Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by Megalith, Mar 3, 2019.
Same here - I see blurays at many stores.
Bay Area, CA here and we have huge blue ray and DVD selections at the same stores.
The people who buy BRs are soccer moms around here who buy 1-2 for Friday night.
I started mkv ripping my library's blu-rays and converting them to .mp4 using handbrake. So much better quality than the pirated garbage my wife downloads.
I hope blu-rays are here to stay.
I just think it is funny that I went out of my way to buy a laptop with a bluray player thinking I would regret it if I didn't. That was over 10 years ago.
There are many perfect rips. However some stuff out there, like 4K movie with 500MB size LOL
You mention VAT which puts you outside of the USA. So that throws of any comparisons slightly.
Looking at DVD in general. In 97 when the first players started to release in the USA they were priced around $600 - $1000 USD. Not something the average person would buy. Took about 4 years for the prices to get down to around $100 for the cheapest most basic of DVD players.
The movies released at a cost of around $20 - $25 dollars (this is in 1997 money which today with inflation would be around $32), which by this point VHS movies were around $10. I recall movie rental places around me not getting DVDs on the shelf to rent till around 2000 once the price of the average players came down. So for the first few years nobody cared about DVD as they couldn't afford the players.
Which would have been the same with VHS and Betamax before DVD when they first came out.
Flash forward to Bluray and the PS3 was the cheapest player at $499. So starting off a little cheaper than DVD, but factor in the standalone units and you are pretty much at the same cost level. I don't recall the starting cost of movies as I didn't buy any until after the Blu-ray vs HD DVD battle was done. I don't recall however once I started buying them seeing many priced higher than $30 at launch with many dropping to around $20 with a few months.
Putting all that the same then for 4K Blu-ray. Where players started off at around the same cost and movies started within the same price range.
As for as what stores offer. Stores around me and every story I have been to in the USA and have went anywhere near the electronics section still carry Blu-ray. DVDs are just $5 items that are in a box or bin that you can dig through if you want to find something. Now 4K is damn near impossible to find, they carry whatever came out in the last few weeks then after that the 4K stuff is gone and only the rows of Blu-Ray are left.
Another thing to factor in is the additional cost of equipment. When DVDs came out everyone could see a different on the TV that they owned right then. For Blu-ray, first off you had to own a HD TV which wasn't going to be cheap for the average person, then on top of that you weren't going to see the same jump for the average person going from DVD to Blu-Ray that you did from VHS to DVD. Same goes for 4K.
except unlike vinyl, blu-rays tend to actually provided a higher quality AV product.
Fries has 4k disks for 15 bucks. Even Mission Impossible Fallout is only 22 bucks. after you're on [H] for a while, you come to realize that everyone just likes to whine about prices. If 4k was 5 bucks a disk, the same people would whine that they weren't 2 bucks. If they were 2, they'd complain that they weren't a buck. And if they were a buck, they'd whine that they're already paying for Netflix or that they can download them for free off the web. I've been on this site for 15 years and it never changes. Only what htey whine about changes. Back then it was CDs (which they still complain about) and and MP3s. I know I did complain about MP3s, but I don't think I've ever bought MP3s (CDs or no sale).
Hell one person on here was saying quality doesan't matter because in the 50s or 60s they were fine with a black and white set with scrolling bars.
Most grocery stores i go to have Blu Ray copies of new releases.
I think they need to update the saying "The only thing certain is death and taxes" to "The only thing certain is death, taxes and that people on the internet will whine about prices being too high for everything"
Well, suuure anybody can complain until something is free with free delivery.
But anectodes aside, is the price truly optimal? I will tell you at 5$ for fresh blurays, I would buy. They can save on the box and just sell me the media in a sleeve, fine my me.
No i am not fishing out older movies for 5$, or searching the internet for what have you. Example, I am interested in spiderverse, I will redbox it. I would most definitely buy at 5$, its an easy decision for me.. between 5-10 is less than the super easy at 5$ Ten and above it starts being no and hell no.
Honestly at 5 its so easy for me that I can see myself buying movies routinely. Say I buy 4 movies a month.. thats 20$ more in sales than the current absolute 0 they get. Question is how many more are in my shoes vs the loss from the price cut.
I would take a theatrical release, no bonus bluray in a sleeve for $ 5 no problem. Perhaps others want a nice box and bonus features for more money?
When you own pirated. And the warning says $10,000 fine.
Does that mean my movies are worth $10,000 each?
Thanks for proving my point. You want something of value for at or below cost and you want it right now. God forbid you wait a year 2 (hell maybe it'd be 8 months) for the price to drop. Studios are as likely to sell a movie that rents for 2 bucks for 5 as Ford is to sell you a Car for 60 bucks, because it rents for 30.
