When the DVD came out to the market, it didn't came to replace the Laserdisc, but yes, the VHS.
Why is that?
For many of reasons...
Let's not consider the American example of quit on the format, because Japan didn't killed the format.
In fact Japan kept the format until 2008 (Last Year of Production for DVL-919 and CLD-R5).
Why is that? Not because they think on us (collector's) like ..."let's support these guys even without profit...", but because the format was still being profitable.
And besides there are edition in Laserdisc you cannot find in DVD, and vice-versa.

But now you can ask? What about High End Players?
Well they didn't justify anymore because the buyers for those weren't that many after the DVD came out.

And besides Pioneer was get difficulties in finding places to manufacture Laserdisc components for their machines.

Just a tough... to share with everybody here.

If you read my post on the recent thread here, I think I explained pretty well the various quality differences between Laser Disk and DVD. Laser Disk was a high quality composite format. But still a composite format. A DVD on most cases is a component video transfer. In addition it has wider bandwidth and higher S/N ratio. It does have as a drawback compression artifcats. But still it provides a superior image to Laserdisk to spite the compression artifcats.

My take is that DVD simply closed the gap between an elite videophile format and a mass public format.

Sadly I witnessed first hand the loss of a great Laser Disk and equipment dealer - Daves Video in Los Angeles but also well known around the country in laserdisk circles. Great demo rooms considering this was the 1980s and 90s. Huge disc selection for both sales and rentals. Knowlegable staff. And on a Saturday afternoon you would find many film industry people shopping there. It was a social hangout for videophiles. But DVD killed it. Yes Dave was quick to adopt the DVD format but just couldn't compete. I mean why buy a disk from Dave at near list price when Wall Mart now has exactly the same product at a heavy discount. Sad indeed!

But still it provides a superior image to Laserdisk to spite the compression artifcats.

It depends on your definition of "image."

In certain areas that is of course true, but once the artifacting gets bad enough it's hard to say that beautifully rendered blockies are superior to a somewhat softer image with no compression artifacts at all.

Then there's the ability to seamlessly frame by frame and fluidly view slow motion on CAV discs, something no video format since LD has been able to do because of the way video compression works.

Definitely don't compare CAV Laserdiscs with DVD'S.
Those are movies at 24 Frames per second (Movie in Real Time).
That you cannot have on DVD.

Definitely don't compare CAV Laserdiscs with DVD'S.
Those are movies at 24 Frames per second (Movie in Real Time).
That you cannot have on DVD.

How? Laser Disk is a 60i or 50i format. Sure you can do 3/2 reversal but it's not a 24fps format. I agree DVD has itr's problems as well with slow motion as MPEG is a interframe compression techmology.

It depends on your definition of "image."

In certain areas that is of course true, but once the artifacting gets bad enough it's hard to say that beautifully rendered blockies are superior to a somewhat softer image with no compression artifacts at all.

Then there's the ability to seamlessly frame by frame and fluidly view slow motion on CAV discs, something no video format since LD has been able to do because of the way video compression works.

Not only a softer image with Laser Disk but also NTSC artifcats and much more bandwidth limitation on the chroma portion.

Now I agree there are some pretty bad DVDs out there and some outstanding Laser Disk pressings.

Add yes, nothing in the consumer market today beats CAV for frame by frame or slow motion.

...Sadly I witnessed first hand the loss of a great Laser Disk and equipment dealer - Daves Video in Los Angeles...
Happened over here too, there was a very nice shop for Laserdiscs and obscure movies close
to where i lived. Closed down soon after the big chains started selling DVDs at heavy discounts.
I do like DVD & Blu-ray but it is not as much fun collecting them as it was with Laserdiscs.
For me this was the golden age of movie collecting. ... and nothing beats carrying a big & heavy LD Box home :D

I do like DVD & Blu-ray but it is not as much fun collecting them as it was with Laserdiscs. For me this was the golden age of movie collecting. ... and nothing beats carrying a big & heavy LD Box home :D

Yeah, you're right. Maybe it was because they were so expensive, that we cherished every purchase. The cover art was often attractive, like vinyl phonographs were. And the fact that LD was so far ahead in quality over videocassettes made laserdiscs a joy to behold. Even now, I still get a bit of that feeling when I buy the occasional used laserdisc.

[QUOTE=WildZero;17145811]Happened over here too, there was a very nice shop for Laserdiscs and obscure movies close
to where i lived. Closed down soon after the big chains started selling DVDs at heavy discounts.
I do like DVD & Blu-ray but it is not as much fun collecting them as it was with Laserdiscs.
For me this was the golden age of movie collecting. ... and nothing beats carrying a big & heavy LD Box home :D[/QUOTE
I totally agree with you, it was the golden age. It really was fun heading out to Camelot Music (before the name change) and browsing through the bins to add to my LD collection or paging through the latest catalog and, yes, after buying the box set of Last Picture Show, Se7en, Close Encounter or Spartacus and others, there was something unexplainably fun about bringing them home and firing up the player. I still remember how excited I was when I bought the Criterion release of Jason and the Argonauts. I still like to watch a few movies here and there (I have over 300 and a CLD-99), such as Lonely are the Brave, which only just a month or so ago finally hit dvd. Hard to explain but it was the same feeling when I was 9, 10, 11 years old and collecting dozens of Marvel comics during the Silver Age of their titles.

