7 ms·

Whoever still buys Blu-rays anyway? Isn't it a dead market already?

qubitcoder 5y ago
I do on _very_ rare occasions. Why? I'm fortunate enough to have gigabit symmetrical fiber, so streaming isn't an issue. That said, when viewing content on higher quality TVs and sound systems, there's a very perceptible improvement in both video and audio quality compared to streaming. For example, on my 65" LG C9 OLED with a Klipsch Atmos system, the difference is immediately noticeable. Even with dedicated streaming hardware like new generation Apple TVs, which offer 4K streaming with Dolby Vision/Atmos, it still doesn't quite compare to physical media. Ditto for the native LG apps with identical options. Of course, there are downsides. Good luck finding UHD content on physical media. Redbox doesn't offer 4K discs in my area, and local stores rarely have physical media in stock. Even with physical media, there's other annoyances--e.g. the Xbox One X produces a loud hum as the disc spins, not to mention the delay when seeking/skipping around. That said, for rarified material such as Blue Planet (or anything by Attenborough)--or movies known for their sound quality like Mad Max--physical media can be sublime.
gmac 5y ago
I do! Since I got a 1080p projector, DVDs of recent releases are often noticeable fuzzy, while the Blu-Rays look great. Plus a Blu-Ray off eBay or CeX is usually half the price of 'buying' a film to stream, can be lent to friends and family, and is something that I meaningfully own into the future (not only until the service I bought it from goes bust, locks me out of my account, etc). The fact I can rip them with MakeMKV if necessary is handy too.
no_time 5y ago
I sure hope not. BDrips, especially if done properly by a good scenegroup have an unparalleled bitrate. Unless streaming sites up their game, we'll see a drop in movie image quality everywhere except cinemas.
- arbitrage 5y ago
  Sometimes I find alternate sources for things I can otherwise stream on services I pay for. The encoding and bitrate can be truly awful on a commercial streaming platform. Worst example I've seen of this recently is _Wheel of Time_ on Amazon. Completely unwatchable streaming.
onychomys 5y ago
I torrent everything and then buy BR's of small movies that I loved. I don't know any other way to support indie-ish film makers. It's not like a band where you can listen to them on Spotify (which is basically like pirating it, given the pay structure for the band there) and then buy a teeshirt or whatever from their website. I honestly don't know if it actually helps anything at all, but I don't have a lot of other ideas about how to let companies know what sorts of things I think they should be making.
rthomas6 5y ago
I buy them. Streaming services encode streams using lossy compression for both sound and video, and the difference is noticeable, especially for 4k movies with HDR and TrueHD/Atmos. If you have a decent home theater setup, the discs are worth it. Streaming services' bitrates top out around 40 Mbps (4k UHD on Apple TV), and most services are actually closer to 20 for 4k, often even lower. 4k UHD Blu-Rays have up to 128 Mbps bitrate. The quality difference is evident, including in the sound. You can see compression artifacts in dark scenes on streaming, and jagged lines in color gradients. The simulataneous dynamic range of sound (some things being loud while other, quieter things are audible on other speakers at the same time) is lower on streaming. And on top of all that, the quality is inconsistent, and the stream will drop into a lower resolution for no apparent reason. I get the sense that the market is drying up, but I hope it doesn't, because the quality of streaming is legitimately worse. The discs are currently the only way to get uncompressed quality, unless I guess if you find a torrent with a rip. But that would be a 50-100 GB download, for one movie. Also, when I buy the disc, I own it. It's mine forever, in its definitive edition. No scene cuts/edits for political or monetary reasons are possible, and streaming services cannot yank the movie and prevent me from watching it.
- rixrax 5y ago
  I also buy mine for mostly the reasons you outlined above. Plus because of the kids, I got tired of renting Lion King or 101 Dalmatians etc. for the 11th time. It is actually cheaper to pay ~10-20USD for a BD and be done with it. It is worth noting though that the content on BD/UDH-BD is not uncompressed. They're still compressed using h.264/h.265/VC1/.. for video and DTS, AC3 and various other codes for audio. It's just that you get a much higher bitrate from the BD compared to streaming. This does make a difference on bigger TV, especially since our internet connection is not as good as it should. As for the future, when world eventually transitions to H.266 or some other next gen codecs, and at the same time internet speeds keep increasing, this whole debate is largely theoretical. You will be able to stream UHD movie at half or less of of bits that it would take today when compressed using h.265, using internet connections that are n times faster than those we're using today. Call me old school, I still like owning those BDs. But it's hard to imagine future where they would age very well (compared to quality you are likely to get from streaming services).
aidenn0 5y ago
I do because I prefer owning to renting.
- blooalien 5y ago
  Except that when you buy something with DRM included, you aren't "owning" anything but the physical disc it comes on. You're still "renting" the content.
  - aidenn0 5y ago
    See my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29937249 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29937249 Note that in the US at least, owning a physical item can be legally important due to things like the first sale doctrine.

