Blueray - why did they bother

[Thunderchild]

ok I was just thinking (as I'm about to buy my first house so will have to buy my own film collection) with the prospect of buying blue ray films at £ 15+ each, why did they bother ? surely with a combination of higher quality encoding like that offered by DivX and the fast lowering cost of high capacity USB sticks and other solid flash memory it would be just as effective and possibly cheaper to sell films on memory sticks to be plugged into readers and current DVD players.

Or is there another side to it and I'm sure that licensing and copy protection will be a big part of the other side

 

[Hero999]

SSDs are too expensive and too small.

A Blu-Ray disc is 50GB single layer or 100GB double layer.

Blu-ray Disc - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

You appear to be missing the point?, BluRay (no 'e') is HD, DVD (and DVD players) aren't. Stamping a disc (of any type) will always be far faster, and a GREAT deal cheaper, that supplying and programming a USB memory.

 

[Thunderchild]

You appear to be missing the point?, BluRay (no 'e') is HD, DVD (and DVD players) aren't. Stamping a disc (of any type) will always be far faster, and a GREAT deal cheaper, that supplying and programming a USB memory.

Yes I suppose so,

Hero: i didn't realize they could hold that much I suppose they are the best bang for buck then

 

[Sceadwian]

It's not as big an advancement as the VHS/laserdisc to DVD switch was, but the sheer raw amount of data you can put on a blueray disc isa big step up. Anyone that cares about video quality knows that increased compression is not always good. Even the best DivX movies still have abysmal quality compared to less compressed data, no matter how good the technology gets the more compression there is the more loss in image quality there is, period.

I'm not sure why you ask why they bothered in the first place.
Dual Layer DVD's can store 8.5 gigs of information.
A dual layer Blueray has a generic storage capacity of 50gig with the current standard allowing up to 100gig and with upgraded players (possibly as simple as firmware) 200gigs is possible once the technology matures. And the media cost is only a a few dollars per disc in quantity. There being an order of magnitude greater storage capacity vs DVDs is reason enough.

Even though bluerays copy protection has already been broken they're still not as easy to copy something like a memory stick ro what not and digital rights management is a hot topic right now.

 

[Hero999]

From the consumer's point of view DRM as a disadvantage.

From the pirate's point of view it's a minor inconvenience.

The fim/music industry are fighting a loosing battle with DRM, as soon as it gets stronger, it just gets broken.

Memory sticks could theoretically have stronger DRM because they can use a proprietary interface and be smart so things like encryption/decryption can occur inside drive itself. It would still be a silly idea though for all the reasons mentioned above.

 

[HarveyH42]

DRM will never work, there are too many people with nothing better to do. It's just a fun challenge, and an opportunity for bragging-rights. Besides, if you can play it, you can copy it, might lose a little quality, but have heard that pirated stuff isn't that great (who is going to file a complaint). If you purchase the media, you should be able to make a back-up copy, or a car copy. Florida does bad things to cassette tapes and CDs, should have to buy the same album endlessly, or replace your video library every time new technology takes over. You pay for personal use, and should be able to use it as you want.

 

[Thunderchild]

well it's at the risk of buying a whole load of DVD's only to want to replace the lot with bluray that has made me stop and think, although with the fast falling price of DVD's and I'll only buy the bluray when it comes down a bit it might work out the same price.

 

[Hero999]

Besides, if you can play it, you can copy it, might lose a little quality, but have heard that pirated stuff isn't that great (who is going to file a complaint).

It depends on the codec used to re-encode it.

If one with the same compression ratio as the original film is used, the quality could degrade noticeably but if a lower compression ratio is used it won't be too bad and if it's lossless it'll be perfect.

Try editing a JPG a couple of times and you'll notice the drop in quality each time it's saved because it's lossy, try doing the same with a PNG and it'll look as good as the original because it's lossless. Unfortunately a PNG takes more space.

The problem then becomes storing it but if it's a 50GB disc, it could easily be transferred to a 100GB disc and if it's 100GB, it could be transferred to two.

This is assuming if it's re-encoded if it's cracked and ripped directly, it'll be as good as the original and be the same size.

 

[HarveyH42]

It depends on the codec used to re-encode it.

If one with the same compression ratio as the original film is used, the quality could degrade noticeably but if a lower compression ratio is used it won't be too bad and if it's lossless it'll be perfect.

