OK, I know I posted this info in a thread that got locked down for other (the usual) reasons, but this is the results of a tiny "straw pole" I conducted in the DVD folder of THE CLASSIC HORROR FORUM (http://p075.ezboard.com/fmonsterkidclassichorrorforumfrm45.showMessageRange?topicID= 1149.topic&start=1&stop=25) I started out as a lossless-audio pole and I expanded it to try and get some general HD opinions.

I will say that from day one I've been one of the few HD guys in this particular forum. I don't argue the war there, the forum is more civil and I respect that. These people are not tech heads, or really JSP, but where they differ from here is probably smaller incomes and bigger DVD collections. The average user has anywhere from 500-2000 DVDs.

It's simply a different perspective, some only voted on what they felt like voting on. All are aware of HD, it's been talked about for at least a year. Believe it or not the results show a "warming trend" compared to attitudes when HD was first talked about.

1) Do you listen to movie audio over your TV speakers? No – 15, Yes - 8
2) Do you know what "lossless audio" is without guessing? No – 17, Yes - 6
3) Do you care about "lossless audio"? No – 18, Yes – 5 (three of the five were just curious to know what it is)

For those who don't own either HD DVD or Blu-ray, what is the biggest factor holding you back?

A) Price - 6
B) The Format War - 6
C) You are happy with DVD and think it's not worth it - 15
D) You aren't seeing the type of films you want available - 6
E) You think both formats are destined to fail - 4

Since A & C are both price related, price seems very important, more than the content or the war itself.

Would you buy a hi-def format now if there were only one? Yes – 3, No - 12

Price always was an issue and always will be. I can't believe people are trying to claim it isn't.

Price always was an issue and always will be. I can't believe people are trying to claim it isn't.

There is a difference whether price is important (which no one would deny, I believe) and whether you can win on price (which is much more debatable).

I know people for who price is indeed the issue. But it's the price of BD players that is the issue. They do not even consider HD DVD since they believe it is a losing format.

As I think more about this, I have to object to lumping together A&C as being price.

Of the 15 people who mentioned C, only 6 mentioned A, ie price.

So there are at least 9 people (out of 15) who mentioned 'not worth it' without mentioning price. Why would you want to claim that their 'not worth it' refers to price as opposed to, for example, I don't have an HDTV so why would I care about an HD player. Or, I get so wrapped up in the story that the picture doesn't really make any difference (like the people who like watching movies on that tiny screen in a plane). The simple fact that they did NOT choose price means that they meant something different than price.

So given that you offered price as an option, anyone who did not choose price did not choose price.

Once you take that perspective, price is exactly as important as the war or as the content.

Edit: but as you can see, I do find it interesting :)

Price always was an issue and always will be. I can't believe people are trying to claim it isn't.Because in this case, you have to hook the thing up to an expensive TV! That limits the market to people who care less about the price. It's that simple. If it wasn't, then why the heck has BD software outsold HDDVD software every week this year?

Even with less than 40 people participating - the results still come out the same don't they?

The general interest in HDM just isn't there. IMO you have to take the answers as they are given, 5 choices - each with results . . .NO ADDING.

A) Price - 6
B) The Format War - 6
C) You are happy with DVD and think it's not worth it - 15
D) You aren't seeing the type of films you want available - 6
E) You think both formats are destined to fail - 4

The "DVD is good enough" accounts for about 40% of the answers. Those that voted were probably the most honest. No psych. about the choice. Money questions - different animal altogether - phantom money is much easier to spend then real money.

The real important choice was C - because prices will drop and more and more movies will be released. But if there is no interest - Oh oh . . .

Because Mr Seder, a few of the 90,000 or so weekly PS3 buyers get a BD disk to see what its all about.

A) Price - 6
B) The Format War - 6
C) You are happy with DVD and think it's not worth it - 15
D) You aren't seeing the type of films you want available - 6
E) You think both formats are destined to fail - 4

Since A & C are both price related, price seems very important, more than the content or the war itself.

I don't take C) as price related.

I know many people that can afford HDM, but just think DVD is good enough.

"Not worth it" could mean many different things to the 15 people that voted. Maybe they are just happy with DVD. That has little to do with price, you know, not caring.

I don't take C) as price related.

I know many people that can afford HDM, but just think DVD is good enough.