December 2007 started my HD DVD collection, approximately October 2008 bought my first Blu-Ray title ''Iron Man'' and have been buying the odd title here and there....
No Blu-Ray player yet but it's being paid for slowly....reserved with the retailer, of which I hope to have by February 2010.

However none of this will ever beat the Laserdisc Format ''IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PICTURE QUALITY'' it's the collectabilty of LD's that does it for me.

I'm still purchasing Laserdisc's and Hardware with a HLD X0 reserved with seller ''will be fully serviced'' before shipment and 2 sets of spare parts for my HLD X9....have a service manual and also have a Pioneer service engineer who works and lives about 3miles away in the same town, and has explained that parts are plentiful.

Still purchasing Laserdisc's and still get the excitment when opening for the first time.....there are still a large number of titles that are new and unopened for sale on the major auction site.

Great reading others fondest memories....and can relate ''totally'' Laserdisc had that certain clientel that you don't get anymore......something very special about this fine format that will not go away.....

I started the AV pastime in April of 1998 and I feel that this was the height of Laserdisc.......Japan carried on production until late September 2001.

Many rare titles that were only produced in Japan are now fetching very high prices, examples are X-MEN / 007 THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH / MI-2 / THE 6TH DAY with 6.1 soundtrack ect...ect....

Great & fine format and still going strong in a number of houses around the world.......

:rolleyes:

Many rare titles that were only produced in Japan are now fetching very high prices, examples are X-MEN / 007 THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH / MI-2 / THE 6TH DAY with 6.1 soundtrack ect...ect....

Great & fine format and still going strong in a number of houses around the world.......

:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

But those titles are not worth the price they used to sell in my opinion. If you check today's prices they are actually cheaper.
In fact the manufacturers should accept orders for some titles, to avoid the black market. But that's life...

I see no one has mentioned size. AFAIC, that is what killed the laserdisc. No consumer wanted to deal with a 'LP' sized storage media.

I see no one has mentioned size. AFAIC, that is what killed the laserdisc. No consumer wanted to deal with a 'LP' sized storage media.

Perhaps true by the '90s and beyond, but certainly not an issue when the format premiered in the late '70s or through most of the '80s. Most people still had LP collections at that point.

Perhaps true by the '90s and beyond, but certainly not an issue when the format premiered in the late '70s or through most of the '80s. Most people still had LP collections at that point.
Yes. And it was still possible for people over 45 to read the cover or liner notes. :)

larry

I see no one has mentioned size. AFAIC, that is what killed the laserdisc. No consumer wanted to deal with a 'LP' sized storage media.

As someone who was very interested in LD back then, I never got into it because of cost, especially the movies. For me, LD never became an affordable format. IMO, that is at least one reason why LD didn't become a mainstream format.

yes. And it was still possible for people over 45 to read the cover or liner notes. :)

larry

Lol!

+1

As someone who was very interested in LD back then, I never got into it because of cost, especially the movies. For me, LD never became an affordable format. IMO, that is at least one reason why LD didn't become a mainstream format.

that would be me as well... i WANTED to get into it, but it was cost prohibitive... :(

The format's biggest deterrents were price and the side break issue.

And think of all the LD titles that never will come to BD. Of course, there are many which shouldn't, but that's a different issue ;)

In my opinion i think Laserdisc is more alive than ever...
It looks like now all Cinema Enthusiasts want a Laserdisc Player in their Home Theater or Living Room. (Even Low End Models, doesn't matter, but they want one).

I think it's the coolest format... :)

And in my opinion the only players worth to have are Pioneer, because they are the only brand that i know that still has parts and gives support.

And the LD machines have a very good point in their favor, that is the fact they are mostly mechanical.... it means that somehow even if there are no parts it's possible to fix them... :)

In fact we all should say tank you to people like Kurtis that is always a very big help to all of us.

I hope that people like him will always be there, because their knowledge is valuable.

And in my opinion the only players worth to have are Pioneer, because they are the only brand that i know that still has parts and gives support.

And the LD machines have a very good point in their favor, that is the fact they are mostly mechanical.... it means that somehow even if there are no parts it's possible to fix them... :)

I recently saw a user report on 2ch.net saying that Pioneer Japan refused to fix his X0 since they no longer have replacement parts. I suppose a private repairman might be able to handle it, though.

