I don’t care about other cars driving on the road with me, but it doesn’t mean I don’t see them to avoid running into them.
Caring has nothing to do with seeing. What I addressed was why you don’t see it until someone points it out to you. And if there was something ‘wrong’ (I prefer the word ‘different’. Maybe there is something wrong with those of us who do see it?) with your brain, why would it be insulting to point it out?
I can definitely see the difference with Blu-Ray/HD content. I was around at my friend’s house yesterday and we watched Mission Impossible III on his Blu-Ray projector, which was very clear and sharp.
But that extra definition doesn’t improve the viewing experience for me. The movie will still play out the same, it has the same ending, and seeing Michelle Monaghan’s eyelashes, or Laurence Fishburne’s pores, really wasn’t exciting me any more than watching it in Standard Definition would.
However, I will say this: if I was watching it on a big screen, which in this case was projected on his wall, about 12ft/4m wide, then HD looks better than SD. The flaws of SD show up on a super huge viewing environment. My home 42inch SD plasma is small enough that HD and SD are effectively indistinguishable.
Interesting. Not a perfect analogy, but it brings to mind “tone deafness.” Different people may perceive sounds with varying degrees of precision, ranging the spectrum from “perfect pitch” to “tone deaf.” None of these people are actually deaf–they may all hear with 100% functionality in everyday life, but the way they process sounds differs.
Some people also have a lot of trouble with rhythm. They can hear the sounds, but they can’t really tell the difference between a song played with the right rhythm and the same song played off-rhythm. If you can tell the difference, it’s hard to see how anyone else couldn’t. And I suppose if you can’t tell the difference, it’s hard to imagine how anyone else could.
I’m sort of curious if there’s any link between not being able to see HD like other people do and synesthesia. I’m a synesthete who sees sound, so I already know that there’s a brain difference (synesthesia is considered a varience rather than an abnormality, much like being left-handed which a large % of synesthetes also are) there, and I’m left-handed, so that’s another. Not to mention that seeing sound means that the brain wiring is already different when it comes to sight. As the second link indicates, synesthesia is also hereitary, and that’s true for me as well, because my mother has the same type so maybe that’s why she can’t see the HD difference either…and most synesthete are women. Hmmm.
Unfortunately, I think it’d be a hard study to do, though, because so few people realize that their “strangeness” with colors or sounds is actually a fairly well-known condition, so finding volunteers wouldn’t be easy.
My prediction: I think both formats will stick around for a good long while, and that downloadable content will increase a lot as storage capacity and bandwidth increase.
Me personally: I won’t be upgrading soon. If I had tons of money? Sure, because it’s better. But honestly, if I’m watching a crappy copy of something, I generally stop noticing 90% of the crappy quality after a few minutes, so it’s not like it’s a huge imposition on my enjoyment… the difference between “good” and “really good” will be even less than between “crappy” and “good” which I already have experienced to be little more than a slight annoyance.
The cost thing is key, though. I have 3 TVs in the house. Either I’d have to get 3 Blu-Ray players, or all future discs I buy will only be playable on the one TV that was deemed worthy to get the player. That alone would make me not buy it until I have significantly more money.
Which Blu-Ray discs would I buy “going forward?” I see almost no movies at this time. I am not a movie-watching person the way I once was, so there simply aren’t that many new releases that I see, and still fewer that I purchase.
Did I say I averaged 40 bucks per DVD? No. I was guessing at the cost of Blu-Ray, having never purchased any or browsed that aisle, I have no idea what their price point is. I estimated that, since DVDs began around $30 for brand-new movies but can sometimes be picked up for $9.99, Blu-Ray would be at or slightly above that price point.
If it’s not $40/disc for Blu-Ray, then $30, or $20, or whatever. It’s still money I needn’t spend.
And how long did that process take, pray tell? Overnight, yes? Because image fidelity was so important to the average television viewer.
No: it took twenty-one years of commercial color TV broadcasts before color TVs outsold B/W.
So you concede that the move to HD is happening a lot faster? Like I said, one quarter of US households upgraded to HD in the past 12 months.
I’m not even sure what you’re trying to argue any more. It’s almost as if you’re just blindly disagreeing with what people say & you’ve forgotten the original argument.
Then why have you been claiming this entire thread that you’d need to upgrade your entire library? This is getting silly.
Then why in holy hell did you continue to argue with me after I pointed out that it was incorrect?
Oh, why don’t you quit your whining. You’re the one who showed up calling people “nut-huggers” and the like. Now you’ve become some delicate little flower?
Cry me a river. If you don’t like the tone this thread has taken, then you have nobody but yourself to blame.
For live-action features, I feel exactly the same as you. I can see the difference but I just don’t care. A person’s face is a person’s face, and the finer detail doesn’t really improve their character or acting.
However, on CGI animated features, I’m simply gobsmacked by the detail. I guess it catches my eye more because the extra level of detail reveals extra intentional effort, and because of the novelty of fantasy worlds having this much detail for the first time. CGI features are mostly about eye candy, and this is where HD really pays off, IMO.
This is one of the reasons I was unhappy to see Blu-Ray win the format wars. It wasn’t uncommon to see movies that had both formats (HD-DVD and DVD) on one disc.
I’m one of those that sees the difference fairly easily (I might not notice something is hi-def right away, but if it’s SD I’ll probably start picking out flaws quickly) so for me it can affect my enjoyment of a movie. Nothing ruins immersion quite like thinking ‘ack, dot crawl!’
