View Full Version : If they brought out Hi-Def DVD would you replace your movie collection (again)?
Solidstate
20-10-2003, 18:58
I got my Indiana Jones DVDs through the post from Canada today and it got me thinking about all my old Video box sets (now banished to the loft). They are effectively worthless now and I couldn't probably even give them away.
That got to me was thinking about the amount of money I spent on my collection of videos and the fact that they are now junk - I don't think I could bring myself to watch a videotape now.
I was wondering that if, (or when) High definition DVD or Blue Ray or whatever comes out, whether I could go through the whole cycle of buying the same films again. I came to the conclusion that I would try to just buy new release films on a new format and leave DVD for my back catalogue. However when it comes to my favourites - like Indiana Jones, Star Wars, Back to the Future - I might have to make an exception and buy them yet again.
So (finally) my question is this - If say in 2010 you were to have the latest High Definition home video format (with the TV to match) how much of your DVD collection would you buy again in the new improved format. Out of my 400+ DVDs I think I would have to limit my re-purchases to perhaps 20 or so films but it's hard to know where to draw the line.
How about you?
Nope I'm with DVD for the long haul now after spending all this money. When all the young whippersnappers are buying Army of Darkness: Super Turbo Shandy Edition on high-def crystal shards I'll be there convincing myself that my DVD version is better like those blokes who only buy vinyl.
Definitely not.
250 DVD's, a new TV and probably amp, new DVD player and recorder??
Not a chance in hell!
kaine106
20-10-2003, 19:13
Yeah I can see what you mean there.
I reckon you lot said thought the same thing about dvds when you had videos, 'Im not wasting all that money when Ive got my favourite films already.'
However I only think this will be the case if what comes out next is significantly different to DVD, and it has something extra special that makes you want to buy it.
Michael Mackenzie
20-10-2003, 19:14
I plan on going to high-def as soon as it takes off. The DVD market is becoming a bit too "mainstream". I'm not trying to be a snob or anything: it's just that I really yearn for a format that only a small number of people are into, so each release really counts -- a bit like laserdisc. I doubt I'll replace all my films, but I'll definitely buy high-def versions of my favorites (Suspiria, Pinocchio, Scream, The Iron Giant, etc.) when they come out. I think, really, that it depends on how much of an improvement high-def DVD is over standard DVD, but given that I'm already painfully aware of the limits of MPEG2, I think high-def is definitely going to be light-years ahead.
Of course, if I won the lottery, I'd definitely buy all my DVDs again in high-def.
Will there be any point in a high def version of most of the films out now? I mean, most of the versions I own now are the supposed best prints available (especially with pre 90's movies). Is high def only going to be applicable to new, mint versions?
For any lottery winners reading this thread, you can get hi-def now, you know: it's called D-VHS or D-Theater. The only prob is that the players cost over a grand, and tapes cost around £30 minimum and are fairly few and far between. The quality is good, though - or so I understand!
thescrounger
20-10-2003, 19:39
I probably will yeah. How could you not?
Hmm.. I wonder if anyone's registered www.theblu-rayforums.com and www.theblu-raytimes yet :p
dco_chris
20-10-2003, 19:53
Probably not. Unlike VHS I think that I will be able to stand DVD picture quality even after HD stuff is common.
rubber duck
20-10-2003, 19:55
I don’t think a new format is needed just yet. DVD was such a huge improvement over VHS (could not afford LaserDisc) don’t think Hi-Def will look a lot better than standard DVD on my 32" set. Plus there are so many movies that haven’t been released on standard DVD yet.
Originally posted by Whiggles
I plan on going to high-def as soon as it takes off. The DVD market is becoming a bit too "mainstream". I'm not trying to be a snob or anything: it's just that I really yearn for a format that only a small number of people are into, so each release really counts
I remember the start of DVD and the major lack of quility movies. Sure I will upgrade to Hi-Def just dont see me doing it for at least 2 years.
I don't think I will. I'm not at all keen on gigantic televisions (my 28" does me fine), so the overall difference is hardly worth the bother.
if it does come out in this country, that's when i'll buy a projector. and i think i'll replace my fav movies, and any new ones from then onward
Fozzybear
20-10-2003, 20:32
When hi-def comes out we'll go through another period of only being able to buy a few films that really show off the technology. There's still stuff that's only just coming out on DVD now - do we really want the studios to go back and start from scratch re-launching their "premier" titles, which will put back films that would just be coming up for release preparation. Probably would mean another 5 years to wait for decent (non-action puff movies) stuff to appear on the new format. In any case I can't see me upgrading much beyond my 28" tv (would like 32" but only when my current set - less than a year old - expires), which makes hi-def not exactly beneficial to me (unless they use it to cram 24 series 8 on one disc).
