Video formats
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=88903
Printed Date: February 01 2025 at 15:51
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Video formats
Posted By: smartpatrol
Subject: Video formats
Date Posted: August 09 2012 at 23:09
|
VHS for me. Got over 100 :D
------------- http://bit.ly/1kqTR8y" rel="nofollow">  The greatest record label of all time! |
Replies:
Posted By: Barah86
Date Posted: August 10 2012 at 03:38
|
Come on we all love the old VHS but the quality is bad... 1080p Blu Ray movies looks amazing on my tv and sounds best so i'll go with that. ------------- Death seed blind man's greed Poets' starving children bleed Nothing he's got he really needs Twenty first century schizoid man. 
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: August 10 2012 at 03:43
|
I do have many VHS tapes, but the quality is horrible. DVD for me, until I get a blueray player I suppose. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: dreadpirateroberts
Date Posted: August 10 2012 at 05:52
|
The difference between DVD and Bluray for me is meaningless due to the quality of my eye sight, so I won't rush to upgrade. I can still get by on VHS - I like its durability when compared to some disks. Aside from the dust etc VHS seems more sturdy - when I drop a cassette it doesn't scratch. Also, most VHS casing doesn't have the fault of DVD casing, which seems to encourage cracks in the disc, especially when you don't feel like putting a plastic imprint in your thumb to remove the DVD. Having said that I've only cracked 2 DVDs in quite a few years, though I've cracked 0 VHS in longer. ------------- We are men of action. Lies do not become us. http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/" rel="nofollow - JazzMusicArchives. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 10 2012 at 06:43
|
Blu-ray is pretty much a failure, 6 years since it's launch and it hasn't really taken off even though many people have HD TVs. Winning formats are usually very quickly adopted and this isn't the case for blu-ray.
I'll stick with DVD just because but I use hard disc recording most of the time. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: August 10 2012 at 07:50
I only started buying video stuff when I finally had a TV home in the early 00's... So i kind of missed the VHS-Betamax revolution (though I do have a tape deck as well for recording purposes (I find DVD-r recording too f. ..g complicated)
Sooo I started buying (and sometimes renting/borrowing) DVDs (90% music-related), but will probably/certainly not up-grade to Blu-Ray.
Yeah, I don't find the difference meaningful enough to splurge on a new video & screen system... my TV is still the 4/3 cathodic tube format, and I like it just fine that way.... Don't feel tempted to go flat screen either.... I can watch my old 4/3 from almost any angle (except from behind the set)... Sooo I won't hurry, either... And since BluRay is not a success (I'm kind of surprised by Dean's information), then it'll probably be dead by the time I'll have to change my video system.
the problem with VHS is that quality new material is rather hard to come by... GF works entirely on VHS (big taper), and if averagequality new cassettes are still available, the choice of VHS deck is really minimal and low...
------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
dreadpirateroberts wrote:Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: August 10 2012 at 07:57
|
^Non compressed audio on Bluray. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: August 10 2012 at 19:06
| .mkv |
Posted By: dreadpirateroberts
Date Posted: August 11 2012 at 01:19
Yeah, new VHS is hard to come by here. BluRay did better than HD DVD at least  ------------- We are men of action. Lies do not become us. http://www.jazzmusicarchives.com/" rel="nofollow - JazzMusicArchives. |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: August 11 2012 at 14:00
|
8mm and 16mm. I have my own little cinema room. |
Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: August 11 2012 at 14:02
Maybe it's different in Europe, but everybody I know has mostly blu-ray in their collection here |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: August 11 2012 at 14:10
Not sure i would call it a failure. Blu'ray is widely available. Players are getting cheaper as are the discs. I don't own one yet but it is not beyond reason that one day I will. But until I get a HD TV there is no point. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: August 11 2012 at 14:21
|
6 years of Blu Ray? Already? I think having noticed their existence only since a couple of years. On the other hand, I only have ten (10) DVDs... |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 11 2012 at 14:47
|
Sure there are differences between the USA, Japan and Europe - the main difference is NTSC and PAL - compared to NTSC Blu-ray is a big improvement, but the comparison to PAL isn't as great, PAL is already high(ish) definition, especially when viewed on our (on average) smaller format TVs. When I first visited the states I was taken aback by how "low-res" NTSC was. [for the technically minded NTSC is 525 lines, PAL is 625 while blu-ray is 720 or 1080 ... as you can imagine, the jump from 525 to 720 is marked while from 625 to 720 will be less noticable]. While the NTSC market is large, the PAL market is larger.
