One question, one poll, separate topics.
Jul. 31st, 2010 01:27 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
One question:
Can someone explain to me why I should get a Blu-Ray player, and why Blu-Ray is better than not? I'm not going to be buying one anytime soon (no money for either the player or the HDTV I understand it's only worth buying a Blu-Ray player for), but I would like to understand why it's better.
I understand tech-talk, so don't be afraid to use big words, big numbers, and intialisms.
One poll:
[Poll #1599741]
no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 06:31 pm (UTC)All I know about bluray is that it's fancy. When I was a kid, we watched our DVDs and we LIKED it, dammit! You blurays get off my lawn.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 06:32 pm (UTC)And yes, go [my age bracket] too!
no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 06:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 06:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 06:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 06:47 pm (UTC)But for something like Mad Men, if you've got an HD screen to display it, it'll be beautiful with the SD discs, but with the HD discs, it'll be beautiful, and you'll see every strand of January Jones' hair and the exact texture of Peggy's coat. For DVD home use, Blu Ray is the consumer medium, and the way to take full advantage of an HD TV set, but if you don't have one, Blu Ray is pointless, because an SD screen can only play SD.
Some players "upconvert" SD for HD, which means they make the image bigger so it can play on the screen, but it doesn't actually make the image clearer, because it's like turning an 800x600 wallpaper into a 1600x1200. If that makes any sense. HD is to SD what IMAX is to a regular big screen. You could presumably shrink down an IMAX shot film for a regular screen, or project a regular shot film on an IMAX screen, but either way kind of defeats the point
no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 07:03 pm (UTC)Regular TV is 480 lines of resolution. HD is 720 to 1080. The letter after refers to the scanning method. I = interlaced scanning (first the odd number lines are displayed, then the evens) .P= progressive scanning (all the lines are displayed in order from top to bottom).
After you've had HD for a while, regular TV looks grainy and bad.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 07:08 pm (UTC)I do know that Blu-Ray discs can hold much, much more data than your (current) standard format DVD disks. So, for example, when I wanted to buy the new Star Trek movie on DVD, I made frowny faces upon finding out that there were a lot more extras on the Blu-Ray version, which I couldn't get because my player doesn't have the right spectrum of light to read the disks!
I also don't have a giant, fancy tv, but really, it is the DVD extras that I care about.no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 07:18 pm (UTC):nod: I know that actors and news anchors are unhappy with HD because they can no longer appear flawless. ;) Maybe it'll be good for people in the long run to see that. (One can dream.)
Yeah interlaced v progressive is a long-time blargh from vidding.
I won't have HD for a long, long time, so I guess the only reason to get a Blu-Ray right now would be for the extra extras. :D
no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 07:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 07:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 07:25 pm (UTC)Cnet has a quick about blu-ray vs dvd (http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-13817_7-6462511-2.html)
no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 07:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 07:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 07:54 pm (UTC)I've bought the HD versions of both seasons of WC from iTunes...and the quality is INSANE. It doesn't have the extras, but $30 for the season, as opposed to nearly $60 for the set? I don't care about the HD extras that much (got the SD discs via Netflix for the extras)
Just my $.02, adjusted for inflation?
no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 08:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 08:27 pm (UTC)seriously -- "planet earth" on blu-ray was like nature porn.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 08:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 09:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-31 09:37 pm (UTC)The thing that annoys me about it is that i feel I need to buy everything twice or decide--all other TVs only have regular DVD players in the house, so even renting a Bluray means I can only watch it in one place.
Oddly we have two BR devices on that TV, bc the PS3 doubles as one too...
But yes, on films where the visuals are the central thing, it gives you a stunning image quality. For the most part, I can take it or leave it though (and would never have bought one, but it came with the new TV...shrugs)
no subject
Date: 2010-08-01 01:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-01 03:33 am (UTC)I'm also able to stream films from Netflix and... I think it's Cinema Now, I'm not sure because I haven't ever used my account. And for me that was worth the very modest price.
However I will say that even standard format DVDs look a whole LOT better on the Blu-ray player.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-01 05:55 am (UTC)A friend of ours who happened to sneeze money had a Super8 sound projector and the home movie release of Star Wars. It seriously was the Reader's Digest Condensed Version.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-01 12:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-02 10:31 pm (UTC)Some bluray players have wifi or ethernet ports (or both) for streaming content from providers like Netflix.
As for discs disappearing within the next few years -- I disagree. Downloading will become more prevalent, but discs aren't going away, and depending on your bandwidth and provider, the quality of downloads can vary, which sort of defeats the whole purpose of having an HD-capable TV.