Would you buy Hi-Def if the only films you could buy to play on it were The League of Extroadinary Gentlemen and Bad Boys II? :D
If you need a projector or a plasma to use it then it's going to be a fairly niche product until hi-def displays reach the price of CRT TVs, which suggests that it won't take off too quickly. If you tell people "it's like DVD, but better quality - only you need a projector or plasma setup" than most will probably say that DVD is good enough for them, thank you very much. I have to agree - until we reach a point where a large section of the population are using plasma (or whatever) then there is no major benefit in an upgraded replacement to dvd.
Better picture quality on standard dvd would be good, as would be fitting lots more on one disc, but if the picture is only slightly better on regular TVs and the extra space is just filled with press documentaries and trailers (as is the case on many dvds now) then it's hard to see a reason to buy into a new format and start my film collection yet again.
thescrounger
20-10-2003, 20:36
I wonder if it will take off though in the UK, current DVD is so widely adopted now.
Originally posted by thescrounger
I wonder if it will take off though in the UK, current DVD is so widely adopted now.
Yeah, thats what I reckon. Similarly to CDs, I think DVD will be around for a while yet. The average guy on the street won't see the point in upgrading for at least another 5/6 years. Much as would like to say I wouldn't upgrade, I probably will, but not for all films (although I have been buying DVDs since '98, if I can squeeze 10 years out of the format I will be happy).
as long as we can buy the disks from other countries then it'll be fine.
i wouldnt have bought a dvd player as early as i did if i could only play the crap they released in this country at the time
Grandmaster
20-10-2003, 21:13
Until high definition TV sets arrive and are a mass market force, there is no point in launching a high definition movie playback system. Even my 1024x768 plasma screen will not playback true HD at native resolution.
Confucius
20-10-2003, 21:28
I'll certainly get into hi-def after they are launched Stateside, though unlike DVD I'll likely wait a year before buying a player over there. My first DVD player cost $420 in 1997, a year later the feature count had gone up and the price had halved.
Like others I would treat the releases as I treated Lasrdisc - picking and choosing only a select few titles.
Fortunately the majority of DVDs in my collection are of television series, which are unlikely to see release (and in many cases benefit) from a hi-def release given the source material.
Mmm Hi-Def Superbit titles. :|
Michael Mackenzie
20-10-2003, 21:51
Just out of interest, everyone here who's saying they won't bother: how many of you also said that when DVD was coming out? ;)
I don't think huge numbers of titles will need upgrading unless you only have recent releases. The fact is that many of the older releases are limited by the quality of film rather than DVD. The improvement would be minimal.
I think I'll just start buying new releases in high-def when it appears and leave my back catalogue as it is with few exceptions.
dco_chris
20-10-2003, 22:24
Originally posted by Whiggles
Just out of interest, everyone here who's saying they won't bother: how many of you also said that when DVD was coming out? ;)
Not me. VHS was awful, fuzzy picture, hissy sound, DVD's were a breath of fresh air (I was too young and didn't have enough money at the time to get a laser disc player). I will get a HDDVD player but unless I have a projector by then, I just don't think that the difference will justify rebuying my entire collection.
Fozzybear
20-10-2003, 23:23
Originally posted by Whiggles
Just out of interest, everyone here who's saying they won't bother: how many of you also said that when DVD was coming out? ;)
Not quite as simple as that though. DVD had serious limitations when it was released, mainly because the mastering of MPEG2 was not well understood and so the early discs didn't look too good. Also it was uncertain if DVD-Video would emerge as a set standard, so there was a definite wait-and-see attitude. Once the encoding improved and it became apparent that this was the standard format, DVD really started to take off.
With Hi-def we know there is likely to be a large improvement, but you have to replace your entire video reproduction setup to get the benefits. Now that it has matured, DVD gives benefits to those who use standard TVs and see the limitations of VHS and, to a lesser extent LD, but Hi-Def will really give these benefits to those with hi-def displays only.
Why, when DVD offers acceptable picture and longevity, would someone upgrade if they won't be using a display capable of resolving the difference? To buy a player and a proper hi-def display is likely to cost a small fortune for the first few years. Only when the cost drops to close to that of current 625 line kit will there be any great demand. Until then it's likely that the main buyers will be either the rich, the technofreaks or the elitists. At some point I'm sure that hi-def will take over, but for these reasons I can see it spending quite some time as a niche product in the UK.
