AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HDTV Software Media Discussion › A missed opportunity for Blu-Ray?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A missed opportunity for Blu-Ray?

post #1 of 24
2/6/09 at 9:47am
Thread Starter 
so being a home media server geek, I recently ripped my entire collection of buffy and angel DVDs and authored what I am calling "super-discs". I did it because I wanted to have access to the positives of the DVD format (alternate audio, unified menu system, etc) while avoiding the negatives (only a few episodes before having to switch discs, etc). My front end plays these as if they were physical dvds even though they are WAY too big to ever be burned to dvd media. and it is the size of the VIDEO_TS folders (between 42-47 gigs) that got me thinking...

I understand that blu-ray is ostensibly about high-def but consider this -
the buffy set is something like 50 discs. I've taken that down to what could essentially be 7 BDs for 140-something hours of television. this includes all playable bonus features and commentaries but I pulled out other languages and things like scripts and still galleries because I don't watch those. and this is without re-compressing ANYTHING from what was done for the DVD master. if you then imagine remastering this content with newer codecs you could gain noticeable quality, if not resolution while lowering the compressed size (1 hour[45ish minutes], 720p tv show MKVs are routinely around a gig, or approx. half the size of an mpeg 2 1-hour[45-min] show). by this reasoning, you could conceivable fit all 7 seasons of this show onto 4 BDs, maybe 3 if you really push it.

my question is, does anyone but me see this as a missed opportunity for BD? there are lots of TV shows out there that were never produced in HD and so, it might seem obvious that they would never even be considered for a BD release. however, and this is probably my biggest point here, the printing, media, packaging and shipping costs for a 50 disc set simply MUST be higher than doing the same for a 4 disc set, even if BD is more expensive at the outset. so essentially, what I'm saying is, this could become a solid differentiator for the format from DVD. leave the HD marketing argument for blockbuster movies and hour long TV dramas. start pushing the archival storage at a lower cost/ smaller shelf space and yes, a slight bump in quality angle for tv enthusiasts who think about buying their favorite old shows in small packages. and finally, even if we're not talking old shows, the same could be said for half hour comedies. we don't really NEED these in 1080p. master them at 720p, keep the widescreen/HD like they were broadcast, set the bit rate to where you can comfortably fit a whole season on a single disc and I'd buy them up. hell, I'm DYING for a widescreen release of how I met your mother.

so anyone with me or am I just nuts?
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #2 of 24
2/6/09 at 9:58am
What you suggest was talked about before the first BD movies hit the shelves. The problem is that until more BD players are in homes, it doesn't make $$$ sense for the studios. DVDs still sell better. VOD, downloads and streaming are big for TV shows too, especially SD shows. Although it would be nice to have multiple seasons on one disc.

larry
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 24
2/6/09 at 10:03am
Quote:
Originally Posted by lateralis View Post

so being a home media server geek, I recently ripped my entire collection of buffy and angel DVDs and authored what I am calling "super-discs". I did it because I wanted to have access to the positives of the DVD format (alternate audio, unified menu system, etc) while avoiding the negatives (only a few episodes before having to switch discs, etc). My front end plays these as if they were physical dvds even though they are WAY too big to ever be burned to dvd media. and it is the size of the VIDEO_TS folders (between 42-47 gigs) that got me thinking...

I understand that blu-ray is ostensibly about high-def but consider this -
the buffy set is something like 50 discs. I've taken that down to what could essentially be 7 BDs for 140-something hours of television. this includes all playable bonus features and commentaries but I pulled out other languages and things like scripts and still galleries because I don't watch those. and this is without re-compressing ANYTHING from what was done for the DVD master. if you then imagine remastering this content with newer codecs you could gain noticeable quality, if not resolution while lowering the compressed size (1 hour[45ish minutes], 720p tv show MKVs are routinely around a gig, or approx. half the size of an mpeg 2 1-hour[45-min] show). by this reasoning, you could conceivable fit all 7 seasons of this show onto 4 BDs, maybe 3 if you really push it.

