PDA

View Full Version : Blue Ray Rip Off



lreyes
04-24-2010, 03:01 PM
Hope I am not irritating anyone for posting this, but since Blue Ray Players has some relations to gaming, and 3-D work, I want to express my anger at Sony Blue Ray player for initiating periodic upgrades for the player to play Blue Ray DVD's..I bought Avatar Blue Ray DVD and it would not play on my Sony player Model BDP S300 (newer versions are now in the 370 models). I was told I need to upgrade my driver with down link from Sony, so I downloaded the upgrade and the upgrade did not work, I used the right CD disk it calls for and tried every which way to make it work, but to no avail. I contacted Sony on line to send one of their CD, so I will wait to see if theirs works. I have a feeling that sony wants us to buy newer models and old models like mine are no good! I was also told that all companies makers of Blue Ray player are in the same boat (not sure about this)? This is just not Right. I returned the Avatar movie!

madwolfproductions
View Public Profile
Send a private message to madwolfproductions
Find More Posts by madwolfproductions
Add madwolfproductions to Your Buddy List

cresshead
04-24-2010, 03:17 PM
yup, welcome the the pile of poop called 'blue ray'...as steve jobs commented it's "a world of hurt"

seriously, it's just like when the dvd came out...some discs did not play on certain players and you had to buy new ones...of course THEY cost around £20 not £300 for a blu ray...

it'll all shake out in the end and we'll have download/streaming/sdcards instead of plastic discs and a rotary motor plus laser...

meatycheesyboy
04-24-2010, 03:40 PM
yup, welcome the the pile of poop called 'blue ray'...as steve jobs commented it's "a world of hurt"

seriously, it's just like when the dvd came out...some discs did not play on certain players and you had to buy new ones...of course THEY cost around £20 not £300 for a blu ray...

it'll all shake out in the end and we'll have download/streaming/sdcards instead of plastic discs and a rotary motor plus laser...

The Jobs quote was: "Blu-ray is just a bag of hurt. I don't mean from the consumer point of view. It's great to watch movies, but the licensing is so complex," (Bold added by me). His quote is in reference to including blu-ray drives in computers and has nothing to do with watching movies on your home player.

source: http://www.betanews.com/article/Steve-Jobs-Bluray-is-a-bag-of-hurt-no-netbook-planned/1224007987

I cannot comment on the situation in the U.K. but in the U.S. the numbers are nowhere near what you've indicated. A new blu-ray player can be had for $100-$150 now which is nowhere near £300 and while a DVD player is $35-$50 now, when there were incompatibilities in the early days, the players were more in the range of $100-$150, just like blu-ray is now.

That's not to say that there aren't problems with blu-ray. The fact that the standard is constantly in flux making player unable to play certain movies like the OP's is terrible and shouldn't happen. That being said, I'll keep blu-ray over streaming/download until they sort out the equally big mess that is DRM.

Markc
04-24-2010, 04:55 PM
I think that model is Profile 1 isn't it (and possibly not upgradeable to Profile 2 and beyond), that's the problem with being an early adopter of tech!
I got a HDdvd player when they first came out (at least from day one it was fully featured though, i.e. region free, firmware upgradeable etc) whereas blu-ray has been drip fed, adding features bit by bit (making older models out of date)
Saying that I do have a blu-ray player now as well (hopefully Avatar will work)

Martin Adams
04-25-2010, 05:35 AM
I helped my dad update his BluRay player (might have been a Panasonic or something). Turned out that you couldn't burn the update CD using Windows Explorer as the file format was unreadable by the player. Managed to use some CD burning software that was bundled on a Toshiba laptop in the end.

I know he could have plugged it in to the net via an Ethernet port, maybe that's something of an option?

Honestly I thought new technology was supposed to make things simpler, but nope, user consumability always takes a hit. For instance, I installed Win7 64-bit using bootcamp and to get the Apple DVD drive to be recognised in iTunes, I had to modify the registry :(

phil lawson
04-25-2010, 06:43 AM
A PS3 is probably the best blu-ray player around. I haven't had any problems with mine. I guess the periodic OS/firmware upgrades on the PS3 take care of the latest blu-ray firmware as well. Having it hooked up to the internet makes all this a breeze.