I do on _very_ rare occasions. Why? I'm fortunate enough to have gigabit symmetrical fiber, so streaming isn't an issue. That said, when viewing content on higher quality TVs and sound systems, there's a very perceptible improvement in both video and audio quality compared to streaming. For example, on my 65" LG C9 OLED with a Klipsch Atmos system, the difference is immediately noticeable. Even with dedicated streaming hardware like new generation Apple TVs, which offer 4K streaming with Dolby Vision/Atmos, it still doesn't quite compare to physical media. Ditto for the native LG apps with identical options. Of course, there are downsides. Good luck finding UHD content on physical media. Redbox doesn't offer 4K discs in my area, and local stores rarely have physical media in stock. Even with physical media, there's other annoyances--e.g. the Xbox One X produces a loud hum as the disc spins, not to mention the delay when seeking/skipping around. That said, for rarified material such as Blue Planet (or anything by Attenborough)--or movies known for their sound quality like Mad Max--physical media can be sublime.

gmac 5y ago

I do! Since I got a 1080p projector, DVDs of recent releases are often noticeable fuzzy, while the Blu-Rays look great. Plus a Blu-Ray off eBay or CeX is usually half the price of 'buying' a film to stream, can be lent to friends and family, and is something that I meaningfully own into the future (not only until the service I bought it from goes bust, locks me out of my account, etc). The fact I can rip them with MakeMKV if necessary is handy too.

no_time 5y ago

I sure hope not. BDrips, especially if done properly by a good scenegroup have an unparalleled bitrate. Unless streaming sites up their game, we'll see a drop in movie image quality everywhere except cinemas.

arbitrage 5y ago
Sometimes I find alternate sources for things I can otherwise stream on services I pay for. The encoding and bitrate can be truly awful on a commercial streaming platform. Worst example I've seen of this recently is _Wheel of Time_ on Amazon. Completely unwatchable streaming.

onychomys 5y ago

I torrent everything and then buy BR's of small movies that I loved. I don't know any other way to support indie-ish film makers. It's not like a band where you can listen to them on Spotify (which is basically like pirating it, given the pay structure for the band there) and then buy a teeshirt or whatever from their website. I honestly don't know if it actually helps anything at all, but I don't have a lot of other ideas about how to let companies know what sorts of things I think they should be making.

rthomas6 5y ago

I buy them. Streaming services encode streams using lossy compression for both sound and video, and the difference is noticeable, especially for 4k movies with HDR and TrueHD/Atmos. If you have a decent home theater setup, the discs are worth it. Streaming services' bitrates top out around 40 Mbps (4k UHD on Apple TV), and most services are actually closer to 20 for 4k, often even lower. 4k UHD Blu-Rays have up to 128 Mbps bitrate. The quality difference is evident, including in the sound. You can see compression artifacts in dark scenes on streaming, and jagged lines in color gradients. The simulataneous dynamic range of sound (some things being loud while other, quieter things are audible on other speakers at the same time) is lower on streaming. And on top of all that, the quality is inconsistent, and the stream will drop into a lower resolution for no apparent reason. I get the sense that the market is drying up, but I hope it doesn't, because the quality of streaming is legitimately worse. The discs are currently the only way to get uncompressed quality, unless I guess if you find a torrent with a rip. But that would be a 50-100 GB download, for one movie. Also, when I buy the disc, I own it. It's mine forever, in its definitive edition. No scene cuts/edits for political or monetary reasons are possible, and streaming services cannot yank the movie and prevent me from watching it.

rixrax 5y ago
I also buy mine for mostly the reasons you outlined above. Plus because of the kids, I got tired of renting Lion King or 101 Dalmatians etc. for the 11th time. It is actually cheaper to pay ~10-20USD for a BD and be done with it. It is worth noting though that the content on BD/UDH-BD is not uncompressed. They're still compressed using h.264/h.265/VC1/.. for video and DTS, AC3 and various other codes for audio. It's just that you get a much higher bitrate from the BD compared to streaming. This does make a difference on bigger TV, especially since our internet connection is not as good as it should. As for the future, when world eventually transitions to H.266 or some other next gen codecs, and at the same time internet speeds keep increasing, this whole debate is largely theoretical. You will be able to stream UHD movie at half or less of of bits that it would take today when compressed using h.265, using internet connections that are n times faster than those we're using today. Call me old school, I still like owning those BDs. But it's hard to imagine future where they would age very well (compared to quality you are likely to get from streaming services).

aidenn0 5y ago

I do because I prefer owning to renting.

blooalien 5y ago
Except that when you buy something with DRM included, you aren't "owning" anything but the physical disc it comes on. You're still "renting" the content.
- aidenn0 5y ago
  See my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29937249 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29937249 Note that in the US at least, owning a physical item can be legally important due to things like the first sale doctrine.