"Not worth it" could mean many different things to the 15 people that voted. Maybe they are just happy with DVD. That has little to do with price, you know, not caring.


and I was a mix of what's being said. However, many see this a another calculated dip into their movie-buying wallet. That's not price per se, rather that they simply don't want to re-purchase. They don't see enough added value this time around. I should have said expense.

The few of us in this genre forum that care about HD have one thing in common, we own video projectors. I should also have asked "do you own an HDTV or projector?" Really, the only surprise I found, was that more have some form of additional sound system, but it also sounded mostly like "theater in a box stuff"

Either way the name of the forum is an active link, you can read the comments yourselves. I seldom get into partisan HD DVD VS BD arguments there, mostly into HD VS DVD.

The "happy with DVD" syndrome is basically a matter of exposure IMHO.

I remember when I had my first surround system (24 years ago!) with LD and 10 foot projection. People who thought TV was a 4 inch speaker were completely blown away; they wanted it, they got it. I was fairly surprised when surround became commonplace, I hadn't expected that, but it did.

I am now getting the same reaction from HD (same 10ft screen with 720P DLP). People who see it are saying that they had no idea HD was that good. I am hearing a big difference between people's reaction to HD over DirecTV and Blu-ray BTW.

Titles that I have gotten a big rise out of include PE, Casino Royale, and Night at the Museum. One friend of mine has a projection system with DVD and has watched NATM many times; he was blown away by the title on Blu-ray.

People are buying HDTV's like crazy now, based on artifact-ridden demos in stores. I think that once people start to see HDM properly exhibited (either Blu-ray or HD DVD), they are going to see a quantum jump in quality and are going to want it.

I agree, the more saturation we get of HD thru satellite or cable the more people will want HD media. Be it BR or HD DVD. It's going to happen. Another big help is that the screens are getting larger every year and cheaper. A very good reason to upgrade to HD media. In a couple of years 50" and bigger will be the norm. That's where HD really starts to shine! DVD just can't compete on the larger screens. Even my father, who is 76 years old now owns a HD set and a HD player and I didn't have to buy him either one!

Well, I have to say many seem eager to discount the idea that there truly are some who don't want to bother, but have at least some exposure to these mediums.

I love good HD presentation in the same way I love/loved a tremendously well mastered DVD, but I gotta tell ya there truly are a good many drawing lines in the sand. Those lines won't be eroded unless HD is just kind of "the norm," and the norm means nearly the same price as SD DVD (hardware and software), with titles they want, and little or no perceived learning curve. These aren't the kind of people who will step up and carry HD on their backs, but they are the kind of people who buy 100's and even 1000's of movies each.

For me Halloween is a great example, I owned Halloween on tape, then a better tape version, then the Criterion Laser, then the first (lousy) Anchor Bay DVD, then a remastered Anchor Bay DVD, then the Anchor Bay DVD with new extras. Now Anchor Bay/starz is releasing yet another DVD to ride the coattails of the remake this fall. I'll bet you I never watched three of the six incarnations of this movie that I owned, and I will now never buy another DVD of it, though maybe an HD. However, some have drawn the line at DVD, because they can't see doing this with a 1000 titles.

Update 7/30/37


1) Do you listen to movie audio over your TV speakers? No – 17, Yes - 8
2) Do you know what "lossless audio" is without guessing? No – 17, Yes - 8
3) Do you care about "lossless audio"? No – 19, Yes – 6 (three of the six were curious to know what it is)

For those who don't own either HD DVD or Blu-ray, what is the biggest factor holding you back?

A) Price - 7
B) The Format War - 7
C) You are happy with DVD and think it's not worth it - 15
D) You aren't seeing the type of films you want available - 7
E) You think both formats are destined to fail - 5

Would you buy a hi-def format now if there were only one? Yes – 3, No - 13

The "happy with DVD" syndrome is basically a matter of exposure IMHO.