This has me a bit worried, but my player is an X9 which was in production for much longer than the X0 so I should hopefully be OK for a while.

You are safe, don't worry.
What you are saying about the X0 it's true, there are no pickup's available anymore.
But for the X9 Pioneer still has plenty of them... Until 2012 i don't think there will be problems...
Besides do you know how much was a pickup for the X0? $800 USD... :rolleyes:
And for the X9 around $400 USD (it's half...) ;)

Did anyone catch the shout-out to Laserdiscs in last week's "Californication"? It's hilarious.

Runkle: Huh? "Behind the Green Door" is available on Blu-ray?

Collini: Laserdisc! People who sold their Laserdiscs were absolute a**h****. Fools and a**h****

(Screen on the TV goes blank)

Runkle: Humph...what?

Collini: Flip it.

(Runkle pulls out the disc to turn it over)

Runkle: Wow!




Anyhoo, here's where mine ended up...

http://img263.imageshack.us/i/laserdiscs.jpg/

And think of all the LD titles that never will come to BD. Of course, there are many which shouldn't, but that's a different issue ;)

It irks me that I can't buy "At play in the Fields of the Lord," loaded with star power, in DVD to replace my laserdisc. But, I can get a DVD double-feature of Porky's 1 & 2 in DD 5.1 for $10. Who makes some of these decisions?

I miss the good'ol days.

Those were the days when THX certification really meant something. Supervised mastering and production of the discs. There were rumors that THX engineers actually had production runs trashed if quality didn't meet their specs.

Laserdisc was where AC3 (Dolby Digital 5.1) and DTS trickled into the consumer market.

I remember saving up my money from the p/t job while in college to order the upcoming release from Ken Crane's Laserdisc. Buying a movie was a fun and exciting. Anyone remember dropping $250 for the Star Wars Definitive Collection or $100 for the Abyss box set? Special edition sets meant you were really getting something extra.

Shame there isn't a replacement 'niche' format anymore. I suppose there really is no need due to DVD and Blu-Ray.

I remember saving up my money from the p/t job while in college to order the upcoming release from Ken Crane's Laserdisc. Buying a movie was a fun and exciting. Anyone remember dropping $250 for the Star Wars Definitive Collection or $100 for the Abyss box set? Special edition sets meant you were really getting something extra.

I'll do you one better. I bought the Aliens - Director's Cut CAV box set at a time when it was long out of print. Had to order it from the classifieds section of The Laserdisc Newsletter. The only copy I could get had a hole-punch in one of the corners through the entire box packaging. I paid $200 for it.

And it freakin' rotted on me!

Years later, I went to a blow-out sale at Sight & Sound here in Boston and bought a replacement copy in much better condition for $15. That was in the waning days, when everyone was dumping their LD collections to get on the DVD bandwagon.

One thing is true...
The magic of Laserdisc cannot be replaced by any other format...
I still remember that i bought Back to the Future Muse Hi-Vision, and i was desperately looking for Parts II and III in new condition for years... and i paid a fortune that i feel shame to tell....LOOOOL


I did some crazy things...

But you know what i don't regret at all, i would pay it again, i love the format.

One thing is true...
The magic of Laserdisc cannot be replaced by any other format...
I still remember that i bought Back to the Future Muse Hi-Vision, and i was desperately looking for Parts II and III in new condition for years... and i paid a fortune that i feel shame to tell....LOOOOL


I did some crazy things...

But you know what i don't regret at all, i would pay it again, i love the format.

While I think it is sort of sweet that you are fond of LD your statements on this thread suggest an almost obsessional quality and are irrational.

First,

"It looks like now all Cinema Enthusiasts want a Laserdisc Player in their Home Theater or Living Room. (Even Low End Models, doesn't matter, but they want one"

This is just silly. Few enthusiasts want to buy low end Laserdisk players...or high end for that matter. Enthusiasts want 4k and HD audio not 35 year old technology.

Second, the PQ of LD cannot hold up to most 480 DVD's available today. When comparing them to 1080P it is not even close.

Third, this is not the heyday of Laserdisk. In a 1080p world with HD audio, other than nostalgia, enthusiasts do not want the latest movie's on LD. Yes it is fun to ponder those nice sleeves and the memories we all have of them....but you seem deluded in thinking that anyone with a serious HT system wants to dump that bad old 1080p and go back to analog disks.

Your posts carry with them a ferver that is not well anchored in reality. No other format can match the "magic" of LD. really? Uh...where is that magic exactly. This is almost eroto-mysticism for a dead format.

Uhhh.. Let me see... :rolleyes::rolleyes:
Who cares about what you think?
Besides if you don't like it, don't comment something that is not your area of interest.
Of course you don't know anything about LD, nothing against that, but simply don't speak about something you don't know.

