Convince me why I should go Blu - ray?

As you've seen by the responses so far they have all once again descended into the better picture and sound comments. The thing you said you didn't want people to say, but give you other reasons.

I think that says it all really. There isn't any other real reason why a person should get Blu Ray. Yes they are capable of containing even more extras than DVD's without it needing to be a double disc llike it would be on DVD, but that is assuming the discs do get loaded up with them.

As you are watching the pennies because of getting married next year (Good Luck! :)) I would say save your money because as with everything, the price of players will drop over the next year or two. When/if you do decide at a later date to get one you'll save yourself some money.
 
How is saying that Bluray offers better picture sound "descending".

The bottom line is that superior picture and sound are what Bluray is about - nothing more.

If thats not good enough for the OP then Bluray would likely be wasted on them so they should stick with dvd if they need other reasons that do not exist:rolleyes:
 
Texas Chainsaw Massacre was made on 16mm film so a Bluray upgrade is unnecessary as 16mm will not offer 1080p quality that regular 35mm film offers.

The Godfather looked shit on dvd so I dont know what the problem is with that.
 
It's a shame that some people base their understanding and dismissal of something on information that is totally wrong:rolleyes:

99.9% of cinema films made in the last 80 years were made on 35mm film or better.

35mm film can produce images that exceed current HD standarRAB by a mile.

Upscaling is simply making standard def material look better on hd ready tv's.

So it's always good to make sure you have the correct info before slagging something off.

Asking about Bluray then skipping improved sound and picture is like asking why should you change from a push bike to car but not mention the internal combustion engine.

Better picture and sound is THE reason for Bluray.
If they are not reason enough then Bluray is clearly not for you- and if you can't spot genuine HD material on HD broadcasts then nobody can help you

TV material made in the UK is not "filmed in HD" if it was made more than a few years ago - and then not much anyway - with the exception of some 60's and 70's classics made on 35mm but for movies : see above
 
Have you tried the Snow White Bluray?

Or disc 6 in The Prisoner boxset?

Oddly disc 6 is actually a dvd not a Bluray but it wont play that either

However - at
 
Why would that be?

You think everything will be re-released in 3D?

Its unlikely that 3D will catch on in a big way , if at all.

And any 3D product released is likely to be limited to just a few titles apart from some brand new releases
 
And it's a shame you didn't read my posts properly or you would realise how silly your reply was. :rolleyes:

For example as you chose the upscaling bit. I did actually say that it doesn't make it "true" HD. In your reply you say.

Upscaling is simply making standard def material look better on hd ready tv's.

Or to put it another way it doesn't make it into HD which is what I said. ;)

The reason I and people like me struggle with this stuff is because of the techno babble. Blu Ray is better picture and sound. Ok I get it. I think we all get it. Wonderful!
It's when we then start getting the 35mm cobblers. Why do we need to know that kind of stuff? I know there are various ratios when it comes to widescreen. i know the ratios are to do with how narrow the picture is and how big the black bars are going to be on a wwidescreen TV. But why do I need to know and understand the ratios?
If people start throwing in Pan & Scan, Letterbox, widescreen, 16:9, 4:3 or 2.35:1 people like me just start zoning out because it's technobabble.
All we need to know is 4:3 = sqaure or old TV 16:9 = widescreen. We don't even need the numbers. Just say old square and widescreen we will get it.
If we go to see a 3D film at the cinema we don't need all the techno babble about 3d Real 3D etc. all we need to know is

1) Sit facing the screen
2) Put the glases on your face so you can look through them and not under your left armpit as they won't work there.

The more info we get given or hear the more we just think I give up as it's getting more confusing.
I help people with learning disabilities to use Outlook Express and do emails. I don't teach them all about POP and SMTP etc. They don't need to know that. All they need to know are the basics. Anything else if excess material that will confuse them

I wasn't slagging anything off. If you bothered to read my post properly you would have seen that I was actually saying I'm not techically minded and don't understand it. That is like you saying you don't understand the Japanese language. You're not critical of it and slagging it off. You just don't understand what is being said, it's totally whoosh! over your head.
 
Its good that there are still suckers around to buy dvd's that will be worthless within a few months .

Bluray titles are already dropping to as low as
 
Good for you:rolleyes:

I can't see how any film fan would be able to "cope fine" with a VHS player these days when they stopped releasing things on VHS years ago...
 
Firstly thank you to Pocatello for taking the time to reply to my posts in such detail. I know that takes a lot of time and effort to do that. :)

As you've seen I can do long posts so won't reply to all of it. Partly as a lot of it still goes whoosh with me.

I would like to pick up on one sentence of yours though.



The reason I posted about if the person bothered to read my posts he would have read on at least three of my posts that I get that the picture is better and the sound if better. In his post he then decided to do the rolling eyes :rolleyes: which came over as sarcasm. Maybe he didn't mean it. I don't know.