my question is, does anyone but me see this as a missed opportunity for BD? there are lots of TV shows out there that were never produced in HD and so, it might seem obvious that they would never even be considered for a BD release. however, and this is probably my biggest point here, the printing, media, packaging and shipping costs for a 50 disc set simply MUST be higher than doing the same for a 4 disc set, even if BD is more expensive at the outset. so essentially, what I'm saying is, this could become a solid differentiator for the format from DVD. leave the HD marketing argument for blockbuster movies and hour long TV dramas. start pushing the archival storage at a lower cost/ smaller shelf space and yes, a slight bump in quality angle for tv enthusiasts who think about buying their favorite old shows in small packages. and finally, even if we're not talking old shows, the same could be said for half hour comedies. we don't really NEED these in 1080p. master them at 720p, keep the widescreen/HD like they were broadcast, set the bit rate to where you can comfortably fit a whole season on a single disc and I'd buy them up. hell, I'm DYING for a widescreen release of how I met your mother.

so anyone with me or am I just nuts?

It all depends on how the original was shot but more that likely DVD offers the best quality that you're going to get from TV episodes from a few years back. I think they should focus on the true HD sources first and worry about the storage of BD last as far as the # of TV episodes that could fit on the media.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 24
2/6/09 at 10:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by PooperScooper View Post

What you suggest was talked about before the first BD movies hit the shelves. The problem is that until more BD players are in homes, it doesn't make $$$ sense for the studios. DVDs still sell better. VOD, downloads and streaming are big for TV shows too, especially SD shows. Although it would be nice to have multiple seasons on one disc.

larry

This topic goes with the other thread I started about how much does it cost to put a movie on BD. As production costs get cheaper, I think ideas like this get more attractive. The question is how many people would be willing to buy an SD TV series on BD?

Also, I wonder if they could improve the video so it would be better than what the are capable of putting on DVD?
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 24
2/6/09 at 10:37am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everdog View Post

This topic goes with the other thread I started about how much does it cost to put a movie on BD. As production costs get cheaper, I think ideas like this get more attractive. The question is how many people would be willing to buy an SD TV series on BD?

Also, I wonder if they could improve the video so it would be better than what the are capable of putting on DVD?

this speaks directly to my point re: remastering.

there are several things that would improve almost automatically like deeper darks and better colors, provided of course, that these are better on the original tape/negative.

however, and this is probably more or less exclusive to TV on DVD, there seems to have been a distinct effort to cram as much content as possible per disc so TV shows that put 4 hours of eps on a disc, + bonus features are quite noticeably MORE compressed than, for instance, a 2 hour movie + bonus features. when you then remaster using a codec that is more efficient, you could easily have noticeable gains even at a decrease in bit rate. like I mentioned, each buffy ep at around 44 minutes was usually 2 gigs for just the video in mpg2. a standard def 44 minute episode compressed with AVC would look much better, even at 1 gig. and yes, I understand that a lot of old tv simply doesn't look great but I can definitely see the difference between what is simply a really dark scene, for instance, and and overly compressed really dark scene. and when it comes to this sort of quality question, this is exactly what sony was marketing towards with super-bit dvds.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 24
2/6/09 at 11:51am
If I could get a 12 DVD set on 3 or 4 BDs, for around the same price, without any apparent loss of quality and with any/all extras, then I'd buy a SD show on BD.

The space saving alone would be worth it.

Plus, I always that this was one of the selling points of BDs. No more massive boxsets, when a couple of BDs would hold the lot?

Seggers
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 24
2/6/09 at 12:04pm
Does anyone know what format the masters for TV shows that get put on to DVD are in? Not the actual film, but where does the video go from there?