That said, if you can lower yourself to wait a few months, I'm sure Redbox will sell you Spider-verse for under 10 bucks.
I don't 'want it right now' organically, i want it now because its been promoted to me.. I will forget and lose interest in a few months even if I don't see it at all.
Do we know if at 5$ is really a loss? Might be, don't know, don't care.
It seems clear enough prices are too high, it seems clear enough higher blu ray prices hindered/slowed adoption let alone 4k blurays.
Again, lower prices could mean higher profits, I dont know why is that an issue with you.. I guess you love high prices, or work for a distributor or something.?
Do you KNOW, what is the point of losing money for a movie in disc? The discs should be extremely cheap by now. I mean, 'your point' is as meaninless as mine, except this is the market we know, with their overpriced media that keeps me completely out of it.. question is, how many millions are out due to prices? How many would be in with lower prices, things like that.
The last jedi sold 1.8 million copies in it first week for an average of 23 bucks/blu ray (they sold 438k DVDs for an average of 18 bucks).
Bohemian Rhapsody sold 1.3 million copies in the first week for just under 20 bucks. (435k DVD for 18 bucks).
You know what those prices are a lot like? The price of a DVD 20 years ago. If you adjust for inflation a Blu Ray costs 13 bucks. DVDs sold for quite a bit more than that.
Disks may not be #1 revenue generator, but they're not bad and your desire for disks to sell for about 2-2.5x the price of a 1 day rental at Redbox is not realistic.
If you don't think that studios do market research on pricing, then you don't understand consumer facing businesses. This is marketing 101. But I'm sure they also factor in what a disk sold for practically nothing will do to the value of their streaming licenses as well as what it costs them in sales to Redbox (or even netflix). What will that do to their streaming rentals on Cable, Satellite, Amazon, Apple and Netflix?
It fascinates me how little business sense most people have.
If I were the type of person to actually collect disks, I don't think the prices are too high. 20 bucks to permanently own a nice case/cover/art/disk you can watch forever seems reasonable.
The problem is, even if disks were 5-10 bucks I still would rather stream them, or rent from redbox for a dollar. Maybe I'm part of the decline -- very few movies are worth watching over again, and I have no issue with 'The Office' going off of Netflix - I don't watch stuff 10x over and over. I don't want this physical crap in my possession anymore.
I agree with this and most of what I buy are things I'll watch again. Thus, I bought all the potter movies on 4k. I've bought quite a few Marvel Movies too. OTOH, while I enjoyed Creed II, I don't see myself watching it again (though I might watch the first one again, but I doubt I'll buy it).
Of course the difference between me and the typical [H] reader is that I actually go to a lot of movies. There's very few releases that I haven't seen in a theater (AMC A-List at 20/month 3 movies/week is just too good to pass up), so I know if I'll watch it again.
I also tend to buy Steelbooks, because they tend to hold their value. If it's not a steelbook, I'll generally wait for it to go on sale in 6 months or a year.
As for TV shows, I also agree that streaming is generally good enough, But I'd spend a small fortune for a Blu Ray or 4K set for Deep Space Nine...but the odds of it being done seem very small The poor quality of the DVD sets are the only reason I haven't watched them in many years.
You might get it, they did TNG into a nice bluray idk what's stopping them from doing it for DS9.
They didn't get a good ROI on TNG, that's why. The process was expensive, long and laborious as they scoured the original 35mm and completely redid all the special effects. They ended up selling far fewer copies than expected. I heard that they're doing some sort of AI upscaling on DS9, so we may eventually get it, but it won't look nearly as good as TNG.
Maybe they'll quit screwing around or a new process for 35mm to digital will surface. One can only hope.
Well, it's not the film that is the problem. That process is well matured and easy to do. The hard part comes in when you need to clean the image for the target resolution, which can be up to 12K depending on the resolving resolution of the 35mm film used.
The issue with TNG was the special effects were printed to the video tape when the film was transferred to be broadcast on air, which would look like garbage if they tried to rip them out and transfer them to the new digital source. The larger issue with DS9 is I think the whole thing was filmed directly to video tape to save money, so even if they wanted to they couldn't go through the same process they did with TNG.
Fuck samsung tvs/br players anyways. Everybody knows their QLED sucks and does not compare to OLED. I work in the quality and now regulatory field. To me when I see QLED, it just means they couldnt be OLED. Basically an impostor of the real mccoy. Also, the BR player to get is the Sex Box 1X!!!
