Blu-Ray or HD-DVD?

[Sharingan]

I'm definitely not going to replace my DVDs either, save for the really exceptional titles that simply deserve high definition love.

Not all HD films are of great quality either - it really depends on the source material, and the effort from the company behind the film. Some HD titles end up looking washed out, and not much better than an upscaled DVD. One company that seems to be putting out GREAT quality Blu-rays is Disney/Pixar.

[Harrison]

Pixar have a big advantage because most of their films are digitally rendered for film resolution size anyway so do greatly benefit from HD format sizes.

[Teho]

I thought I wasn't going to rebuy any of my movies, but now I've allready rebought several films on blu-ray. The first two Pirates of The Caribbean movies, and David Gilmour - Remember That Night - Live at The Royal Albert Hall 2006. That is one great concert, but I was a bit disappointed at the DVD release after I bought it when I found that there was no lossless audio track on it. Just two Dolby Digital 2.0 and 5.1 tracks. So when I learned that this concert was out on blu-ray also I ordered it immediately.

Also I rebought A Knight's Tale on blu-ray very early on. Back then there was like twenty movies released in total to choose from, and I allready had most on DVD. Wanting some blu-rays anyway I bought that and another that I didn't allready have.

And of course, I sell the DVD editions once I have the blu-rays so get at least some of it back.

And I have to say that even though the PS3 does a good job at upscaling DVDs, the HD picture on the blu-ray edition of the same movie is miles better. I can understand that people don't want to replace their entire collections, but trust me, once you get started on blu-rays you will be replacing some of your favourites.

[Sharingan]

One trilogy I'm especially looking forward to is LoTR. I've seen the films dozens of times already (cinema 3 times, regular DVD edition a few times, extended cut a couple times more), but I'd watch it again in HD. Imagine also the amount of goodies they can pack into a 50GB BR disc!

I'll also be picking up The Fifth Element soon - very much underrated movie, IMO. I thought it was brilliant fun.

[Harrison]

The fifth element is a brilliant film, and as you say, very underrated. As I said before, I will update films that are definitely worth getting again for the higher quality picture and sound. Most Sci-Fi films especially. 2001 is another I will have to buy if and when it gets a release. Also the first Alien film. Imagine that in HD, and you thought no one could hear you scream in space in SD resolution!

LoTR in HD would be amazing, that is for sure. As for the mention of 50GB BR discs, I think we need to whisper that because they already increase the length of each part to 4 hours because they had the space to do that on normal DVDs, so image how long they could make them on BR. We could be sitting watching the trilogy for days!

But for me the greatest films they can release on BR would be the Star Wars and Star Trek films. But I have the feeling we might be waiting some time for both to appear, especially considering how long we had to wait for them on DVD.

[Submeg]

Hmm, I think my dad may start replacing some of the dvds....Im not a dvd nut, only music.

[Sharingan]

Got some Blu-ray discs for Christmas, and man ... I'm impressed. I knew there would be a jump in picture quality over DVD, but wasn't prepared to see such an improvement. Teho was absolutely right when he said BD can't really be compared to even an upscaled DVD.

While watching the high-def movies, I had to constantly stop myself from pausing the playback just to take in the detail of certain scenes. Distant objects that appeared as shapeless blobs on DVD actually look good and distinguishable now. It's definitely a whole different experience.

Consequently, I went to the AVS forums to read up a bit about Blu-ray technology and current developments, and imagine my surprise when it was stated there that the PS3 is currently actually the best Blu-ray player available when it comes to picture quality - even better than standalone BD players that cost the same or more!

Does the PS3 have the best video quality of Blu-Ray players?
Nothing is definitive, but most agree that it does. Additionally, it now offers 1080/24p output, which not all standalone Blu-ray players do.

How could that be possible? It is so inexpensive compared to other players.
While that is true, Sony is known to be subsidizing the PS3, while the other players are not subsidized. Sony wants to ensure the future of both Blu-Ray and PS3, so while this loses them money in the short term, theoretically, it will be a financial win in the long term.

For more info, Sound and Vision magazine has shoot out of the first batch of Blu-Ray players here . I'll ruin the ending, PS3 wins.

So, while I was already considering getting me a standalone player for the living room, I'm now for the moment simply keeping my PS3 there, or maybe even getting a second one just for movie playback

[Demon Cleaner]

So what movies did you exactly watch? There are many movies out on BluRay that are not worth buying, as the normal DVD has the same quality, I even read something about that on the movie 300, which is apparently not better on BluRay. Sadly, would be a breathtaking journey.

[Sharingan]

There's a very nice thread over on the AVS forums where movies are ranked into categories, based on picture quality. They use some kind of Tier system, Tier 0 being the absolute best Blu-rays (flawless, basically demonstration material), and Tier 5 being generally poor (ie. on par with or only just edging out an upscaled DVD).

There are also some high definition video review sites out there such as http://www.highdefdigest.com which review BD films, and score them based on factors such as picture quality, audio quality, extras, as well as the movie itself.

So, by looking at these, I can get a general impression on whether it's worthwhile to buy a BD title over its cheaper DVD counterpart.

I don't have '300' yet, and yes, there has been talk about the high-def version of the film being less than perfect. Apparently, because the source material has this intentionally, exaggerated grainy look, it just doesn't look very nice when viewed in high resolution.

As for the films I've seen on BD so far, I have gotten Dinosaur (a Pixar animation), Kung-Fu Hustle, Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut, the Harry Potter 5-in-1 gift box set and Letters from Iwo Jima. All these look top notch, except maybe the first Harry Potter which has a very 'soft' feel to it - but still far better than DVD.

I'm hoping to get a few more discs sometime next week, probably the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy (which supposedly has a VERY good picture quality), the Spiderman trilogy, The Fifth Element and Ratatouille.

[Teho]

I have 300, it was one of the first blu-rays I got. And it's true that it doesn't look very good. It's as Sharingan says, they decided to add a grainy effect on this film to make it more reminiscent of the graphic novel it's based on. The picture on the blu-ray is as sharp as ever, but unfortunately this makes the grainyness stand out like a sore thumb. I never saw this movie on DVD or in cinemas, so I don't know how this looks in other formats. Might not be much better for all I know.

This is definitely one of the exceptions though. I can't believe the claim that many movies on blu-ray aren't any better quality than the DVD version. Every one I've watched is as I said, miles ahead. Also don't forget that you have uncompressed PCM audio tracks on almost all if not all releases.

The Pirates of The Caribbean Trilogy is a good example. I have all three on blu-ray now, but also bought the first two on DVD initially. And while these movies are among the better looking ones on DVD, they can't match the blu-rays. There are so many small details in these movies that are lost on the DVDs, they really stand out as the textbook example of how even the best-looking DVDs still look flat and dull when put next to their HD counterparts.