Is that a digital format with a higher bitrate than DVD? If a TV show is put on to Blu-ray couldn't it have a much higher bitrate and have other improvements over DVD ever though it may only be 480p?
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 24
2/6/09 at 12:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by seggers View Post

If I could a 12 DVD set on 3 or 4 BDs, for around the same price, without any apparent loss of quality and with any/all extras, then I'd by a SD show on BD.

The space saving alone would be worth it.

Plus, I always that this was one of the selling points of BDs. No more massive boxsets, when a couple of BDs would hold the lot?

Seggers

Oh yes. Just with the TV series I own that would clear two 10' shelves right there.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 24
2/6/09 at 12:08pm
Thread Starter 
one possibility:

Quote:


Digital Betacam (commonly referred to as Digibeta, d-beta, dbc or simply Digi) was launched in 1993. It supersedes both Betacam and Betacam SP, while costing significantly less than the D1 format. S tapes are available with up to 40 minutes running time, and L tapes with up to 124 minutes.
The Digital Betacam format records a DCT-compressed component video signal at 10-bit YUV 4:2:2 sampling in NTSC (720×486) or PAL (720×576) resolutions at a bitrate of 90 Mbit/s plus four channels of uncompressed 48 kHz / 20 bit PCM-encoded audio. A fifth analog audio track is available for cueing, and a linear timecode track is also used on the tape. It is a popular digital video cassette format for broadcast use. Its main competitor is the Panasonic DVCPRO50 cassette format[citation needed].
Another key element which aided adoption was Sony's implementation of the SDI coaxial digital connection on Digital Betacam decks. Facilities could begin using digital signals on their existing coaxial wiring without having to commit to an expensive re-installation.
Sony branded Digital Betacam videotape is sold in a blue-grey cassette container.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 24
2/6/09 at 12:39pm
Where is MovieSwede? He would know this.
Isn't 10-bit YUV 4:2:2 much better than DVD?
Couldn't studios put 480p, 10-bit YUV 4:2:2, "super-bit" TV shows on BD and still fit them all on to a handfull of discs?
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 24
2/6/09 at 12:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everdog View Post

Where is MovieSwede? He would know this.
Isn't 10-bit YUV 4:2:2 much better than DVD?
Couldn't studios put 480p, 10-bit YUV 4:2:2, "super-bit" TV shows on BD and still fit them all on to a handfull of discs?

On his cellphone

The problem here is that BD only support 8bit 4:2:0.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 24
2/6/09 at 1:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

On his cellphone

The problem here is that BD only support 8bit 4:2:0.

Thanks for the reply! Its like calling for Dr. Bombay on Bewtiched.

What is DVD, and isn't the DVD color space something like 320x240?...or am I completely confused.

Could you put a 480p video on BD and have it look significantly better?
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 24
2/6/09 at 1:14pm
DVD is 4:2:0 aswell one quarter chroma to the luma resolution.

If you upscale the source to HD. You will have more colorresolution. But you can introduce artifacts at the same time.

But no, SD on BD is just 360*240, just as it is on DVD.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 24
2/6/09 at 1:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

DVD is 4:2:0 aswell one quarter chroma to the luma resolution.

If you upscale the source to HD. You will have more colorresolution. But you can introduce artifacts at the same time.

But no, SD on BD is just 360*240, just as it is on DVD.

Thanks for the help! I was hoping there would be a quicker way to get some TV shows on to BD with a much improved picture rather than doing what they went through with Star Trek TOS. I know it is costly to go all the way back to film negatives and clean them up.

I know many here would love to see the X-files in some kind of better than DVD format.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 24
2/6/09 at 3:19pm
I think one problem to having so few disks for so much content is perceived value. Some folks would balk at paying the same amount for less physical media. It would seem like less for their money. The other thing would be what happens if a disk is scratched or damaged? You would lose a lot more content. We have our own concerns in IT about DASD size (one big disk, or many small ones) but for different reasons.

Art
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 24
2/6/09 at 3:23pm
Getting SD TV shows onto BD for the sake of creating less physical DVD discs is probably pretty low on the priority list for studios. There is plenty of DVD capacity so the extra discs do not hurt there.