Try editing a JPG a couple of times and you'll notice the drop in quality each time it's saved because it's lossy, try doing the same with a PNG and it'll look as good as the original because it's lossless. Unfortunately a PNG takes more space.

The problem then becomes storing it but if it's a 50GB disc, it could easily be transferred to a 100GB disc and if it's 100GB, it could be transferred to two.

This is assuming if it's re-encoded if it's cracked and ripped directly, it'll be as good as the original and be the same size.

No offense, but wasn't looking for a how-to, don't watch much TV or movies. The copy protection drives up the price, making pirated copies more attractive, regardless of quality. My point was that they can keep working on preventing people from making copies, but in the end, it will still be copied, even if it with a video camera off the TV screen (movie theater). I think if somebody wants the perfect copy for a collection, they would pay for it, and get the cover art as well.

 

[Hero999]

All I'm saying is that a reduction in quality from pirated copies is an incentive for people to buy the real thing.

It's true that some people will still buy the real thing even if they can get a pirate copy of the same quality and it's also true that people will pirate a film even it means putting up with inferior quality.

At the moment a major factor in pirating Blu-ray is the size vs the speed of a typical broadband internet connection, with a 10Mb broadband connection, it will take 11 hours 6 minutes and 40 seconds to transfer a 50GB file, assuming full speed continuously, using Bittorrent it will take up to three times as long.

 

[smanches]

Most pirated stuff is full quality rips of DVDs/Bluerays/Satellite TV. There is no quality lost at all, unless it's re-compressed to fit a smaller medium. You just have to know where to look.

One of the big downsides now of blue-ray is it's so friggin old. It may have just recently been ratified, but the technology has been out for about a decade now. Took them years of fighting over standards before they finally started releasing them. Again, just another way for you to buy the same content for extravagant prices, yet again.

 

[Thunderchild]

I am actually starting to seriously reconsider my decision, after all unless I get a 40" HD TV (not blooming likely) what will I gain ?

 

[Hero999]

You won't gain much from a normal low definition TV.

I don't watch DVDs or anything like that so I'm not bothered. The only DVD player I have is on my PC.

 

[Thunderchild]

well my main DVD player is my PC, I've got a large TV for my new house but it's an old CRT so won't be impressing anyone with bluray on that

 

[Hero999]

You'll probably get better definition from your PC screen although the response time might be a little slow.

Of course you could go back to using a CRT for your computer, the definition is at least as good as a plasma, not quite as good as an LCD but the colour and response time will be superior.

 

[smanches]

And to get the full effect from it, you really need a 1080P TV, which means 40" is about the smallest you want to be able to really get the advantage of the extra resolution. It's time for the big upgrade of everything, or none at all. I'm in the same boat.

 

[Thunderchild]

well I'll probably be buying all those DVD's that will be sold at chuck away prices, DVD's look fine on my 19" 1440*900 monitor and I'll only be using the big CRT for social gatherings, I think most people do not understand the figures behind all this new HD stuff, most don't understand that unless you plan on looking real close it won't make that much difference but then the brits are obsessed with big TV's

 

[Sceadwian]

Thunderchild then you're a non-standard consumer asking what the big deal about something that doesn't even apply to you =)

The big deal about blueray is that it stores huge amounts of data. The reason this is important is for HD TV sets. If you don't have an HD TV set then the only possible advantage to you would be in purchasing a burner for backing up large amounts of data. If you view DVDs on your PC you're already basically using an up converting DVD player so there's really no reason for you to switch.

Just because you don't see waht the big deal is doesn't mean there isn't one =) And only idiots buy blueray players and upgrade their entire movie collection. Most if not all blueray players will still play DVDs and on an HD TV it will upconvert to HD (much like your PC already does)

They're still playing around with a blueray disc that actually has a layer that can still be read on a standard DVD players allowing two different versions of the movie to be seen depending on what player it's in.

I personally within the next two years plan to have a 40-50" HD TV and likley a PS3 acting as a blueray player and for the few games that I still enjoy. I think I'll hit the price/performance point I'm looking for sometime around next Christmas.

 

[Hero999]

Blu-ray does look like a good option for backing up a hard drive.

My LCD monitor is 1280x1024 which is better than a DVD but not quite HD.

If I remember correctly my CRT, I no longer use because it hogs too much space, can be set to 1600x1200 which is good enough for HD, although the pixels probably blur slightly so it won't be as sharp as an LCD of that resolution but colour and speed wise it's better.