I do love samsung drives tho!!
Neither one will. To small of a niche to do that. If ALL they offered was UHD, it might help the format overall. I enjoy my UHD collection.
I view them as the 'budget' option; still better than your average LCD, and far cheaper than OLED when you go above 55".
Those two hit the sweet spot. The big issue is whether you like Oled or Quantum dots. Pros and cons to each technology. Your specific scenario may determine which one you go with. (Or, whichever brand you like better. )
There are some sale locations which are not "official" resellers. The warranty will not be honored unless you buy from the correct location. (If that matters to you.)
To be fair, the price of the 77" C8 is currently $2k more than the 75" Q9FN. I'd love to compare the 2019 Samsung QLED to the 2019 LG OLED when the latter come out. The 65" Q90R is $3,500 right now.
It's really unlikely. TNG apparently didn't sell well (I'll admit I just wasn't interested enough to buy it again).
Steven Ira Behr (who AFAIK was the show runner) and many of the actors have been trying to find ways to do it, but I'm not holding my breath. It's a shame. And DS9 is really made for binging. The first season is just so-so. 2 was a bit better, 3 was really good and from 4 on it was best Trek series, IMO.
If they did it, it'd do well on streaming services. If it happens, I'll jump. Hell if they kickstart it, I'd donate handsomely just to get it (if they could do it in 4k with UHD, all the better).
Apparently some (most? all?) of the big CGI battles were done in high resolution and could at least be rerendered in 1080 with little effort. I think this is the scene I saw from several years ago, but I could be wrong.
That's not true with LG. Everything I've read on AVSForums says they honor their warranty no matter what. What you lose is the ability to return the panel because you don't like it (for whatever reason).
Reality is that as good as these prices seem, the 65C8 was selling for under 2k around Black Friday. I bought mine from an unauthorized seller, but others paid under 2k from BuyDig, who is authorized.
Does the Samsung support the latest HDMI spec? If not, then I'd argue the C8 is fine. If it does support the latest, then I agree 2019 models. That said, unless you don't care about money (and maybe even if you do), you should wait till late in the summer to buy a 2019 model (and if you're really tight, wait till Thanksgiving).
I've got my C8. I wish I had a 77" instead of 65", but it looks great and in 3-5 years bigger better sets will be out (what the best technology will be, I don't know and I don't care....I'll worry about it then).
I'd like a 77" but it'd require a new wall mount I presume, do not want to make even more holes in the studs.
Only the Q900R and Q950R have HDMI 2.1 from what I've read. These are the 8K panels. The 4K panels up to and including the Q90R do not appear to have HDMI 2.1. LG stated that all of their 2019 OLED panels will have HDMI 2.1.
My bold, above: wow...that's great to hear. Thanks for the clarification.
What did they charge? TNG has lost its luster for me for many reasons over the years but when they first brought TNG era Trek to DVD years ago the expense was a joke. $100/season turned me off of buying the disks for all of the shows.
It was $209 for the box set when it first came out. It's going for around $100 now.
Hey a little tip from someone who has spent much time in handbrake doing just that.... the default audio settings always go to Dolby pro logic downmix. This is fine for laptops but if you want surround sound, you need to change it. I usually keep whatever AC3 or DTS track it defaults to then use AC3-passthru or DTS passthru. There is an auto passthru, but sometimes it does wierd stuff. Files wind up a little bigger but not too bad... 640k DTS vs 448k (or less) isn't a huge amount of space.
They were available for less if you didn't want the Best Buy exclusive bonus disk. I eventually opted for the BBY versions, but I bought a few seasons from Deep Discount for 70 bucks. That was not unreasonable at that time and compared to what they sold for on VHS it was a steal.
I have no idea what they sold the HD version for. I wanted DS9, not TNG.
Yep, I do the good audio. I set the bar to 19, which is one under superhq. That way I can do a DVD hard copy or at least a DVD DL for long movies should I want a hard copy.
Still burning? I used to, I gave it up. I do MKV HQ -> .265 1080p and keep the DTS or AC3 intact. Movies are 2-3gb (or less) and look perfect coming from my Plex server to Roku.
I used to do BD-Rebuilder and burn DVD-DL but honestly I cannot tell the difference at all between those and the 2gb MKVs handbrake is spitting out. And it keeps chapters and does subtitle burn in which is nice.
And the beautiful thing is Plex is easy enough for the wifey. It's basically home sourced netflix nowadays. Except my rips look much superior
Oh, and a Ryzen 7 1700 (which I got here on Hardfourm for cheap ) does pretty well with handbrake. Sure, a threadripper would be nice, but still....