Besides it looks to me that you have a couple of dead formats, such as HD-DVD, D-VHS...

Do you see anyone here saying that you have an obsession?

Uhhh.. Let me see... :rolleyes::rolleyes:
Who cares about what you think?
Besides if you don't like it, don't comment something that is not your area of interest.
Of course you don't know anything about LD, nothing against that, but simply don't speak about something you don't know.

Besides it looks to me that you have a couple of dead formats, such as HD-DVD, D-VHS...

Do you see anyone here saying that you have an obsession?

But I am not claiming that HDDVD or DVHS are "magical" and that everyone is dying to have a unit. LD is not the "coolest" technology out there (geez this is 2009) and its "magic" was replaced a decade ago.

I think you should respect others, that's all.

RMST: I agree with you 100%. I can't deny the fact that DVD or BD for that matter are steps ahead as far as PQ and SQ, but with the appearance of these new formats something was lost along the way....I call it ART. I'm a big Pat Metheny fan, and I have pretty much all the concerts on DVD, but one day I came along this website that had the same concerts but on LD and by looking at the cover and the inserts I knew that there was no comparison. It's like when people downloads music and keep them in hard drives as opposed as buying the CDs....man what's the point!!!!!. CDs are collectible items, so are LD,VHS, SACD, DVDA, etc,.... maybe I'm getting old:o

It's not about getting old my friend, it's about passion for cinema and music, it's different...;);):cool:

Did anyone catch the shout-out to Laserdiscs in last week's "Californication"? It's hilarious.


Hehe, I saw that. It was pretty funny. Brought back memories of getting up and changing discs. Ah, the good ol' days. Sadly, I've retired most of my LDs. I kept a few, some Disney CAVs, the original Star Wars box (with Han shooting first:cool:), a handful of DTS LDs. Other than that, I sold off most of my collection.:( *Sigh* To quote Bobby Dylan, "The times they are a changin'."

Collini out!:D

If you love your laserdiscs that much I have some advice.

Capture them and burn them to dvd. That way you won't have to worry about the hardware becoming obsolete.

I never saw the attraction of LD myself. The 4x3 and composite nature of the video was always a let down. I've never seen an LD that rivalled even an averagely competent dvd mastering.

It is one format that seems to propogate a certain level of : dare I say it, fanaticism , outwith its actual capabilities.

This for example:

http://www.starlaser.com/dvd-lasr.htm

Is fairly typical of the rose-tinted view that LD tends to garner.

I can barely manage to watch a dvd on screens bigger than about 24" these days . I doubt I'd even bother getting an LD out of its sleeve.

RMST: I agree with you 100%. I can't deny the fact that DVD or BD for that matter are steps ahead as far as PQ and SQ, but with the appearance of these new formats something was lost along the way....I call it ART. I'm a big Pat Metheny fan, and I have pretty much all the concerts on DVD, but one day I came along this website that had the same concerts but on LD and by looking at the cover and the inserts I knew that there was no comparison. It's like when people downloads music and keep them in hard drives as opposed as buying the CDs....man what's the point!!!!!. CDs are collectible items, so are LD,VHS, SACD, DVDA, etc,.... maybe I'm getting old:o


This is one area where a re-pressed DVD is INFERIOR! Those classic 80s and 90s concerts were mastered on 1 inch NTSC tape. A pure composite recording format. A Laser Disk is also a "direct color" composite format with slightly less bandwidth than 1inch type C recording. To make a DVD from that master it must be decoded to component and than compressed. I find that process far more damaging than the raw laserdisk. Furthermore some facilities may try to noise reduce or enhance the image going to DVD. This if not done carefully, and its generally not, makes all kinds of artifacts.

A film re-transferred to DVD from a component video master or a later HD down conversion is no contest for quality over a LD. But if the master only exists on NTSC tape, then LD is the best copy you can get.

If you love your laserdiscs that much I have some advice.

Capture them and burn them to dvd. That way you won't have to worry about the hardware becoming obsolete.



But do so only as a safety copy if the LD ever deterioates. If you want the best quality use the LD for viewing.

And FWEIW, the realtime MPEG encoders in consumer DVD recorders are pretty poor. Much worse then a professional multipass encoder and as outlined in my post above, even that is not up to par for a NTSC master.

I never saw the attraction of LD myself. The 4x3 and composite nature of the video was always a let down.

Always a let down? As opposed to what? Anamorphic enhancement and Component Video didn't exist on home video until the very end of Laserdisc's 20-year life cycle.

Either you're too young to remember a time prior to DVD, or you have your own rose-tinted view of home video history.

But do so only as a safety copy if the LD ever deterioates. If you want the best quality use the LD for viewing.

And FWEIW, the realtime MPEG encoders in consumer DVD recorders are pretty poor. Much worse then a professional multipass encoder and as outlined in my post above, even that is not up to par for a NTSC master.


