatybollocks]

I can see why they have gone for it, with everyone needing to buy a new Blu-Ray player and with the movie studios having to re-release everything again, the potential for loads of cash being earned are enourmous.

But it is risky and people may not be willing to fork out for a replacement player or be annoyed at having to replace their DVD collection and it may end up only being as popular as laser discs were.

I can see this really taking off in the next generation of game console and PC market though.

[squealpiggy]

It's all about the laserdisc:

http://www.hjemmekino.no/guide/bilder/2maslaser.jpg

[PoofBird]

I still use CD-i, mainly

that, and DAT-tapes

[I'm Jim Too]

DATs are cool. I think they still have the best capacity for audio. Better than cd methinks.

Originally posted by Dibbie
Yeah and the mini-disc was the replacement for the CD I seem to remember.

The point is that media will keep evolving but the blu-ray is only a hike in space/disk rather than a leap in quality (per se). The outcome will allow for so called "Superbit" edition DVDs to carry extras too.

The is quite a difference between blu-rays High-Definition video and DVDs "Superbit".
Super-bit is still 720x576 (although i have heard of one disc which was 1024x576) pixels - so at the expense of "dvd extras" they use less compession to get better images.
High Def (HDTV) starts at 1280x720 and goes up to 1920x1080 - thats a big picture to begin with! roughly 5 times more than standard dvds. Add to that the fact that they will be uncompressed - well I've edited on a HD system and its more like looking through an open window then looking through an open window. is.

Trust me on this - you will see the difference.

Also USA, Australia and Japan all have HD broadcasting - we kind of jumped the gun going for widescreen in the 90's.

Did you know that the latest series of startrek is all filmed in HD? They have to "dump down" the pictures to SDtv(Standard-Def) for the UK...

[Scribbly]

I just bought a friggin DVD burner :p

This Blue-ray thing is probably going to be really neat and very popular and such, but I'm betting it's going to take a good 3 years before "everybody" is using it. DVD's will suffice until that time..

[squealpiggy]

Betamax and VHS. Beta was a better format, VHS was more popular. People will not want to change to Bluray now they have bnought dvd players and dvds. It's far too soon. Bluray people are better advised to keep it under wraps and keep developing and put it out later once DVD stops being a new thing.

[CheHamstera]

but all the same, your faithful mod Dibbie, or Mr 400+ DVDs as he is also known, is kaking his pants. :D

like all boys he wants to be on the cutting edge of meeeja technology.

he looked like this --> :( when he found out about the new stuff.

[Dibbie]

I did not look like that at all (well maybe a bit) but the point is that media companies are still producing videos alongside DVDs so there is no point worrying about it just yet.

[I'm Jim Too]

True say Dibmeister- as long as Dvd sales keep rising (and people keep buying up the studios back catalogue which costs them nothing to produce) then the big players have an investment in that market.
The reason you've not heard about blu-ray at all is because they dont want you to stop buying DVDs. And you wont.
...
When does Kill Bill come out again..? :D

[renatzu]

Scribbly is right
DVD's were around for years before everyday people had them, the first Blu-Ray will probably cost thousands of dollars
VHS has survived (so far), and DVDs probably won't be obselete for a while

[mr jones]

im still in the video age and proud

[Cainam]

That article is over a year old. Sony is making a recorder for the Blu-ray format, but at $3800 they probably won't sell too many. HP and Dell are in on the thing, too. I haven't actually seen a product ( yet ) that is reasonably priced, but my first DVD player was about $850, and you can get a better one now for under $100.

I get the feeling that this one may not take off. The differance from a VCR to a DVD player is huge - better sound, better picture, no rewind, skip to any point in the film, smaller package, bonus material, all kinds of stuff. The only thing that Blu-ray really gives you is better than DVD picture and more storage on one disc. While this IS nice, it probably isn't worth throwing out your DVDs over.

Oh, and I'm Jim Too - where did you get your specs for HDTV size? I thought that the HDTV broadcasts were 675 X 600 in the U.S. adn 700 X 700 in Europe.

[I'm Jim Too]

700 x 700? That'd make for a rather square television dont you think?

Anyway Dvds are great but not that good. If you're in the states you're probably watching your dvds on a HDtv and just dont see the nasty frame interpolation your set is doing to fill the whole screen. Perfection isnt for everyone i guess... :p

http://www.bendcable.com/HDTVExplained.pdf have a look at page 3.

As to the article being old - read my previous post.
As to the Blu-ray box being expensive - how much did you pay for your first DVD player?

[Cainam]

Talk about an old article - the place I looked those resolutions up was severl years old. Sorry. Those resolutions were used for a while, though. 700 X 700 will give a rectangular picture if the immage is expanded back out - that would take interpolation or just rectangular pixels. I believe this is what is currentlybeing used:
720p - 1280x720 pixels progressive
1080i - 1920x1080 pixels interlaced
1080p - 1920x1080 pixels progressive

Which is better than the 720 X 480 maximum of a DVD.