Animation actually benefits the most from high definition, although it’s more noticeable on newer stuff. That’s why Cars, the Simpsons Movie, and Shrek the Third are all on Blu-ray. Try watching the Simpsons movie on DVD, then on Blu-ray. I did. Rented it on DVD on December 22, 2007 or so from Blockbuster, then received the Blu-ray that Christmas and watched it, and was stunned by the improved detail.
Nor do we have much room to improve in sound reproduction over Blu-ray. Most Blu-ray movies have a lossless, PCM soundtrack (same sound, uncompressed, as the sound in the studio), and the only way you can improve that is to have a higher sampling rate.
What’s wrong with your brain?
Do you want that list in spreadsheet format or will a .doc file do? heh.
But seriously… I have VHS tapes of tv shows and music videos that I recorded off of TV 15 years ago that I’ll still put in once and a while and at first I go “wow, this is kind of fuzzy” or whatever, but after a few minutes I’ve generally gotten to where I’m just paying attention to the story and don’t pay much attention to the image quality. And that’s when the image quality is actually BAD. DVD is already GOOD, so I don’t have any nagging part of my brain paying attention to image crappiness. For this reason, I doubt that the upgrade would make enough difference in my enjoyment of the movie to justify buying 3 Blu-Ray players at this point in my life. It isn’t that I can’t see the quality difference, it’s that it isn’t a big enough deal to my enjoyment to justify the cost at this time.
Now, if someone was offering to buy me equipment and wanted to know which I’d want? Of course I’d pick the better one. But that isn’t the case. Right now I’m a student and a parent and my fiancé is in podiatry school. Is it a big enough difference to me to use student loan money to buy sharp cheddar cheese over store-brand American? Yes, because taste-wise and nutritionally, it’s well worth the difference in cost. Is it worth spending student loan money or credit card debt to make my already acceptable quality movie-watching even better? Not so much.
Egad, am I about to be pitted?
Good analogy, BTW
I first watched Michael Bay’s Transformers on regular DVD, and the Transformers were just these masses of metal that moved. Then I got the HD DVD, and suddenly I could see every little detail in the bodies. It made a real difference in appreciating the movie visually.
<defensive>Yeah, I like that movie. Wanna make something of it?</defensive>
whew sorry for the long post, I’ve tried to make small points but it just kept growing. I didn’t realize I had so many thoughts about this. I would like to continue to edit this, but I’ve got to get home…
Yes, I think that Blu-ray will go away relatively quickly.
1. The Blu-Ray Disc as medium
A lot of the discussion in this thread has revolved around the benefit of the HD video and audio signal, but the longevity of the medium is the original question, not the content. I realize that the Blu-ray was designed with HD as its raison d’etre, but ultimately I don’t think the format is keeping up with the times, it just feels like a grammophone with a cool logo…
(I never understood Marshall McCluhan, the medium is not the message.)
2. Internet as delivery
As others have pointed out streaming/downloading are on the horizon for the populous at large. Many people are streaming/downloading now with differing measures of success (subject to compression, file size and bandwidth issues). Bandwidth is already under scrutiny and consumers are asking for more which, I hope, will actaully drive the market to deliver. The big problem is copywrite and maintaining it…new DRM flavours to come before this is prevalent.
3. Storage of the movies
Network attached storage (home network shared hard drives), and home theatre PCs are all factors in how the software (movies) will be delivered. It makes sense for consumers to be able to store their movies where they watch them and where they can access them.
4. Storage and portability
I read some of the linked articles and everyone seems fixated on the fact that the Blu-ray is the only way to get HD content. It’s the currently the preferred method of distribution by the studios, but the speed that technology is changing and the decreases in related prices suggests to me that The blu-ray format is too restrictive (must have a bulky disc player to watch) to remain a viable architecture. With netbooks and handhelds being readily available but too small for a disc player, other technologies will take over.
5. Blu-ray vs flash media
Blu-ray discs have a capacity of 50GB and a throughput of 54Mb/s while the new (later in 2009) SDXC format will be 64GB capacity and 103Mb/s transfer. It may be expensive when initially released, but I bought my first camera card 6 years ago for $120 for 256MB. The same format now costs $20 for 2000MB, 8X capacity for 1/6 the price.
Even if the SDXC is not ‘the’ format for solid state movie distribution, this suggests the technology is obviously available to create and distribute the software in a less fragile, more compact format. Having the software in a solid state format will make the hardware easier to incorporate into other devices (portable screens, TVs, computers, etc), less power consumption, and less complex hardware (no moving parts). If the MPAA were smart (the studios are too arrogant and narcissistic) they would commission a ‘movie card’. They could make this the de facto distribution mechanism for movies so that they could control the royalties, format and content (and probably DRM). (I know, the politics won’t allow…) With netbooks making a splash at CES this year, it is easy to imagine movies on flash cards being widely accepted.
5. Blu-ray will still be available for BR/DVD/CD
With flash media approaching the capacity and performance of the Blu-ray disc, there will be little reason to continue to put out the movies on disc. Transmission or flash storage will take over, since it is easier to make available to different hardware.
6. Super High Def TV…or whatever it is called
There is another HD format coming that is super widescreen. I don’t know if the Blu-Ray would be able to fit that content on it. If they need to make more capacity, then they would need a new laser frequency, the way they moved from DVD to blu-ray. Won’t that just piss you off?
In case you weren’t following the thread, I agree one thousand percent.
I followed a lot of it but got tired and skimmed for the last half or so. 