Who said use a realtime encoder? I use at least a sweetspot component capture card and multipass encoding.

This is one area where a re-pressed DVD is INFERIOR! Those classic 80s and 90s concerts were mastered on 1 inch NTSC tape. A pure composite recording format. A Laser Disk is also a "direct color" composite format with slightly less bandwidth than 1inch type C recording. To make a DVD from that master it must be decoded to component and than compressed. I find that process far more damaging than the raw laserdisk. Furthermore some facilities may try to noise reduce or enhance the image going to DVD. This if not done carefully, and its generally not, makes all kinds of artifacts.

A film re-transferred to DVD from a component video master or a later HD down conversion is no contest for quality over a LD. But if the master only exists on NTSC tape, then LD is the best copy you can get.

Don't agree with this. Whatever the format of the video it gets viewed as RGB. Capture to a format thats greater than the native materials bandwidth capabilities and you shouldn't have any deterioation.

Always a let down? As opposed to what? Anamorphic enhancement and Component Video didn't exist on home video until the very end of Laserdisc's 20-year life cycle.

Yep and its not 1080p either . That doesn't make it particularly cherishable.
Laserdisc was never that impressive on its own terms or anyone elses.



Either you're too young to remember a time prior to DVD, or you have your own rose-tinted view of home video history.

Please! I don't regard home video as turning serious until dvd arrived and I'm very familiar with most video formats from about 1980 onward.

Laserdisc was never that impressive on its own terms or anyone elses.


Please feel free to share what home video technology DID impress you prior to the advent of DVD.:rolleyes:

Yep and its not 1080p either . That doesn't make it particularly cherishable.
Laserdisc was never that impressive on its own terms or anyone elses.

Please! I don't regard home video as turning serious until dvd arrived and I'm very familiar with most video formats from about 1980 onward.

Your argument doesn't make any sense. You may not consider home video as turning serious until DVD arrived in 1997, but plenty of people were watching and collecting movies then. What better or more impressive option than Laserdisc did they have? To sit on their hands and wait 20 years for DVD to be invented?

The first 2 or 3 years of DVD's existence weren't particularly impressive or cherishable either. The terrible compression quality of those early DVDs made many of them inferior to Laserdisc playback, despite Component color and anamorphic enhancement (and it took several big studios a few years to even get on board with anamorphic enhancement). Have you tried to watch the first DVD edition of Blade Runner lately?

By your logic, Blu-ray isn't particularly impressive right now either, because if we just wait 20 more years we'll eventually have 80,000k video formats. And 20 years from then, we'll have 1,000,000,000k video. And 20 years from then...

There's basically just no point to this hobby at all, is there? :rolleyes:

Please feel free to share what home video technology DID impress you prior to the advent of DVD.:rolleyes:

35mm maybe 16mm at a pinch.

There's basically just no point to this hobby at all, is there? :rolleyes:

Not back then it wasn't. In my opinion. There is no way I'd have been happy forking over that amount of money for the sort of quality laserdisc offered with all its quaint industrial disadvantages. Like I said rose-tinted specs.

I think I would have taken svhs recordings of analogue PAL over LD.

The BR dvd wasn't that bad in comparison to LD. Seriously I've got it lying around somewhere.

Laserdisc was a substantial step up from VHS and S-VHS. At least the discs don't wear out with playing! There are other defects of the tape medium (like print-through) that they don't have. Note the present tense: I have quite a large library of LDs. I was quite annoyed when my favorite purveyor of LDs went out of business a few years after the arrival of DVDs, even though they were selling a large selection of DVDs.

There are many LDs which never will be available in either DVD or BD formats. Like the Atari video game Firefox. Bluth's Space Ace and Dragon's Lair did get translated to DVD, but It seems unlikely they'll make it to BD. Hmmm. I just discovered that Space Ace is available on the iPhone, so maybe it will...

Don't agree with this. Whatever the format of the video it gets viewed as RGB. Capture to a format thats greater than the native materials bandwidth capabilities and you shouldn't have any deterioation.

DVD involves mainly temporal compression. However there is spatial filtering as well. Its also a question of the decoder used. Once you decode it for DVD, you have locked any future decoding improvements. Keeping the signal stored in a composite format allows you to leverage any future decding technology. I do recognize though that future NTSC decoder developement is probably a dead issue.

It all depends on the gear you have and your desire to get the most out of a composite recording. I go to extremes with a digital tap from the players TBC out through a broadcast decoder and Digital Vision DVNR. But it's a hobby and I realize not to many people will want to go to that length.

But on a more practical scale, I would still use the laser disk as a direct playback to a state of the art scaler like a Lumagen or DVDO rather than make a DVD out of it. Of course the coveinence factor of a DVD may also outweigh the mslight increase in viewing quality from a direct playback. That depends on the user.