From what I understand, a Blu-ray player should be able to play DVDs, as well as CDs ( all the formats are the same physical size ).

I'm not saying that the Blu-ray format is not good - far from it. But I just don't see a successful market for some time. There are over 70,000,000 DVD players in the U.S. alone, there is a large selection of movies available, and the players are cheap. For the new format to be successful:

1. The price must come down. Yes, I paid $800 for a DVD player when they first came out, but if the things were still that expensive VHS would still be #1. As for recording HDTV programs, there are alot of players that use hard drives that can do that, cheaper than the current Blu-ray prices.

2. There needs to be a wide selection of movies available. This is the big reason that DVDs finally took off.

As far as cutting edge technology goes, DVDs are old news. For a major shift in consumer buying, though, I think the Blu-ray is about 5 years too soon. A huge section of the DVD market is people that used to have VHS that are just now switching over to DVD, now that older movies are starting to become available.

And remember, just because the thing is better, that is no reason that it will do well in the mass market. Squealpiggy mentioned the old example of VHS and Beta. Beta was better, but can you even find one of those things now?

[terrorbite]

Wow, people having proper interesting discussions and staying on topic. I like :D

As for these Blu-Ray discs, I think they will just be the next "minidisc", where quite a few people have them, but they never really become fully mainstream.

[Dibbie]

Originally posted by mr jones
im still in the video age and proud

Eh? You're seriously telling me that you are proud of the fact that you can watch bad quality reproductions?

[I'm Jim Too]

Hmm, tracking. I used to love they way that your favourite part of the film would be the section to grow snowy lines first.

Originally posted by Cainam
720p - 1280x720 pixels progressive
1080i - 1920x1080 pixels interlaced
1080p - 1920x1080 pixels progressive
Isnt that what i said? By trade I'm a video editor - but my background is in video engineering.
700 x 700? I dont know where you got that from but it's wrong.
Historically; US=NTSC=720x525 UK=PAL=720x576 Others=SECAM=720x525
If you see sizes different to these then they are quoting the resolutions the viewer recieves after transmission rather than the resolution the images were filmed/edited at.

Originally posted by Cainam
Which is better than the 720 X 480 maximum of a DVD.
The highest resolution DVD I've heard of is Terminator2:Ultimate Edition which has a resolution of 1280x720i (only for computers running Windows Media 9 Player and above). Which is pretty amazing. There are (reportedly) only a few compression probs at this size (some blurring and ringing on high contrast edges) but to get it on the disc that they were forced to sample the audio at a lower rate than standard.
If you're in the US - try it and let me know if its good as its cracked up to be!

Originally posted by Cainam
...just because the thing is better, that is no reason that it will do well in the mass market. Squealpiggy mentioned the old example of VHS and Beta. Beta was better, but can you even find one of those things now?
Would you really want to bother? (theres always ebay!) ;)
I dont know about Bluray and dvd being compatable. The players use lasers at opposite ends of the spectrum but I dont see why a box couldnt have 2 types of laser...
I'm mainly just tired of people talking up DVD as they turn some of my favourite films into wavy jpg mush.
But there are so much better than vhs.

Continue buying dvds. Be prepared to buy the same stuff again though...

[Dibbie]

The problem will come if the bluray disk needs to be housed - if it does then there will be no way a DVD could be played - it would be like trying to play a CD in a mini-disk player

[I'm Jim Too]

I guess you could get round that using the same technology* as those ugly VHS/DVD players. Yick! :P

*using a big stick to force 2 things into 1 box

[Cainam]

Originally posted by I'm Jim Too
By trade I'm a video editor - but my background is in video engineering.
700 x 700? I dont know where you got that from but it's wrong.
Historically; US=NTSC=720x525 UK=PAL=720x576 Others=SECAM=720x525
If you see sizes different to these then they are quoting the resolutions the viewer recieves after transmission rather than the resolution the images were filmed/edited at.

O.K. I'm not a subject matter expert, so I looked up the information online. If it was wrong, I can send you the link and you can deal directly with the source if you like.

I never once even remotely even hinted that the Blu-ray technology is in any way inferior to what is now available, and although I haven't seen it, all of the information I can find on it says that it is in fact better than DVDs or HDTV.

What I have been saying is that there will probably not be a major shift to this new format at this time - NO MATTER HOW GOOD. The fact that it is better will not matter. DVDs took care of the major problems with VCRs, and I just don't think that enough people will spend the money necessary to switch formats again.

The thing is, as someone working in video editing, you are more likely to pick apart the jitters and artifacts that most people just don't care about. That's not a bad thing at work, but when you are at home, just sit back and enjoy the movie!

Look at it this way - Does EVERYTHING that EVERYONE buys have to be the top of the line? And if so, why doesn't evereyone drive a top of the line BMW? How does McDonalds stay in busness when you can go to a real resteraunt? And are you reading this on a Cray Supercomputer?

[Twiz]

even if dvd does get outdated these blurays will be dvd compatible, and if its in cartridge then there will be an adapter that you can put dvds in, dvd and bluryas are the sma size i believe.