I feel no strong reason to ditch dvd because it's good enough for my needs - I upgraded to dvd as soon as it became apparent that it would give benefits over vhs and LD, and now I can record to DVD as well. If I keep my 28" tv (as most people will) what are the benefits of hi-def? Why should I upgrade? Although you can fit a lot more on a disc at 625 line resolution, the cost is likely to be as high or higher than dvd. I can't see a studio releasing a box set of 6 dvds for £70 and also on a single hi-def disc for less. Sure it's one disc instead of 6, but I quite like my boxsets and I don't really mind too much that I have to change the disc every four hours. ;)
kiran_mk2
20-10-2003, 23:33
I can't see it taking over for at least ten years. Blu-ray is likely to keep using MPEG2 simply with less compression to eat up the extra space. I doubt the manufacturers would be stupid enough to effectively tell Joe Public that all those DVDs they paid £19.99 or £24.99 each for all need to be replaced because the "new" versions might look slightly better on their 28"ws TV.
Look at the take up of D-VHS - I doubt many of the enthusiasts on the forums have a player/films yet it apparrently offers a higher quality to DVD.
Squirrel God
21-10-2003, 00:08
I've always said to myself - no, can't rebuy my DVD collection as Hi-Def. No way.
However, I was fortunate enough to see some Hi-Def material recently, and it blew me away. I kid you not when I say that, afterwards, DVDs looked distinctly blurry and lacking in detail. The difference was as stark to me as that between VHS and DVD. Seeing the two side-by-side, or one after the other, you can't help but notice the differences, which are not apparent otherwise.
So if you really want to stick to your DVD collection and not have the urge to upgrade to Hi-Def, do not under any circumstances view any Hi-Def material. It will mess with your mind :nuts:
Having said that, I agree with others that it will be hard for Hi-Def to establish a foothold here, certainly not for a long time. Unless the software is there, and it's cheap enough, not many people will bother. I certainly wouldn't envisage getting a Hi-Def player just to spin 20 or so disks. Betamax vs VHS .... SACD vs DVD-A vs CD .... Apple vs IBM ... it's all in the software.
You can currently get good quality small projectors which are 1/4 HD resolution - i.e. half HD resolution horizontally and vertically - 960x540 pixels. I'm thinking of the Panasonic models in particular - they cost around £800-£1200, depending on brightness - see the Projector thread or search for "AE300".
It turns out that this 1/4 HD resolution is actually almost identical to a UK widescreen TV. A consequence is that on any decent widescreen TV, HD would look much better and sharper than DVD. One reason is that many artifacts on DVD are 2 pixel by 2 pixel blocks (because that is the Chroma resolution of DVD - it's 4:2:0 colour encoded) - so in some respects DVDs are only 360x288 resolution.
Higher resolution projectors, e.g. 1280x720, are now mainstream and cost around £2k-£3k typically, i.e. comparable to (or less than) most plasmas. These are nice with any source, but would be particularly good with HD.
Strange how the market works, though. A newly introduced in 2003 projector capable of actual HD resolution (1920x1080) costs more than £20k. Digital projector prices roughly halve every 2 years, so I reckon it will be about 2015 before HD resolution projectors are cheaper than CRT!
captainshadwell
21-10-2003, 00:36
I suppose if it became the norm like dvd then I would become a sheep and follow the masses. But I cant see that happening unless there is such a marked diff between dvd and hdvd like the diff between video and dvd. I know pj's and rptv's have been round a while but the first time i saw a dvd through a projector was the first time home cinema at a reasonable price became a realistic potential. Ive def got the bug and if a new format could convince me the way dvd did then hell.....why not.
CS
rainbird
21-10-2003, 01:11
If they brought out Hi-Def DVD would you replace your movie collection (again)?
Very doubtful. The gain in picture quality from a good DVD transfer to HD is not going to be anything like as spectacular as some people are claiming. People are assuming (understandably) that HD is going to offer a leap in quality comparable to going from VHS to DVD but it won't be like that.
A key consideration which should be borne in mind is that most companies can't afford, or don't want, to spend money remastering the material they've got right now; instead, they use whatever transfer they've got, smother it with DVNR and chuck it out on disc. The studios are little different in this regard; a modest number of selected titles get the full-blown restoration treatment and become showcase DVD's, while the rest make do will little or no remastering.