Your argument doesn't make any sense. You may not consider home video as turning serious until DVD arrived in 1997, but plenty of people were watching and collecting movies then. What better or more impressive option than Laserdisc did they have? To sit on their hands and wait 20 years for DVD to be invented?

There's basically just no point to this hobby at all, is there? :rolleyes:

Remember too that a lot of these folks had commercial AV projectors that would do progressive scan. Faroudja had a line of consumer scalers and image processors in the early 1990s to feed these projectors. Now the equipment cost in those days was into high 5 figures to play in this club but still there were quite a few videophiles that did.

Sure today a $3000 Panasonic projector and $200 BluRay player blows the above setup right out of the water. But back then it was the very high end and the image quality was the benchmark for home video, even broadcast video.

35mm maybe 16mm at a pinch.

And these in what way qualify as home video? Could you go to your local Sears to buy one for the home? How many movies were available for consumer sale?

Not back then it wasn't. In my opinion. There is no way I'd have been happy forking over that amount of money for the sort of quality laserdisc offered with all its quaint industrial disadvantages.

I'm not asking this to be rude, but I'm curious how old you are? Your comments strike me as someone who simply wasn't around at the time. Especially when you say, "There is no way I'd have been happy" or "I think I would have taken svhs recordings of analogue PAL over LD."

Like I said rose-tinted specs.

You complain about the "industrial disadvantages" of Laserdisc, and yet advocate installing a 35mm projector in your home and buying 35mm film reels? You say that you would have preferred PAL SVHS, with its speedup problems and the inherent disadvantages of any linear tape format?

Believe me, I'm not the one wearing rose-tinted glasses here.

D., I have a lot of respect for your posts in the Blu-ray Software forum, but I think you really just don't have any idea what you're talking about here. Your comments are way off base.

D., I have a lot of respect for your posts in the Blu-ray Software forum, but I think you really just don't have any idea what you're talking about here. Your comments are way off base.

:D

I really think you are getting a little carried away here.

I never was impressed by LD. The fact that there was not a superior consumer format around for a time is besides the point. It still wasn't very good.

I was never impressed by an LD picture and I don't regard them with the same affection you do.

In answer to your question I'm 37.

Ironically in the late 70s where I grew up it was easier to obtain films on 35mm, 16mm and even Super8 ( I remember watching "Alien" on all three) than laserdisc ( probably easier than getting films on beta or vhs too). Now we obviously didn't have projectors at home but what we did have were municipal halls with projection capabilities and film clubs that would show films well after their initial cinema release.

My point was that as a format LD was no great shakes but it does seem to garner this affection amongst people ( I'm obviously not one of them;)).

Just like with DVDs and (less often) BDs, LD video quality varies (varied?) a lot. Criterion has always produced a quality product. Discs from other sources sometimes were obviously made from a VHS tape -- and I don't mean from the master used to make the VHS tape!

"Ironically in the late 70s where I grew up it was easier to obtain films on 35mm, 16mm and even Super8 ( I remember watching "Alien" on all three) than laserdisc ( probably easier than getting films on beta or vhs too)."

The only consumer laserdisc product available in the "late 70's" was MCA DiscoVision (mid 1978). It was by all measures a first effort at best, and a mess at worst.

It seems to me that concluding a judgment of any technological product by its first appearance in the marketplace seems improper, especially one that lasts over two decades. By example - the video quality of "The Matrix" LD was almost indistinguishable from the initial DVD; the LD audio was far better.

Watching "Alien" in the late 70's "well after (its) initial cinema release" would have been a challenge, obviously. ;)
Regardless ... I've never seen a non-theatrical film-based showing of any movie that was comparable (in a good way) to later-generation, high-end laserdisc.

Each to his own.

The only consumer laserdisc product available in the "late 70's" was MCA DiscoVision (mid 1978). It was by all measures a first effort at best, and a mess at worst.

It seems to me that concluding a judgment of any technological product by its first appearance in the marketplace seems improper, especially one that lasts over two decades.

I'm not . read my reply in the context it was made. I've seen plenty of premium laserdiscs.



By example - the video quality of "The Matrix" LD was almost indistinguishable from the initial DVD; the LD audio was far better.



I'm thinking a visit to the optician would be a good thing.



Watching "Alien" in the late 70's "well after (its) initial cinema release" would have been a challenge, obviously. ;)



Not if you go around misquoting people obviously.


Regardless ... I've never seen a non-theatrical film-based showing of any movie that was comparable (in a good way) to later-generation, high-end laserdisc.

Each to his own.

I'm thinking the optician thing again especially if you drive.

DVD involves mainly temporal compression. However there is spatial filtering as well. Its also a question of the decoder used. Once you decode it for DVD, you have locked any future decoding improvements. Keeping the signal stored in a composite format allows you to leverage any future decding technology. I do recognize though that future NTSC decoder developement is probably a dead issue.

