HOW LONG BEFORE BLURAY IS OBSOLETE?

[g***@hotmail.com]

With redray now on the horizon and some films being shot with the new redray digital cameras, how long before televisions and disc players will be available commercially for this new 5K redray system? Will bluray become obsolete before it has even replaced dvd?

[cinemad]

With redray now on the horizon and some films being shot with the new redray digital cameras, how long before televisions and disc players will be available commercially for this new 5K redray system? Will bluray become obsolete before it has even replaced dvd?

A lot of people I know can't tell the differnce between Blu-Ray and DVD.
Realistically you don't need more resolution than Blu-Ray in the Home environment
even on a large screen.

The SMPTE did experiments back in the fifties(about the time CinemaScope 55 was
introduced) and it was found that increasing negative area only resulted in
improved picture quality up to a limit and four times the negative area of 35mm which was the limit at that time.

Regards,
Peter Mason

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by cinemad
A lot of people I know can't tell the differnce between Blu-Ray and DVD.

The difference is clear and obvious... the Blu-Ray is the one displaying the
stack dump on the screen after the Java libraries crashed. The DVD is the
one showing the movie.

Post by cinemad
Realistically you don't need more resolution than Blu-Ray in the Home envir=
onment
even on a large screen.

There are an awful lot of Blu-Ray videos out there that are just NTSC that
have been scaled up. They show up as 1080P, but you see interlace artifacts
up the wazoo.

If everything was actually 1080P, I agree it would be fine for home use.
However, you should be aware that higher capacity disks can be used not
only for higher resolution, but also for longer videos, and also for
reducing the compression level. The compression artifacts with high speed
movement are very disturbing to me.

Post by cinemad
The SMPTE did experiments back in the fifties(about the time CinemaScope 55=
was
introduced) and it was found that increasing negative area only resulted in
improved picture quality up to a limit and four times the negative area of =
35mm which was the limit at that time.

The 1080P format has sufficient resolution for home use, or perhaps about 1/8
the resolution needed for large screen theatre applications.

But the thing about the Blu-Ray is that it's a container format that can hold
a lot of things that aren't 1080P, and what it does not have is compatibility
or reliability.
--scott

[Mutley]

Post by Scott Dorsey

Post by cinemad
A lot of people I know can't tell the differnce between Blu-Ray and DVD.

The difference is clear and obvious... the Blu-Ray is the one displaying the
stack dump on the screen after the Java libraries crashed. The DVD is the
one showing the movie.

Post by cinemad
Realistically you don't need more resolution than Blu-Ray in the Home envir=
onment
even on a large screen.

There are an awful lot of Blu-Ray videos out there that are just NTSC that
have been scaled up. They show up as 1080P, but you see interlace artifacts
up the wazoo.
If everything was actually 1080P, I agree it would be fine for home use.
However, you should be aware that higher capacity disks can be used not
only for higher resolution, but also for longer videos, and also for
reducing the compression level. The compression artifacts with high speed
movement are very disturbing to me.

Post by cinemad
The SMPTE did experiments back in the fifties(about the time CinemaScope 55=
was
introduced) and it was found that increasing negative area only resulted in
improved picture quality up to a limit and four times the negative area of =
35mm which was the limit at that time.

The 1080P format has sufficient resolution for home use, or perhaps about 1/8
the resolution needed for large screen theatre applications.
But the thing about the Blu-Ray is that it's a container format that can hold
a lot of things that aren't 1080P, and what it does not have is compatibility
or reliability.
--scott

Blu-ray is not all about video but also HD audio..

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by Mutley
Blu-ray is not all about video but also HD audio..

True enough, but the same is true of DVD. Remember, the V stands for
versatile, not video, and while the DVD-A mostly failed in the market, it
still has a small dedicated following.
--scott

[cinemad]

Originally DVD meant Digital Video Disc. Somewhere along the line this changed to Digital Versatile Disc.

When The King and I was filmed in the mid fifties they used Eastman 5248 whic had a resolution of 50 lines a millitre. The current 500 ASA film has a resolution of 100
and much finer grain than the 5248 from 1956.

Regards,
Perter mason

[Steve Kraus]

Post by cinemad
Originally DVD meant Digital Video Disc. Somewhere along the line this
changed to Digital Versatile Disc.

Sort of, but not exactly.

True, the name was to be Digital Video Disc. But the people interested in
the other uses complained the name was not representative of their use and
someone suggested the backronym of Digital Versatile Disc but this was
never formally adopted (thank Bog) and so officially DVD now stands for
nothing.

[Terry del Fuego]

Post by Scott Dorsey
while the DVD-A mostly failed in the market, it
still has a small dedicated following.

And continues to have new releases.

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by Terry del Fuego

Post by Scott Dorsey
while the DVD-A mostly failed in the market, it
still has a small dedicated following.

And continues to have new releases.

Yes! And this is the cool thing about the DVD... you can make all sorts
of different format discs, from DVD-A and SACD to data discs, all using the
same pressing plant and facilities. The only difference is in the software
preparation. This makes small niche formats like the DVD-A cost-effective
and still viable in the market place.

The same can be said, maybe even more so, about Blu-Ray. However, the whole
notion of embedding executable code in with a data disc seems like a disaster
waiting to happen to me.
--scott

[Terry del Fuego]

Post by Scott Dorsey
But the thing about the Blu-Ray is that it's a container format that can hold
a lot of things that aren't 1080P, and what it does not have is compatibility
or reliability.

We forget now, but neither did early DVD (I'm looking at you on my
shelf, "Kalifornia" and "High and Low"). Maybe it's still out there,
but there used to be an entire website devoted to problem disc +
player combinations.

At least with the better Blu-ray players (e.g., Oppo) a network
connection and reasonable customer service gives us a fighting chance
that a fix will come semi-soon.

I'll agree that at least in my modest setup, the increased resolution,
while visible, is not game-changing.

[Steven Guttag]

Post by g***@hotmail.com
With redray now on the horizon and some films being shot with the new redray digital cameras, how long before televisions and disc players will be available commercially for this new 5K redray system? Will bluray become obsolete before it has even replaced dvd?

The realities are that the trend is for people to stream their video with fewer and fewer feeling the need to own a piece of plastic that has their precious movie. As a result, I think you'll find less and less incentive to deploy a new medium as it would also tend to dilute a market that is already heavily invested.

Furthermore, the number of people that would actually give a crap about the improvements (and actually have a system that could conceivably benefit from it) are so statistically small as to not make the effort worth it at this time.

I think BluRay is safe, for now.

[R***@theatresupport.com]

Post by Steven Guttag

Post by g***@hotmail.com
With redray now on the horizon and some films being shot with the new redray digital cameras, how long before televisions and disc players will be available commercially for this new 5K redray system? Will bluray become obsolete before it has even replaced dvd?

The realities are that the trend is for people to stream their video with fewer and fewer feeling the need to own a piece of plastic that has their precious movie. As a result, I think you'll find less and less incentive to deploy a new medium as it would also tend to dilute a market that is already heavily invested.
Furthermore, the number of people that would actually give a crap about the improvements (and actually have a system that could conceivably benefit from it) are so statistically small as to not make the effort worth it at this time.
I think BluRay is safe, for now.

I'll chime in that with people willing to watch movies on a 7" or smaller
digital phone/device/dildo/can opener the desire for increased resolution seems
to be passe in some circles.