Gotta love 1080p/24p movies.

Agreed - little to no problems with the PS3 as a blu ray player.

OnlineRender
04-25-2010, 06:43 AM
A PS3 is probably the best blu-ray player around. I haven't had any problems with mine. I guess the periodic OS/firmware upgrades on the PS3 take care of the latest blu-ray firmware as well. Having it hooked up to the internet makes all this a breeze.

Gotta love 1080p/24p movies.

totally agree ! that's my blueray player !

Ågrén
04-25-2010, 07:04 AM
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/sony_screw.jpg

OnlineRender
04-25-2010, 07:07 AM
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technology/sony_screw.jpg

nice screw ! and the most expensive i have ever seen

Elmar Moelzer
04-25-2010, 07:19 AM
I think I am going to skipp Blue Ray, or at least wait until players are down to 50 Euros or so. Then I may feel tempted. Right now I dont really see any reason to spend that much money on yet another player.

ken_g9
04-25-2010, 08:17 AM
+1 on the PS3.

It is also the best blu-ray player in my book. And it also plays games! :D
The only downside of the PS3 is power consumption compared to stand alone blu-ray players.

Titus
04-25-2010, 08:25 AM
I own three BR players, one in my computer (HD-DVD and BR, when the format war was still going), one in my home and one PS3. No issues with that, and I'm expecting the firmware update for BR 3D support.

In every BR box comes a notice for the inminent upgrade, never did it. I love the resolution, color range, no color banding nor compression artifacts of the BR. I'm hardly watching DVDs again.

kmacphail
04-25-2010, 10:37 AM
nice screw ! and the most expensive i have ever seen

Go here:

http://servicesales.sel.sony.com/ecom/accessories/web/index.jsp

then enter 324018911 in the search box, click the "Part or Accessory Number" radio button, and then click "SEARCH".

Unit Price (in USD): $4.95

Not that $4.95 isn't a hugely inflated price for what's likely a $0.04 screw, but your going to find similarly priced spares across all industries.

Cheers,

-K

The Dommo
04-25-2010, 05:40 PM
The problem with Blu-ray is that it was released to market before the specifications were even finalised. Early adopters who spent £800 on players quickly had players which were obsolete.

Profile 1.1 and 2.0 have come out, and cover the specs that HD-DVD had from the begining with the HD-DVD spec 1.0. It's a shame it lost the war as in most respects it was the superior platform.

But, you can now get cheap Blu-ray players for £80 ni the UK, so I might jump on board soon too. I prefer Xbox360 to PS3 so wouldn't buy a PS3 just to play movies.

Shnoze Shmon
04-25-2010, 07:58 PM
Remember Beta video players? ...Yeah I never had one of those either.

My point? The entire market can use DVDs. Blue-ray may be nicer, but as long as the technology is single source there is the danger that one companies decisions will render your expensive hardware to worthless junk. Not a risk I find acceptable. If a Toshiba or RCA et al player could at least make use of the basic functions of a Blue-ray that are available on any DVD than it would be an acceptable risk.

I don't know this for sure, but I assume Blue-ray players can play regular DVDs. If they can't then buying one is insanity IMO.

Titus
04-25-2010, 08:02 PM
Copy protection in BR is tough :devil:.

Titus
04-25-2010, 08:06 PM
I don't know this for sure, but I assume Blue-ray players can play regular DVDs.

Yes, they can. A BR player is some sort of virtual machine or dedicated computer, I presume this is due to enabling DRM and content control, my sony player needs 3-4 minutes to turn on, any movie needs a an extra minute to load.

JamesCurtis
04-25-2010, 09:16 PM
My Bluray player is a year and a half old now [profile 2.0 xx], but it has played every bluray fed to it so far, even Avatar and 2012 have not given it trouble. I'm currently a firmware update behind - though there is a new one that's been just released. I'll install it once I hear its performing okay.