.

4:2:0 is more than enough to contain the color bandwidth from an NTSC composite signal. A good capture card with an accurate composite decoder should be more than a match for anything you'll find on LD.

Mr. D - I did not get personal, nor did I misquote. Nor am I arguing.

Please -
- Your reference to "Alien" was in a sentence started by "Ironically in the late 70s." Additionally, my reply noted the potential issue with a ";)."

- Your exposure to the history and type of hardware and discs is not clear, from what I read. To this point I don't remember any reference to the players involved, nor any to the format (PAL LD has a reputation of being inferior to NTSC in many instances, for a variety of reasons.)

- As to players there truly is huge difference in the video and audio quality provided by even mid-1980's machines and the final couple of generations (CLD-97, and then the HLD models). It is very similar to the difference between VHS and S-VHS.

- My video setup has been a G-90 + Lumagen(s) + high-end player(s) at about ten feet from the viewer for years. It is fair to conclude that "The Matrix" LD is indeed comparable to the time+date DVD release. That is especially true on smaller displays/screens.

As to suggesting the necessity of corrective vision ... well, that could be kinda personal :cool:, but I continue to be able to see that LD at its best is better than S-VHS at its best, that DVD at its best is an advance over LD at its best, and DVD is quite inferior to BD in video and especially audio quality. :D

Always a let down? As opposed to what? Anamorphic enhancement and Component Video didn't exist on home video until the very end of Laserdisc's 20-year life cycle.

Either you're too young to remember a time prior to DVD, or you have your own rose-tinted view of home video history.

and as you pointed out ''a 20 year life cycle. i doubt any new format from here on out will last 20 years!

Mr. D - I did not get personal, nor did I misquote. Nor am I arguing.

It is fair to conclude that "The Matrix" LD is indeed comparable to the time+date DVD release. That is especially true on smaller displays/screens.

As to suggesting the necessity of corrective vision ... well, that could be kinda personal :cool:, but I continue to be able to see that LD at its best is better than S-VHS at its best, that DVD at its best is an advance over LD at its best, and DVD is quite inferior to BD in video and especially audio quality. :D

Neither am I relax I was pulling your leg...a bit.

I find it very very difficult to believe the original dvd mastering of the matrix is inferior to a 4x3 letterboxed LD.

Yes I do have it and watched it many times on very large screens , its not perfect but its not terrible either and certainly not anything as bad as LD quality.

Waterworld HD-DVD (although its 1080pish) reminds me a lot of LD video ( but a fair bit sharper) and I consider that one of the worst masters I've seen in recent years.

I'm beginning to feel that, perhaps, Mr. D is the one in need of corrective lenses. ;-)
No one here is going to begrudge you not looking back fondly upon the laserdisc format, but we will begrudge you for denying its inherent advantages.
The difference in image quality between VHS and a properly mastered LD is, in my opinion, analagous to the difference between an excellent DVD & a poor quality video CD. It will be very hard for you to convince anyone other than yourself that the picture and sound provided by LD was not light-years ahead of VHS.
As illustrated above, you complain about the idiosyncrasies and cost of LD but then go on to advocate home installation of a 35mm projector. Do you have any idea the cost involved at the time in this proposition? Not to mention the fact that the noise would drown out every film and it might take you 10 minutes, from canister to show time, to start a film- not to mention reel-changes.
Frankly, if it weren't for the fact that many of your comments elsewhere are so informed, I would just assume that you were trolling. So do tell, where does the animosity come from?

I'm beginning to feel that, perhaps, Mr. D is the one in need of corrective lenses. ;-)

I'm wearing glasses at the moment : Diesel frames , £500 lenses (recently had them reground as I wasn't happy with the first attempt).


No one here is going to begrudge you not looking back fondly upon the laserdisc format,

Phew that's a relief!

but we will begrudge you for denying its inherent advantages.

Darn I knew it was too good to be true.


The difference in image quality between VHS and a properly mastered LD is, in my opinion, analagous to the difference between an excellent DVD & a poor quality video CD. It will be very hard for you to convince anyone other than yourself that the picture and sound provided by LD was not light-years ahead of VHS.

I don't believe I said I regarded VHS as superior to LD.


As illustrated above, you complain about the idiosyncrasies and cost of LD but then go on to advocate home installation of a 35mm projector.

I've not complained about anything I merely stated LD wasn't that great a format. Neither have I advocated installing a 35mm projector for anyone. Are you hoping that merely by saying things they somehow become true?

Do you have any idea the cost involved at the time in this proposition? Not to mention the fact that the noise would drown out every film and it might take you 10 minutes, from canister to show time, to start a film- not to mention reel-changes.

Yes.