I will happily admit that I don't know hardly anything about film production. I also don't know much about computers so when this one goes wrong I give it to my brother to sort out. Could I learn more? Yes. Do I care enough to do it? No.
I don't need to know how to program a computer to turn it on and send an email, use Word or surf the net.
When it comes to films at home. I put the DVD or Blu ray in the machine and hit play. The picture appears on the screen I watch the film. I put it back in the box. I don't sit there and wonder whether it was shot in 35mm 70mm or with a polaroid camera put together as a flip book.

In the sentence I quoted of yours, you too say my complaints (what complaints?) come from a fundamental misunderstanding of technology. I'm not complaining about anything, but you are right, I am confused and I don't have lots of knowledge. I have never denied it.
I don't know abut lots of things. Cricket rugby, fashion, music, international politics, history, geography. I'm not a moron but I'm also not a person that claims to know stuff that I don't.
So just to clarify it for you and other people on the thread.

I do not understand technology in great depth. There's no denying it. No avoiding the issue. I don't understand technology in great depth and I'm fine with that.

Now onto notpctoday. :)

Again I'll pick out two sections of your post. The first paragraph is covered in my reply to Pocatello.



No I dont want more info. I'm not the OP. The person who made the OP is called scorpio2000. He/she asked if there was any other reason other than better sound and picture to get a blu ray.
The only thing I originally tried to do was to answer their question and all I said was I think there is a possibility that a Blu Ray disc may be able to hold more extras or data than a DVD.
My logic is this. A CD has a bigger storage capacity than a floppy disc. A DVD has more than a CD and so possibly a blu ray disc has more than a DVD.
If this is true then logic would also suggest it means the blu ray releases may have more bonus material than their DVD versions as they can hold more data.

That may be right, that may be wrong. I don't know and don't claim too, but I'm sure you know if it is or not, but isn't that logical and a fair assumption?

Second quote



Spot on! Thank you. :)
I'm not rubbishing Blu Ray. I'm not saying it's the work of Satan and should be destroyed. I have a Blu Ray player and some discs although I haven't watched them yet.

I'm just not good at picking things up. I can read a manual but I struggle with it. I can be told something and I don't get it. But if I see something I'm able to visualise it in my head.
I bought a computer although I had never used one before. I worked out how to set it up using logic. The pin/plug is the same size as that socket so it probably goes in there as the other lead's pin/plug is too big for it.
Once it was up and running I pictured in my head what the person on BBC Bitesize on TV had done to open a window. I remembered she moved the mouse up to the top of the screen over there. Slowly by clicking on bits and pieces I found bits I remembered or looked familiar.
I can install hardware into a PC casing. If I have to configure etc then I'm stuffed.
I once got talked through as I went into BIOS. I couldn't get out of there fast enough. I was scared I was going to change something and totally break the thing and be left with a dead computer.
 
35mm is nothing to do with aspect ratios. 35mm is the type of film (as in the film reel that goes through a projector) that a certain movie was filmed using. There's also 70mm film (i think anyway, it's either 70mm or 65mm, i forget which) that produces even better quality images, but due to 35mm being cheaper and generally more than sufficient, 35mm is the industry standard.

Saying whether a film was filmed in 16mm/35mm/70mm is very relevant to Blu Ray because generally the higher the "mm", the potentially higher the picture quality of the Blu Ray. See 'Event Horizon' as an example of a stunning 70mm transfer.
 
I saw my first Blu Ray on a properly cabled HD TV at the weekend..
Its good,but not "that good"..Watching Iron Man on regular DVD on a HD TV with an upscaled Philips DVD player is good enough for me at this point in time.
As for 3D...its never going to happen outside the cinema...stupid glasses are just ridiculous in the home for a nights viewing
 
Better picture and sound, IMHO, than you get in the cinema

You can watch in the comfort of your own home, instead of sitting in a dark room with strangers, who are all chewing on popcorn

If you need the loo, you can press pause

You can have a drink, and have a ciggie, if you want, pressing pause again

Case rested?
 
I went to see a promised 70mm screening of Zulu at the National Media Museum a few years back.

At the start, it was announced they couldn't get a 70mm print and were showing a 35mm one instead. I was so disappointed.

But the 35mm version turned out to be of excellent quality, one of the best things I'd ever seen in that format. And yet last week I saw Shutter Island that not only looked like 16mm but out of focus too (probably projection issues).

So within each format there's a wide range of quality with probably some overlap between formats.

(Regarding Blu-ray format, I understand it's just a high-density data disk. So you could get perhaps 5 or 6 DVD-quality movies, or a whole season of Seinfeld for example, on the one disk.

Somehow not having to mess around changing disks sounRAB more attractive to me than HD..)
 
Thats the thing, was it a really proper hdtv. Its like with early dvRAB, some people played those things back on 20" crts from decades ago. Not all hdtv's are equal regardless of 1080p claims, the amount of rendered detail making out to your eyes depenRAB on the quality of the screen. There is literally 5-6 times the pixel detail on a dvd. But on a lousy tv, you would be hard pressed to see it.

Refer to this thread for screen shot comparisons.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1070952
 
Back
Top