With television - which has been the fastest growing sector of the DVD software market - there's only so much you can do given the quality of the source material. With older broadcast TV material - shot either on composite tape or 16mm film it won't really look any different on HD than it will on a good remastered/encoded DVD. Bear in mind also that the original elements may either no longer exist or simply be unavailable to the company.
I think you'll see exactly the same practices going on by the film and television companies if HD ever takes off as a mass market media format. Sure, there'll be some stunning examples produced to showcase the format but they will not be representative of what you'll see the other 99% of the time.
Originally posted by Whiggles
Just out of interest, everyone here who's saying they won't bother: how many of you also said that when DVD was coming out? ;)
No never said that but I only owned 30 videos. There is only so much money you can justifibly spend chasing the latest fad.
By the time Hi-Def comes out, a lot of people who own large DVD collections will also be settled down with children. Now, I can assure you, once that happens small improvments in picture quality will seem like an irrelevance and the increased cost to chase the fad will not be justified. Unless, of course, you have plenty of money anyway, in which case good luck.
Originally posted by Whiggles
Just out of interest, everyone here who's saying they won't bother: how many of you also said that when DVD was coming out? ;)
Took me a while to get into it. What put me off was the lack of every single one of the major titles I wanted. Try explaining to someone without a DVD player that you can't buy Star Wars, they'll think you're :cuckoo: .
I had about 30 VHS. I consider myself a film collector. Often though I like to watch parts of films, VHS could not fulfill that brief. DVD did in spades.
And to all those who said "I doubt hi def will look any better on my 32 inch TV," my understanding is that it will look NO BETTER. Hi Def has over 2000 lines of resolution IIRC. Your TV can only do 520 max (leaving aside teletext etc). You will need a new display and you will need a new DVD player.
Also what sound format will they decide on?? TBH wouln't PCM surround actually be better? Will they come up with 7.1 uncompressed PCM surround? Result: new amp.
Lottery win? Yep I'd buy one but I suspect it'll be 10 years until I can even replace my DVD collection with all the titles I want even IF money was no object.
Originally posted by Whiggles
I plan on going to high-def as soon as it takes off. The DVD market is becoming a bit too "mainstream". I'm not trying to be a snob or anything: it's just that I really yearn for a format that only a small number of people are into, so each release really counts -- a bit like laserdisc. I doubt I'll replace all my films, but I'll definitely buy high-def versions of my favorites (Suspiria, Pinocchio, Scream, The Iron Giant, etc.) when they come out. I think, really, that it depends on how much of an improvement high-def DVD is over standard DVD, but given that I'm already painfully aware of the limits of MPEG2, I think high-def is definitely going to be light-years ahead.
Of course, if I won the lottery, I'd definitely buy all my DVDs again in high-def.
you sir are a :dork: :dork: :dork:
:lol:
Grandmaster
21-10-2003, 11:01
Originally posted by rainbird
Very doubtful. The gain in picture quality from a good DVD transfer to HD is not going to be anything like as spectacular as some people are claiming. People are assuming (understandably) that HD is going to offer a leap in quality comparable to going from VHS to DVD but it won't be like that.
Hmmmmmmmm well in resolution terms, the jump from DVD to HD is pretty much the same as the resolution jump from VHS to DVD - a doubling of both horizontal and vertical resolution. Of course, a lot of VHS analogue woes (like tape degradation and dodgy heads) wouldn't be factored in.
The problem is that DVD is pretty much exploiting the maximum resolution of current CRT screens - there would be very little to gain by moving to HD. Also, as stated previously, the TV content appearing on DVD would not gain too much unless it was seriously remastered - highly unlikely to happen.
For HD to be worthwhile, we need HD screens. Sure, you would get some of the effect by using a projector or a plasma screen, but even these are not currently using the full resolution of HD (though I would love to connect up an HD source to my Pioneer plasma as the native resolution picture from my PC is outstanding).
And even if you do have HD screens, you're going to need serious kit to run it and of course seriously expensive cables! DVD was easily interfaced with current AV kit of any and every level. HD just doesn't really cut the mustard in this regard and certainly in the UK (and most probably everywhere else too) it's destined to remain elitist technology for those willing to put the investment in.
Originally posted by Grandmaster
and of course seriously expensive cables!
not necessarily, HD will no doubt use an advanced form of the all digital signal path used in formats like DVI and HDMI, and the majority of people using DVI are hooking up their PJs with £15 DVI cables
Surely you've also got to consider the resolving power of the human eye. If you're sitting the correct distance from a well configured prog-scan dvd image you can get a superb picture.