But blu-ray hasn't surpassed or replaced DVD in 6 years so I doubt that it never will, the only reason blu-ray is in many homes is because it snuck-in on the back of the PS-3 - Sony won the HD format battle but hasn't won the won the format war.
Now it looks like it will be suffering serious competition from internet video streaming on demand from services such as Netflix and LoveFilm. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 11 2012 at 14:50
------------- What? |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 11 2012 at 15:16
|
I have tons of blurays but even more dvds. There's just more of what I like available in dvd (documentaries, obscure classics and horror movies like Hammer films and many more). For recent movies I always buy the blu but for older ones sometimes it doesn't even pay off (an old b/w movie in blu ray looks just slightly better than on dvd, if it actually does, especially if you have a tv or blu ray or receiver that can upconvert properly). Blu ray will be the last physical format. Just as with audio, I'm not following the streaming train. ------------- 
|
Posted By: rdtprog
Date Posted: August 11 2012 at 15:59
Every video formats is due to disappear or become a archive format, it's not that it is a failure, but that it's replace by another format. I am sure will see a improvement of the Blu-Ray or something with a new name, can't stop technology. In the meantime, i keep my favorites VHS and DVD and buy the Blu-Ray if it's available. It's true that the Blu-Ray has made his entry slowly and still not the universal format, because not everyone has the equipment, but no one can argue that it's the ideal format if you have the home cinema with the giant screen. There is so many alternative to watch movies on line now that, the future of the Blu-Ray and all formats are in danger. |
Posted By: Eria Tarka
Date Posted: August 12 2012 at 00:35
| I own a blu-ray player and only one blu-ray disk. But I have a lot of DVDs so I guess thats what I prefer. |
Posted By: smartpatrol
Date Posted: August 12 2012 at 18:41
|
sh*t, i forgot Laserdisc!
------------- http://bit.ly/1kqTR8y" rel="nofollow"> The greatest record label of all time! |
Posted By: Andy Webb
Date Posted: August 12 2012 at 20:15
Blu-ray are only good if you have a great setup. DVDs are better for everything else. I have ISO rips of all my DVDs and Blu-rays as well which are nice as well. I think it's something like 3 terabytes of movies on my NAS; about 600 movies all together.  I'd say DVD since is the most compatible and gives decent quality. And LOL VHS. God those things were awful. ------------- http://ow.ly/8ymqg" rel="nofollow">  
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: August 12 2012 at 20:32
I have never watched anything on Blu-Ray. We have a cheap DVD player and a bunch of DVDs. I ain't paying again for the same sh*t in nicer colors. I don't need to see Jack Black's sweat that clearly. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 12 2012 at 22:57
|
I don't need to see Jack Black even in ultra-low definition. -------------
|
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 12:50
"sh*t in nicer colors"? Yeah, neither I would like to see that.  |
Posted By: Bj-1
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 13:32
|
DVD. f**k Blu-Ray. ------------- RIO/AVANT/ZEUHL - The best thing you can get with yer pants on! |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 13:39
|
The language in this thread is ... colourful, can we tone it down a little please? ------------- What? |
Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 13:43
Yes, yes, yes, no
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 14:37
|
I'm genuinely surprised. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 15:12
|
I know a lot of people who buy Blu Rays exclusively now too Dean.
------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 15:18
How many? |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 15:24
|
4 or 5 maybe?
------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 15:43
Well, if I say that I know at least a dozen of people who buy exclusively DVD's, would that be significant from a statistical point of view? |
Posted By: rdtprog
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 15:50
| I can see now, why i have never seen a picture of a Blu-Ray cover on all Live concerts reviews on PA |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 15:53
|
I think current figures would be interesting. In http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/story/2012-01-10/blu-ray-sales-2011/52473310/1" rel="nofollow - 2011, in the USA (by far the largest uptake market) blu-ray totalled $2b to DVD's $6.8b ... given that Blu-ray is more expensive than DVD the numbers of discs sold would be even more than the 1:3.4 ratio would imply - a conservative guess would be what? 5 times more DVDs than Blu-ray (10 times?). The figures for Europe would be considerably lower (for a comparable total population). ------------- What? |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 15:54
It depends your knowledge of the multimedia collections of the people that you know. Personally, I only know the intimacies of the video collections of a dozen of my friends. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 15:58
|
DVDs work fine for me. We have a handful of Blu-Ray discs, and they look great, but I don't really care about picture quality that much. The only thing that cheeses me off is how some DVDs make you sit through a bunch of introductory crap before you can get to what you want to watch. Great - impressive graphics, creative opening menu sequence, but I just want to watch the damn movie.
