3 ms·

In my opinion, the main point is that "quality" is highly subjective. High definition may not matter most to some users, at least not compared to acting, direct

In my opinion, the main point is that "quality" is highly subjective. High definition may not matter most to some users, at least not compared to acting, direction and photography of the movie. Also I believe the customers of physicals are more interested in those parameters than resolution. Another point to consider is that old movies don't gain that much from blue ray. In conclusion, the higher price of blue rays doesn't justify the increase of quality for some users, who may value other parameters more.

chungy 4y ago
> Another point to consider is that old movies don't gain that much from blue ray. Disagree :) The oldest movies I own on Blu-ray are Gone With the Wind and The Wizard of Oz, and both of them are visually improved by being in HD compared to the DVD releases. I wouldn't really prefer SD for anything regardless of age.
- duskwuff 4y ago
  > I wouldn't really prefer SD for anything regardless of age. For movies, sure. But a lot of content produced for TV wasn't produced and/or archived in HD formats. Some older shows are occasionally remastered in HD if the original film can be found and digitized, but that's a fairly expensive and time-consuming process when it's possible at all. Older content that's in low demand, like children's shows or soap operas, may stay SD forever.
  - chungy 4y ago
    If the original production isn't possible to master in HD, then fine, you don't have a choice but to (hopefully) enjoy the show in SD. Same if it is possible but it hasn't been done (eg: Star Trek DS9 and Voyager). On thinking about things when I make this post, I remember that DragonBall has never had a good HD remaster done, there's always DNR applied to it, soundtracks switched out, et al. Old VHSes might actually be preferable to the modern Blu-rays in that circumstance.
  - account42 4y ago
    For shows that cannot be sourced in HD I would still like the highest quality there is made available as Blu-Rays without the bitrage and usage constraints of streaming. 480i on DVDs is shit enough that very few productions, even early all-digital ones, cannot be released with better quality.
aidenn0 4y ago
As with all media, mastering makes a big difference. If you just stick a film into a TC machine and directly encode to DVD then film-grain (and other artifacts) will demolish the quality of a DVD because so many of the bits end up being spent encoding noise. HEVC handles this somewhat better and the higher bitrate of Blu-ray gives the codec some breathing-room.
deergomoo 4y ago
> Another point to consider is that old movies don't gain that much from blue ray Very much not the case. The detail in 35mm film can scale to 4K and beyond very nicely.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  My favorite 4K movies are the ones on originally recorded on 35mm, in fact, as far as looks go.
- account42 4y ago
  To 4K, yes. Beyond, returns will be very diminishing. Grain does limit what you can get out, and even if it didn't, not all shots are going to be sharp enough so will need added grain to hide that anyway.
- fedeb95 4y ago
  Can, yes. I know that film allows such a detail. That's not my point, rather an aesthetic and, I know, extremely subjective point of view. Film where made (and consumed) a certain way back then: consuming differently today makes a different experience. Not better or worse, but different. Maybe for some dvd customers the added detail doesn't matter that much

chungy 4y ago

> Another point to consider is that old movies don't gain that much from blue ray. Disagree :) The oldest movies I own on Blu-ray are Gone With the Wind and The Wizard of Oz, and both of them are visually improved by being in HD compared to the DVD releases. I wouldn't really prefer SD for anything regardless of age.

duskwuff 4y ago
> I wouldn't really prefer SD for anything regardless of age. For movies, sure. But a lot of content produced for TV wasn't produced and/or archived in HD formats. Some older shows are occasionally remastered in HD if the original film can be found and digitized, but that's a fairly expensive and time-consuming process when it's possible at all. Older content that's in low demand, like children's shows or soap operas, may stay SD forever.
- chungy 4y ago
  If the original production isn't possible to master in HD, then fine, you don't have a choice but to (hopefully) enjoy the show in SD. Same if it is possible but it hasn't been done (eg: Star Trek DS9 and Voyager). On thinking about things when I make this post, I remember that DragonBall has never had a good HD remaster done, there's always DNR applied to it, soundtracks switched out, et al. Old VHSes might actually be preferable to the modern Blu-rays in that circumstance.
- account42 4y ago
  For shows that cannot be sourced in HD I would still like the highest quality there is made available as Blu-Rays without the bitrage and usage constraints of streaming. 480i on DVDs is shit enough that very few productions, even early all-digital ones, cannot be released with better quality.

aidenn0 4y ago

As with all media, mastering makes a big difference. If you just stick a film into a TC machine and directly encode to DVD then film-grain (and other artifacts) will demolish the quality of a DVD because so many of the bits end up being spent encoding noise. HEVC handles this somewhat better and the higher bitrate of Blu-ray gives the codec some breathing-room.

deergomoo 4y ago

> Another point to consider is that old movies don't gain that much from blue ray Very much not the case. The detail in 35mm film can scale to 4K and beyond very nicely.

yamtaddle 4y ago
My favorite 4K movies are the ones on originally recorded on 35mm, in fact, as far as looks go.
account42 4y ago
To 4K, yes. Beyond, returns will be very diminishing. Grain does limit what you can get out, and even if it didn't, not all shots are going to be sharp enough so will need added grain to hide that anyway.
fedeb95 4y ago
Can, yes. I know that film allows such a detail. That's not my point, rather an aesthetic and, I know, extremely subjective point of view. Film where made (and consumed) a certain way back then: consuming differently today makes a different experience. Not better or worse, but different. Maybe for some dvd customers the added detail doesn't matter that much