I also have a BD player/recorder in my PC which works wonderfully.

BTW, I use http://www.blu-ray.com/news/ and http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/ as sources for info.

Great sites.

meatycheesyboy
04-25-2010, 10:04 PM
Blue-ray may be nicer, but as long as the technology is single source there is the danger that one companies decisions will render your expensive hardware to worthless junk. Not a risk I find acceptable. If a Toshiba or RCA et al player could at least make use of the basic functions of a Blue-ray that are available on any DVD than it would be an acceptable risk.


Just like DVD and VHS before it, blu-ray technology was developed primarily by one company (Sony) but the decisions about the format are made by a consortium of companies and not just that one. In the case of DVD, it was invented primarily by Toshiba and in the case of VHS, it was invented primarily by JVC.

People seem to forget that when DVD came out there was the exact same situation going on as is going on now with blu-ray. There was a format war (DVD vs. CD-i), there was fear of change from people with large VHS collections, and there were incompatibilities with different versions of hardware and different types of discs in the early days (most early DVD players can't play dual layer discs).

I probably seem like a huge fanboy but I don't have any allegiance to any one format over another, I just don't like seeing misinformation being passed around.

meatycheesyboy
04-25-2010, 10:10 PM
Copy protection in BR is tough :devil:.

Not that tough though. :)

I copy all my DVDs, HD-DVDs, and blu-ray discs to my server so that I can put my discs in storage to save space and haven't found a disc yet that I haven't been able to copy using AnyDVD HD.

JCG
04-25-2010, 10:22 PM
Interestingly, this was just announced today:


Announcing the first free software Blu-ray encoder
Filed under: blu-ray, x264 ::
For many years it has been possible to make your own DVDs with free software tools. [...]

But Blu-ray has yet to get that treatment. Despite the “format war” between Blu-ray and HD DVD ending over two years ago, free software has lagged behind. “Professional” tools for Blu-ray video encoding can cost as much as $100,000 and are often utter garbage. [...]

Thanks to tireless work by Kieran Kunyha, Alex Giladi, Lamont Alston, and the Doom9 crowd, x264 can now produce Blu-ray-compliant video. [...]

With x264’s powerful compression, as demonstrated by the incredibly popular BD-Rebuilder Blu-ray backup software, it’s quite possible to author Blu-ray disks on DVD9s (dual-layer DVDs) or even DVD5s (single-layer DVDs) with a reasonable level of quality. With a free software encoder and less need for an expensive Blu-ray burner, we are one step closer to putting HD optical media creation in the hands of the everyday user.

http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=328

Shnoze Shmon
04-26-2010, 07:15 AM
People seem to forget that when DVD came out there was the exact same situation going on as is going on now with blu-ray. There was a format war (DVD vs. CD-i), there was fear of change from people with large VHS collections, and there were incompatibilities with different versions of hardware and different types of discs in the early days (most early DVD players can't play dual layer discs).



Part of the reason I didn't get my first DVD player until 2006.

If BR pans out and takes the route of VHS & DVDs then I'll probably have one in a couple of years.

BeeVee
04-26-2010, 03:30 PM
The difference between VHS -> DVD and DVD -> BR is that the leap in the first was enormous - random access, subtitling, audio tracks, additional features and games. The difference between DVD -> BR seems a lot smaller, with the one main difference being increased resolution. That's not enough of an incentive for me to buy the same films for a third time even though my TV is now HD (http://xkcd.com/732/).

B

meatycheesyboy
04-26-2010, 05:53 PM
The difference between VHS -> DVD and DVD -> BR is that the leap in the first was enormous - random access, subtitling, audio tracks, additional features and games. The difference between DVD -> BR seems a lot smaller, with the one main difference being increased resolution. That's not enough of an incentive for me to buy the same films for a third time even though my TV is now HD (http://xkcd.com/732/).

B

I use a system of every other generation. If I own the film on VHS then I buy the blu-ray. If I own the film on DVD then I do not. Once the successor to blu-ray comes out then I will start replacing my DVD collection. Hopefully by doing it this way, the leap will seem bigger and less than an incremental upgrade like DVD -> blu-ray.