Frankly, if it weren't for the fact that many of your comments elsewhere are so informed, I would just assume that you were trolling. So do tell, where does the animosity come from?

Your imagination would be the best bet.

I do continue to be fascinated by the level of fervour LD seems to instill in people as mentioned in my first post.

I've not complained about anything I merely stated LD wasn't that great a format. Neither have I advocated installing a 35mm projector for anyone. Are you hoping that merely by saying things they somehow become true?


Let's review, shall we?

I queried:
Please feel free to share what home video technology DID impress you prior to the advent of DVD.:rolleyes:

You responded:
35mm maybe 16mm at a pinch.

If you note above, I asked what home video technology impressed you.
You indicated that you were impressed with 35mm as a home video technology.

I don't believe I said I regarded VHS as superior to LD.
Neither did I state that you did. I simply illustrated how superior Laserdisc was to VHS.

This was done in the hope of illustrating how silly you sound when you make comments such as the following:
I never saw the attraction of LD myself. The 4x3 and composite nature of the video was always a let down.
&
It is one format that seems to propogate a certain level of : dare I say it, fanaticism , outwith its actual capabilities.
How can you not see the merits and understand why it garnered the appreciation of a generation of videophiles? It did so because it was far better than any other (reasonably) available home video technology at the time. Your statements above are no different than saying that you never understoof the appeal of LPs in the 50s and 60s because of the analogue nature and the current availability of DVD-Audio and SACD... An illogical argument that makes no allowance for the flow of time and progress of technology.

I am not a laserdisc fanatic. I have only recently rediscovered the merits of laserdisc after revisiting my collection and realizing that the DVD phenomenon, that swept me up as much as anyone else, wasn't all it was cracked up to be. However, I've learned to enjoy laserdisc for what it was- a fantastic format that was way ahead of its time, maybe too far ahead, early on in its life-cycle.

4:2:0 is more than enough to contain the color bandwidth from an NTSC composite signal. A good capture card with an accurate composite decoder should be more than a match for anything you'll find on LD.

It all depends on what you consider acceptable quality. I have a few NTSC DVDs that were made from the same master as the LaserDisk and I perfer the LD through my system. Now these DVDs may have been carelessly made based on poor sales projections. But that's my point. Once it's on DVD, you cannot reverse any damage that was done during the encode. The Laserdisk is still the closest thing a consumer can get to the master tape when it comes to NTSC projects.

But hey, if people want to burn them to DVDs for ease of playback and not fool with a dead technology which there is virtually no hardware support left, that's OK. Makes sense. I never said my approach was very practical.

I've not complained about anything I merely stated LD wasn't that great a format.

Do you consider 1 inch Type C videotape a good format? Keeping in mind it was mainstream late 70s through late 80s? Laser disk is basically the same format. In fact the FM frequencies used in laserdisk are the same as PAL high band that was used on 1 inch and even 2in quad.

A good NTSC 1 inch recording could yield 54db S/N. A good laserdisk can do 48db. Not bad for a comparision between consumer and top of the line broadcast equipment at the time.

However, I've learned to enjoy laserdisc for what it was- a fantastic format that was way ahead of its time, maybe too far ahead, early on in its life-cycle.

I'm very happy for you... enjoy.

Vinyl/LPs is a slightly different kettle of fish. I'm not a vinyl fanatic but as a high quality audio format vinyl is still up there with the best of them.

Do you consider 1 inch Type C videotape a good format? Keeping in mind it was mainstream late 70s through late 80s? Laser disk is basically the same format. In fact the FM frequencies used in laserdisk are the same as PAL high band that was used on 1 inch and even 2in quad.

A good NTSC 1 inch recording could yield 54db S/N. A good laserdisk can do 48db. Not bad for a comparision between consumer and top of the line broadcast equipment at the time.

I have no experience of this format. U-matic was probably the earliest pro format I encountered before beta SP took over.U-matic was awful by the way.

However I have watched plenty of LDs and I'm sorry fellas but I'm just not an LD man.

I have no experience of this format. U-matic was probably the earliest pro format I encountered before beta SP took over.U-matic was awful by the way.


U-Matic actually predates 1 inch Type C. It is a color under format like VHS and Betamax and suffers the same ills. Beta 1 was of comparable quality to 3/4 U-Matic but not quite as good. U-matic was initially developed as a consumer format in the early 70s but was too expensive. Where it really caught on is industrial video. Then the developement of the outboard digital TBC in 1974 made ENG possible an killed news film for good.

My first experience with Laser Disc was when I was developing MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 encoders way back in 1993. We used to use them as a nice stable video source for feeding the encoders while testing/debugging.

We would just leave them running 24/7 in loop mode. I've probably seen disc 2 of "Terminator" a thousand times. Of course, the consumer players would only last a few months under those conditions. Eventually, we started using a semi-pro Sony unit that also did both PAL and NTSC.

Ron