Blue ray or normal dvds

[Darkscooty]

whats the difference?

 

every one trys to tell me blue rays better and i should get a blue ray player.

can some 1 help.

 

tab back

 

thanks for the help in advance.

[Wesley]

You could do a lot of reading on this and go into great depth.

 

The difference in a nutshell is better picture quality. But, to view this better picture quality you need a Blu-Ray player, High Definition enabled television/monitor, Blu-Ray DVDs and proper connectors. This all costs quite a bit of money.

 

This explains it quite well without going too in-depth.

 

http://www.dabs.com/learn-more/electronics/blu-ray-explained-4528.html

[Darkscooty]

thanks dude much help. : peace:

[Emasher]

Its not just better picture quality. You will still get better picture quality on a normal TV from what I've heard. Its more the resolution. You get full 1080p from them. HDMI cables aren't expensive if you know where to buy them also. If you buy them online they're only like $10 (cnd).

 

If you have an HDTV get one, if you don't don't bother. Even with just a 720p TV, probably don't bother. If you're planning on getting a 1080p TV soon, it may even be worth it so you have time to build up your collection ect.

[khilafah]

even with 720p TV you still see a major difference with blu-ray/HD-DVD compared to DVD.

 

Also remember that not all blu-ray films will look amazing. Some transfers are better than others.

[RoadKill]

Honestly, blu-ray for most people is a show off piece for a handful of films, when in reality you could buy a dvd player and dvds for a fraction of the cost and still watch the same films.

 

Unless you spent a lot of money on a massive 1080p telly, I probably wouldn't bother.

 

If you do want a blu-ray player though, as much as I think the PS3 is a waste of money otherwise, it is pretty fantastic value for this purpose.

[Blue_Ninja0]

In case he's talking about BD-R for file archiving purposes:

 

DVD = 4,7 GB

BD = 25 GB

 

+/-

[Jon]

The difference is pretty big, even a shitty standard blu ray (something not shot in hd, just upscaled) is still a lot better than a normal DVD. If you can't tell the difference go here.

[ReZourceman]

After watching the HD extras on The Dark Knight....Well its the best DVD/Blu Ray I've ever bought. But thats probably down to the specific extras than anything. Although on Hulk and Iron Man they are quality too.

[Darkscooty]

thanks guys much help

[Emasher]

Is there any kind of side by side comparison like the ones comparing Wii on an HDTV with Composite and Component?

 

Edit: Found one.

 

[Jimbob]

Blu-Ray is best when using a 1080p HDTV because it gives the best possible picture available, as long as a HDMI cable is used.

 

Even on a standard TV with a CRT or a non-HD LCD TV, it is still an improvement over a standard DVD with its upscaling capabilities.

[McPhee]

Colours are better on a good Blu-Ray for a start.

 

I'd agree with Roadkill though, Blu is just there for getting the best out of a select few films at the moment. I won't be buying recent films on DVD any more because the Blu is only a few quid more, but as for older films i'll only replace the DVDs for my favourite films. Serenity, The Departed, Kingdom of Heaven: Director's Cut, LOTR Trilogy, Black Hawk down and a few others. Really old films i'm just not going to bother with, DVD only for me.

 

The Dark Knight is stunning on Blu-Ray, better than i've ever seen (even at the Cinema). Foo Fighters Live at Wembly is pretty awesome too. Iron Man didn't blow me away with it's PQ though, better than DVD but not up to the standard of the other two.

[Raining_again]

I have an upscaling dvd player (w/ HDMI cable) and an HDTV. Its pretty damn nice.

 

If you are a big movie buff (and have a nice big HDTV too) then maybe blu ray is worth it, but I couldn't justify spending so much money tbh

[EchoDesiato]

Sorry for being off-topic, but do UK blu-rays usually have Dutch subtitles? I'm thinking of importing some from the UK, since the pound isn't doing too well. I understand English perfectly, but having a consistent collection with all Dutch subtitles would be nice. I know DVDs probably don't, but since blu-ray can hold a lot of data...

[Cube]

I'm guessing that like DVDs some Blu-Rays will hold one language, some will have a few and some will make you scroll through over 50 before you can select "United Kingdom". For subtitles, space isn't really an issue.

 

I find that I hardly notice the difference between HD and SD when I'm actually watching it. When I look for the better quality then I don't really notice what I'm watching.

[Blue_Ninja0]

Sorry for being off-topic, but do UK blu-rays usually have Dutch subtitles? I'm thinking of importing some from the UK, since the pound isn't doing too well. I understand English perfectly, but having a consistent collection with all Dutch subtitles would be nice. I know DVDs probably don't, but since blu-ray can hold a lot of data...

 

Having or not having more subtitles has nothing to do with the size of the disc because subtitles only take something like 0,000000001% of the whole disk.

[Hellfire]

 

Yeah my movies totally look like the pic on the left

[Jasper]

Honestly, wait out with buying in. Digital distribution is getting some firmer leges now and blu-ray is just a small market for now with high prices. Unless you're an early adaptor (wich you're not since you didn't even know) you should leave blu-ray for the moment untill players get more commen, cheaper and the discs themselves become less expensive.

 

Also, I think the comparison you've shown Emasher is also the comparison of analogue vs. digital. Analogue DVDs look crap, yes, but if they're connected digitally their quality improves hugely.

[Jon]

Honestly, wait out with buying in. Digital distribution is getting some firmer leges now and blu-ray is just a small market for now with high prices. Unless you're an early adaptor (wich you're not since you didn't even know) you should leave blu-ray for the moment untill players get more commen, cheaper and the discs themselves become less expensive.

 

Also, I think the comparison you've shown Emasher is also the comparison of analogue vs. digital. Analogue DVDs look crap, yes, but if they're connected digitally their quality improves hugely.

 

Discs are hardly that expensive nowadays, a couple of pounds more for a new release is hardly a lot. I kinda think we're past the early adopters stage now. Digital distribution is nothing for films and tv, sure it's a big player in the audio world but who actually buys films online- not too many.

[Serebii]

I have an upscaling dvd player (w/ HDMI cable) and an HDTV. Its pretty damn nice.

 

If you are a big movie buff (and have a nice big HDTV too) then maybe blu ray is worth it, but I couldn't justify spending so much money tbh

That is exactly my reason for getting DVDs over Blu Ray. My upscaler does it brilliantly...Heroes for example looks better on DVD through my upscaler than on BBC HD.

 

However, I do get films like WALL-E on Blu Ray...thats just necessary

[khilafah]

Is Hot Fuzz out on blu-ray yet. Its a pretty average film but the the PQ on the HD-DVD is pretty stunning. easily one of the best High Def films I have seen when it come to PQ quality.

 

 

 

 

 

[Cube]

Why does my DVD look like the bottom set of pictures?

[S.C.G]

Because the "comparison" shots are probably upscaled dvd quality on the bottom pic and deliberately blurred dvd quality on the top pic.

[McPhee]

It's because both pics are cropped and then blown up in size.

 

Try this for a comparrison;

 

http://www.zonadvd.com/modules.php?name=Sections&op=viewarticle&artid=749