Of course if things go to all streaming/downloads soon then I won't upgrade my DVD collection as the jump will probably be backwards in terms of quality from blu-ray like it was with CD -> MP3.

Titus
04-26-2010, 06:00 PM
Of course if things go to all streaming/downloads soon then I won't upgrade my DVD collection as the jump will probably be backwards in terms of quality from blu-ray like it was with CD -> MP3.

Bluray discs now come with DVD and digital copy of the movie.

cholo
04-27-2010, 12:59 AM
When my LD player goes south I will be replacing my LD collection with BR discs :)

Titus
04-27-2010, 08:02 AM
When my LD player goes south I will be replacing my LD collection with BR discs :)

I've some wax cilinders for you :D.

BeeVee
04-27-2010, 03:29 PM
I think that cartoon is funny. But only because it is bad in the laughing at way :)

Any person with just a slight grasp on visual quality and detail in a movie frame will find HDTV/Blu-ray impressive when they're used to DVD on a CRT (or DVD on a HDTV). If he wants to have fun with numbers he can compare the 414.720 pixels of a 576p DVD frame to the 2.073.600 pixels of a 1080p Blu-ray frame, then add the much better colour fidelity and dynamic range to that.

If you can't appreciate the difference, I don't think you should be making "funny" cartoons about the impact of HD.

I think the point he was trying to make was that we are *all* using screens every day with pixels in excess of 1,310,720. I would say that most in our field are using single monitors capable of at least 1,764,000, and many here have dual or triple monitors capable of resolutions exceeding 2,073,600 each. And those screens are *small* by comparison to the 60" monstrosities people shout about.

If anything, people should be shouting that resolution is deplorably low on TVs, not celebrating "FullHD" as they do, and that was Randall's point.

B

The Dommo
04-30-2010, 03:45 AM
Actually, handling and editing 4k footage is about to become piss-easy - and I can't wait.

I'll hopefully be building a new system for 3D and editing 4k (which we're being asked about more and more) within the next few months.

Check our Premiere Pro CS5 for details.

toby
05-01-2010, 01:33 AM
I love the resolution, color range, no color banding nor compression artifacts of the BR. I'm hardly watching DVDs again.
!!
You're not looking very closely then! The only bluray's I have that don't have artifacts or banding are Pixar's. Remember it's still a 24 bit format, so banding is just as prevalent as on other displays.

As a matter of fact I can't decide which upgrade I want next; 4k, or high-bit depth movies!


I use a system of every other generation. If I own the film on VHS then I buy the blu-ray. If I own the film on DVD then I do not. Once the successor to blu-ray comes out then I will start replacing my DVD collection. Hopefully by doing it this way, the leap will seem bigger and less than an incremental upgrade like DVD -> blu-ray.

I go by priority; bluray is almost a complete waste for comedies. Animated features benefit from 1080p less than live action film does. Dialogue and drama heavy movies don't benefit from bluray nearly as much as your cinematic experience movies. Some movies you won't watch over and over again. Lots of ways to prioritize.

You might want to rent before you buy too, I thought Master and Commander would have god-like images in bluray; totally dissappointed. Gladiator was the same. Better than dvd but not stunning like Planet Earth or Corpse Bride. Even "The Warriors" was more stunning!

Red_Oddity
05-01-2010, 05:19 AM
!!
You're not looking very closely then! The only bluray's I have that don't have artifacts or banding are Pixar's. Remember it's still a 24 bit format, so banding is just as prevalent as on other displays.

As a matter of fact I can't decide which upgrade I want next; 4k, or high-bit depth movies!


I go by priority; bluray is almost a complete waste for comedies. Animated features benefit from 1080p less than live action film does. Dialogue and drama heavy movies don't benefit from bluray nearly as much as your cinematic experience movies. Some movies you won't watch over and over again. Lots of ways to prioritize.

You might want to rent before you buy too, I thought Master and Commander would have god-like images in bluray; totally dissappointed. Gladiator was the same. Better than dvd but not stunning like Planet Earth or Corpse Bride. Even "The Warriors" was more stunning!