------------- My other avatar is a Porsche It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased. -Kehlog Albran |
Posted By: AlexDOM
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 16:11
| Love the vintage feel of VHS, dvds are solid too, but with a good set up (its a must), blue ray is an experience. I mean watching say Sucker Punch on an hd tv, with a great soundsystem and hd tv is vastly superior over dvd. The quality of blue ray over dvd is much more noticeable in newer movies... |
Posted By: NotAProghead
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 16:23
I often see new releases when the same programme is offered as 2DVD or single Blu-ray disc. In such cases Blu-ray is cheaper.
Even now most videos released on DVD and Blu-ray (quite often on DVD only). So we usually choose DVD cover. When exclusively Blu-ray editions appear you'll see their covers on PA.  ------------- Who are you and who am I to say we know the reason why... (D. Gilmour) |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 13 2012 at 17:12
 -------------
|
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: August 14 2012 at 12:47
The... "intimacies of video collections"??? "Intimacies", really? That sounds a bit raunchy (or have I a dirty mind?) |
Posted By: sleeper
Date Posted: August 14 2012 at 15:54
|
DVD's for me but I dont tend to buy many films on any format, watching them once tends to be enough for me as I can usually remember them pretty well and feel no need to watch again (the exception being really good films and TV series). Because of this I tend to rent on my LoveFilm subscription. The problem is my PS3 recently went Yellow Light of Death on me and since it's out of warrenty it'll cost me £120 to get it refurbed, which I cant afford so the few Blu-Ray's I have are going to be collecting dust for a sometime to come now. Meanwhile my old PS2 still soldiers on so I can watch my DVD's fine, even if it's not the best picture quality. ------------- Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005 
|
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: August 15 2012 at 11:30
Couple of interesting points there - I've worked for a large film company for 8 years now in the home entertainment side (ie video/DVD/BluRay etc); when I first joined, VHS was in the process of being elbowed out by DVD & that format is no longer being manufactured, let alone sold... then in came BluRay. Over the last 5 years or so, DVD & BR have happily sold side by side with BluRay by no means outselling DVD (quite the opposite, in fact). So far as sales are concerned, these are definitely dropping on the physical medium side as many switch to the streaming sites; definite comparison to CD vs Downloads, I'd say. Personally - I do prefer BluRay; to my aging eyes, looks better, sounds better (not quite the difference between VHS/DVD, but still a large improvement). ------------- 
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012 |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 15 2012 at 13:00
Yes, this is born out by the http://www.ivf-video.org/new/public/media/European_Overview_2011.pdf" rel="nofollow - published figures , though the industry tends to put a spin on it to make it all sound buoyant - "57% increase in Blu-ray sales" proclaimed the headlines in 2011.... when what that meant was €1 in every €12 spent on disc media was on blu-ray whereas the year before it was €1 in every €16... in a market where total sales had dropped by 8.3% over the year.
In Europe in 2011 http://www.ivf-video.org/new/public/media/Europe_Key_Data_2011.pdf" rel="nofollow - 77% of household owned a DVD player compared to 3% who owned a Blu-ray (including all those "stealth" sales via the PS-3).... i.e. 25 times more DVD players than Blu-ray - the figures also show that the average price per blu-ray disc was €18.32 compared to €10.58 for DVD. (Sorry Eugene - maybe you can find some titles cheaper on Blu-ray but when you add up the total revenue and divide that by the total number of titles sold then the averages do not reflect that - cheap DVDs are still cheaper than cheap blu-rays)
Putting all that lot together ... 25 times more people are spending 12 times more on a product that is roughly half as expensive ... or basically the number of titles sold per machine is the same regardless of the format.
If blu-ray was "taking off" or replacing DVD I would have expected those figures to have been radically different, even in a declining market.
------------- What? |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: August 15 2012 at 13:14
|
How long did it take DVD to pass VHS?
------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 15 2012 at 13:17
/edit - I suspect that VHS held out for that long because it was easier for recording broadcast programming than DVD-R - had HDD appeared earlier it would have demised earlier.