.
I don't think so. I know quite a few people who like HD demos, and can easily see and appreciate the difference, but when they find out what it costs,, they say its not worth it. Its more a matter of priorities.
J

I conducted in the DVD folder of THE CLASSIC HORROR FORUM (http://p075.ezboard.com/fmonsterkidclassichorrorforumfrm45.showMessageRange?topicID= 1149.topic&start=1&stop=25)


Interesting forum.
J

I don't think so. I know quite a few people who like HD demos, and can easily see and appreciate the difference, but when they find out what it costs,, they say its not worth it. Its more a matter of priorities.
J
That's what I'm hearing, in fact I have to defend HDM on a pretty regular basis, example,

This is from one of Fangoria's film critics and the writer of many respected genre books,"I make my living partly by writing about movies and the people who made 'em -- and yet I'd agree with the above 100 percent. If some new format came along, and the amount of money it'd take to buy it was burning a hole in my pocket ....... I'd spend it on fixing something up nice around the house. Or take a vacation. Or give it to some needy charity, like an animal shelter. I'm just SO not interested in making the upgrade from the kind of picture clarity where you can see the pores in a guy's nose to picture clarity where you can see the pores AND pick out the split ends amidst his nose hairs."
my response,
Come on guys the "nose hair and greasepaint" analogy is a little silly. It suggests magnification, so unless you only watch the works of the late, great Ingmar Bergman, you'll be OK in HD land.

Where HD really pays off is when your watching something like Lawrence of Arabia, and that little camel the size of a quarter in the overall frame can actually been "seen" rather than just acknowledged, as it plows across the desert.

Stop any frame on say, the shimmering leaves of a tree-top on DVD, and you'll see leaves and patches of blurry geometric simplification. Stop the same frame on a well-mastered HD disk and you see only leaves, stop a 35mm print and look at a frame, again leaves. When running, HD can give a lot more of what is truly on a film print, and that for me is the appeal, I want that 35mm print in my living room.

Update 7/30/37

Would you buy a hi-def format now if there were only one? Yes – 3, No - 13


I am amazed at the number of people who have an HDTV and HD Cable/Sat. and still watch their favorite shows in SD (my wife is one). It is very hard for us tech loving people to realize that there is large % of people who just don't care about HD. A decent picture is good enough for them.

I've said it all along, that both formats are destined to be niche products. The masses just don't care, IT'S JUST TV, and they don't want to pay more for HD.
J

I've said it all along, that both formats are destined to be niche products. The masses just don't care, IT'S JUST TV, and they don't want to pay more for HD.
J
So it's not just what a new format costs, but that many see it as wasteful in general to toss DVD.

So it's not just what a new format costs, but that many see it as wasteful in general to toss DVD.
That's the attitude I'm getting from people, why mess with success?
J

There are supposed to be over 50 million HDTV's in the USA. Anyone want to take a guess as to how many are actually watching HD on their HDTV?

Hint - don't put too much faith in polls and surveys.

40%

J

40%

J
I know two who have and HDTV, those two have no HD cable, or hi-def media.

One bought it because she needed a new TV and wanted one that took up less room, the other because he knew the HD "switch" was coming.

Neither would pay an extra cent to get actual HD programing.

40%

J

20 million? Not even close . . . .

Comcast HD Info - CBL - most popular method of getting HD in the home:

http://www.tvpredictions.com/comcastboom042607.htm

News
Comcast: HDTV Is Booming
The cable operator says about 20 percent of all subs get a HD or DVR service, or both.
By Phillip Swann

Washington, D.C. (April 26, 2007) -- Comcast said today that roughly 20 percent of its 25 million customers now subscribe to a High-Definition or DVR service, or both.

In its first quarter report, the nation's largest cable operator also said that new High-Definition and DVR subs have jumped 72 percent over the last year.

The company said 535,000 customers added either a high-def or DVR service in the first quarter, compared to 310,000 in the first quarter last year.

Unlike most cable and satellite providers, Comcast does not break down how many subscribers have High-Definition TV and how many have Digital Video Recorders. They include both in the same category.

Comcast also countered those who say they will need to offer a large number of high-def channels later this year when DIRECTV expands its capacity. Company COO and President Steve Burke said the 'quality" of the HD channels is more important than the quantity.

Q2 of 2007:

http://www.tvpredictions.com/comcast072607.htm

Comcast does not specify how many subscribers get HD and Digital Video Recording service. But the cable operator said 441,000 customers added either a HDTV or DVR package (or both) in the second quarter, compared to 294,000 in last year's second quarter.

Lets face it. Most people are buying HDTV because of the size, not the resolution. I don't think you can even buy an SD 50" TV any more, probably not 42" either at this point.
J