If you double the resolution, will your eyes actually be able to see the full difference without moving closer to the screen and resulting in a film being like watching a game of tennis from the boundary line?
[/B][/QUOTE]
Originally posted by Grandmaster
Hmmmmmmmm well in resolution terms, the jump from DVD to HD is pretty much the same as the resolution jump from VHS to DVD - a doubling of both horizontal and vertical resolution. Of course, a lot of VHS analogue woes (like tape degradation and dodgy heads) wouldn't be factored in.
Actually, vertically resolution VHS and DVD are the same, 480 lines for NTSC, 576 for PAL. Horizontally, where VHS is analogue and DVD is digital, is where the big difference is.
Originally posted by Grandmaster
The problem is that DVD is pretty much exploiting the maximum resolution of current CRT screens - there would be very little to gain by moving to HD. Also, as stated previously, the TV content appearing on DVD would not gain too much unless it was seriously remastered - highly unlikely to happen.
Yep, although brand new US tv shows at least are post-produced on hi-def, for older shows, even if they were filmed on film, will have been post produced at NTSC or PAL resolution, hence other then mpeg-2 encoding issues, DVD is as good as its ever going to get for them.
CLH: Presumably they will use something like Meridian Lossless Packing, ie a lossless compression scheme for the sound.
oooh - provocation, Warren Alexander.
The HD format is explicitly designed so that the resolution is equal to the resolving power of an (adult) human eye, sitting at the correct distance from the screen (i.e. so that the screen subtends a 30 degree angle in your field of vision).
That's not to say that an even higher resolution wouldn't look better still, as obviously your eye does not have its rods and cones in a rectangular array - also some people like to sit closer to the screen.
For example, the IMAX version of Matrix: Reloaded was something like 4000x2500 pixels (some :dork: please look up the correct figure for me?). When you see it, you certainly appreciate all of that. Admittedly you are slightly closer to the screen than the 30 degree angle I mentioned - it is probably more like 50 degrees in an IMAX.
("subtends" - what does it mean? If you hold your arms out straight and point your arms to the opposite sides of the screen, then your arms are at an angle, right? The angle that the screen 'subtends' is that angle between your arms. It is a way of describing how much of your field of view the screen covers, whether it is a 28" telly from 3 feet away or a 120 foot wide IMAX screen from the middle row.)
Niceguygeoff
21-10-2003, 11:52
I'll get into Hi-Def without a doubt, but for the UK it's still years away. I certainly won't go the early adopter route by importing Hi-Def hardware/software from the States, even though 'official' HD-DVD will appear much faster over there. I know the format is still bogged down in red tape, but a de facto HD-DVD standard will arrive in the US/Japan long before Europe.
As for replacing my entire collection, I did it with VHS to LD, then LD to DVD, so SD-DVD to HD-DVD will be a natural progression for a :dork: like me.
Originally posted by Mr Nice
CLH: Presumably they will use something like Meridian Lossless Packing, ie a lossless compression scheme for the sound. [/B][/QUOTE]
I did wonder. No-one else on here appears to appreciate it's not just going to be a visual issue!
Niceguygeoff
21-10-2003, 12:02
CLH, I too would love to see a higher quality audio format appear on HD-DVD. However, I remember reading somewhere that Hi-Def video (as it stands) will take up so much disc space using the proposed systems (AOD, Blu-Ray etc) that compressed audio will still be a factor. But don't quote me on that.
robzinski
21-10-2003, 12:12
Nah, i'll stick with my DVD's. They do the job needed to watch a film at home, any more will be overkill.
Originally posted by Solidstate
I got my Indiana Jones DVDs through the post from Canada today and it got me thinking about all my old Video box sets (now banished to the loft). They are effectively worthless now and I couldn't probably even give them away. You'd be surprised - a mate of mine recently flogged off most of his old videos on eBay, in lots of three. These went for between £5 and £25 (!!)... he even flogged his Back to the future trilogy on VHS for £20 before buying the DVDs for £17.99 :lol:
And to answer the question: most likely, but definitely for a small number of favourites!
I never used to buy VHS, I used to record films from TV and Sky. The quality of an original VHS film and of a film recoreded from the tv was the same, so i didn't think it was worth spending a tenner on a video.
But when DVD came out I was blown away, started buying loads of 'em. One of the major factors that made me buy DVD was that the picture quality didn't deteriorate with time.
I'm going to stick with DVD.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.