/edit 2- checking up, it seems that HDD recorders were complace by 2003 - they were probably the final nail in the VHS coffin. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: August 15 2012 at 14:00
|
I would say that's a pretty good benchmark and that the VHS to DVD conversion should have experienced more inertia than the DVD to Blu Ray. The one factor I could see having a demonstrable affect would be time of use. How long were VHSs prominently used before the introduction of DVDs? I think that's relevant. People may be more reluctant to switch to a new media unless a certain sort of critical time has passed since the previous conversion. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: August 15 2012 at 15:08
|
It looks better, and nowadays costs marginally more. The machines themselves have dropped in price considerably. If you have a HD tv and like to watch movies in disc with good quality, I don't see any reason not to upgrade (provided you have the means to do it, of course). -------------
|
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: August 15 2012 at 16:25
Goddamn, I'm not going to buy a new machine every year just to watch Transformers 3 in a "Brand New Awesome" format, would it be called NVD4, MP5+1, Gold-Ray or other rubbish name!  And I'm not drunk. Not today. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 15 2012 at 18:15
I certainly have a minidisc recorder/player and a zip-drive media player stored away in the attic and they came and went very quickly with very little (read: no) investment in pre-recorded media to play on them. 8-track machines and digital cameras that used Compact Flash or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SmartMedia" rel="nofollow - SmartMedia memory cards (and more recently Olympus xD cards), iPods with micro-drives and PCs with Bernoulli Boxes and Hifi with DAT tapes - all of those were superseded long before any critical time period had passed or any user libraries had been accumulated.
What is evident is that with each successful change to a new media (whether that's Compact Cassette, DVD or 3½" floppy discs) there has often been one characteristic of that media that's made it more attractive than what existed before, and that was not necessarily the most obvious characteristic or the one the designers and marketing people expected it to be. The winning word is 'application' - each had one killer application that made it more desirable (but not necessarily better) than what went before - Blu-ray doesn't have that - all it offers is higher definition (and as I've said, in Europe that not a big improvement, it's slight improvement), but to all intents and purposes it's just an expensive form of DVD in a different box - to most consumers it's the difference between hardback and paperback books. ------------- What? |
Posted By: rdtprog
Date Posted: August 16 2012 at 01:43
Oh no, you don't have any money left after you bought your new mobile phone, ipod, blueberry etc.... |
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: August 16 2012 at 02:15
I'd disagree the difference isn't all that marked; I do find BR to be considerably higher quality, both in picture quality and sound than DVDs - I don't have a top of the range player, I don't have a top of the range TV, so it's not that (maybe my aging eyes just want to see an improvement, so they're telling me it's better, but I don't think so). Another improvement (which I was very sceptical about) is the better picture I get on existing DVDs when played on the BR machine (upscaling - another useless word for the dictionary); not a huge amount, but again, noticeable. Where BR does fall down (and this is not a fault in the technology, but the manufacturing) is on occasion where I've bought an older film (eg The Usual Suspects) on BR, the transfer hasn't been done very well at all & instead of high definition, all you get is more noticeable grain. It is well worth reading reviews if you are buying an older movie on BR to make sure it's been transferred well. -------------
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012 |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 16 2012 at 03:50
------------- What? |
Posted By: rdtprog
Date Posted: August 16 2012 at 05:58
Why the film industry waste any money producing Blu-Ray products if people are not switching to this format? |
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: August 16 2012 at 06:10
They're already set up to do so & the production cost of a BluRay is virtually the same as a DVD once the initial investment's been made; not sure what it is at the moment, but a couple of years ago the actual cost of manufacturing an individual DVD was only around 15/20p -------------
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012 |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: August 16 2012 at 06:24
|
If you have a huge TV...I mean massive, then the difference is far more noticable. Or at least the limitations of DVD are. Plus bluray has lossless audio which some people swear by.
Also Bluray has far more extras, which are not being put on DVd's these days. The release of far fewer 2 disc DVd's attests to this. If you want specual editions, it has to be Blu ray now. I feel that bluray will slowly take over, but DVD will also exist for a long time to come. As you can play DVDs in a BR machine this is enevitable. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 16 2012 at 06:28
------------- What? |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 16 2012 at 06:41
Without getting into ABX double-blind testing it's all subjective anyway, Lossless doesn't necessarily mean better (which is why there are so many lossless foramts out there).
Does anyone watch the extras? I mean really watch them.... I watched Robert Rodriguez demonstrate how to make puerco pibil off the One Upon A Time In Mexico DVD once, then I don't buy a film for the extras anyway, I buy a film to watch the film. ------------- What? |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: August 16 2012 at 07:43
Yes ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: August 16 2012 at 07:47
I used to watch the extras all the time; for example, some of them on the Lord Of The Rings extended sets were genuinely interesting as were those on Saving Private Ryan, Gettysburg (the older one, not the new TV one) & Schindler's List - the problem is, especially when you're dealing with technical & CGI led movies, the extras tend to tell you how it was all put together - it's like watching a really impressive magic trick, then the magician shows you how it was done; takes away the magic, somehow.
Generally now, I'm not too worried about them (nice to have if you want them though) -------------
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012 |