I see a lot of really bad telecines on BluRay just to churn out a movie for retail again, also, i find that BluRay authors should keeps their damn mitts of the sharpening filters (older movie will seem a bit fuzzy, its because of the filmstock and type of lenses that where used, it is supposed to look that way, so don't f-ing touch it.)

Case in point. in Germany they used to author HD movies on normal 4.5/9GB DVDs using the WMV codec, the release of the Fifth Element on that one was a true benchmark movie, then the BluRay was released, it was so utterly and completely badly done that they actually released the movie again on BluRay as a remastered version.
Also, a lot of HD movies on BluRay are cropped and pan scanned for no reason, anyone remember the first release of Pirates of the Caribbean on BluRay? (http://hd.engadget.com/2007/08/31/blu-rays-pirates-of-the-caribbean-release-has-framing-issues/, the original AVS thread is pretty much broken but it showed how bad it really was.)

The examples are getting old, i know, and things are getting better, but i hardly buy any new movies on BluRay, i buy the older ones, from the budget bin, and those are often from the first batch or still being done by a bunch of amateurs.

In my opinion, screw 4K, most people have 1080p TVs and are sitting at a distance from the TV that even a cheap 720p TV would have sufficed.
Give me better color and luminance depth, I'm sick and tired of the ugly banding i see when ever a shot is fade in and fade out and a gradient is visible somewhere in a shot (think fading in of a full moon shot and watch that sky around the moon band like crazy)

DBMiller
05-01-2010, 06:49 AM
I look at Blu-ray.com for reviews of blu-ray quality. I just got a Panasonic player on closeout for $120 (US) and have only 6 disks so far. All got great reviews for picture quality, and they live up to that.
But I have a lot of DVDs (and a few laser disks!) I wouldn't bother replacing. I can't believe what they charge for 10, 20, 30 year old, and older, movies! Very few are given the care they deserve.
Is it a rip-off? I don't know. I bought betamax, oops. I bought laser disk (2 players), oops. I bought dvd, still great. I bought blu-ray at a great price, but the disks are still mostly not worth the cost. Not quite an oops.

toby
05-01-2010, 01:15 PM
The examples are getting old, i know, and things are getting better, but i hardly buy any new movies on BluRay, i buy the older ones, from the budget bin, and those are often from the first batch or still being done by a bunch of amateurs.
But aren't you guaranteeing that you'll get lower quality discs?


In my opinion, screw 4K, most people have 1080p TVs and are sitting at a distance from the TV that even a cheap 720p TV would have sufficed.
Give me better color and luminance depth, I'm sick and tired of the ugly banding i see when ever a shot is fade in and fade out and a gradient is visible somewhere in a shot (think fading in of a full moon shot and watch that sky around the moon band like crazy)
4k would still be great, it's feature film res. Also I can see pixels on my 40" while still far enough away to watch the whole screen. That indicates that higher res would look better. But yes you can see banding at any distance :P Compression is another big problem - people's faces tend to turn flat red in shadow, and it aggravates banding.

After we get those out of the way we can cry for HDR movies!

Dexter2999
05-02-2010, 09:15 AM
2K has been film res for the last 20 years.

toby
05-02-2010, 11:57 AM
2K has been film res for the last 20 years.

cg is 2k, but film is scanned at 4k

Red_Oddity
05-02-2010, 04:36 PM
cg is 2k, but film is scanned at 4k

Not always in my experience, we always get 2K scans, off course your mileage may vary.
We usually get scans done with the URSA-Y or the ARRI scanner (capable of 2,4 and 6K, but they always deliver in 2K for some reason), i have no experience with the Northlight yet.
Whenever we get Red material it is always shot on 4K but final delivery almost always on 2K.

Then again, the dutch movie industry isn't exactly big enough to warrant large amounts of scanning facilities or extremely high quality deliveries, especially with the small market and limited budgets over here.

So, not trying to argue or anything, just observation it probably differs per country i guess.