Blu-ray would be better served to get a breadth of movie titles out there.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 24
2/6/09 at 3:38pm
There is a BIG perceived value problem you are not considering. If you put out the same series on 2 disc set and then put it out on 10 disc set the 10 disc set will far out sell the 2 discs because it is perceived as "more" and a better value even if all else is the same.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 24
2/6/09 at 6:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by William View Post

There is a BIG perceived value problem you are not considering. If you put out the same series on 2 disc set and then put it out on 10 disc set the 10 disc set will far out sell the 2 discs because it is perceived as "more" and a better value even if all else is the same.

If both cost the same amount to the consumer, the 10 disc DVD set would sell more than the 2 disc Blu-ray set, mostly because more people own DVD players than Blu-ray players.

If, in the advert for the Blu-ray 2 disc version they advertised that it was exactly the same content as the 10 disc DVD version, but was less compressed (higher bitrate), used a better codec, had higher colour resolution (up-scaled in the best way so you get better than 4:2:0 SD colour resolution), then I think they'd sell more of the Blu-ray version than they would otherwise sell. They'd still sell more of the DVD version but that's because more people have DVD players.

The main thing is how they advertise it and describe it in the product descriptions. A DVD set that says "2 Disc Set" will have more perceived value than one that says "1 Disc Set", because the consumer just sees that one has an extra disc so it must have more content, and they might think that a 1 Disc DVD set with lots of features would probably have to lower the quality to fit it all on 1 disc.

If as many people had Blu-ray players as DVD players, if they said in the product description that the 2 Disc BD version was identical or better in content, resolution, bitrate, quality etc. as the 10 disc SD DVD set, I think more people would buy the 2 disc BD version, especially if they could price it less than the 10 disc DVD set.

Another thing is DVD or Blu-ray disc product descriptions mainly advertise the number of discs in the set, so that is mostly what the consumer has to go on in making a decision (apart from the list of features). If there were 2 versions of a title and one was advertised as "25GB version" and the other "50GB version". The 50GB one would have more perceived value. If there were 2 versions of a title and both had the same type of disc, but one was advertised as "Standard Version (and in the description said "14 Mbit/sec Average Bitrate)", and the other was advertised as "Ultimate Picture Quality Version" (and in the description said "40 Mbit/sec Average Bitate"), the second one would have more perceived value.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 24
2/6/09 at 7:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everdog View Post

Thanks for the reply! Its like calling for Dr. Bombay on Bewtiched.

What is DVD, and isn't the DVD color space something like 320x240?...or am I completely confused.

Could you put a 480p video on BD and have it look significantly better?

I would think they could use AVC or VC-1 instead of MPEG-2, which should reduce the compression artifacts if the bitrates are comparable to DVD. I don't know if that would be significantly better though. Of course, sound could be lossless too.

However, I agree with those that don't see this happening any time soon.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 24
2/7/09 at 5:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

If both cost the same amount to the consumer, the 10 disc DVD set would sell more than the 2 disc Blu-ray set, mostly because more people own DVD players than Blu-ray players...

Please carefully reread my post. I did NOT say 10 disc DVD vs. 2 disc BD. I said "10 disc set" vs "2 disc set" (as in same format). A 10 disc BD set would out sell a 2 disc BD set on perceived value with all other things being equal. You could even put a sticker on the 2 disc set bragging about a smaller carbon footprint and less waist and it would not matter. It is just human nature to see more as being more even if it's not. Why do you think we are getting so many 2 disc Special Editions when all the content would comfortably fit on one 1 disc? Perceived Value
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 24
2/7/09 at 5:38am
Putting SD on BD makes about as much sense as putting HD on DVD. Little or none.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 24
2/7/09 at 9:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Putting SD on BD makes about as much sense as putting HD on DVD. Little or none.

Erm, did you actually read any of the posts?

There appears to be a few of us that would like to see SD on BD, if for nothing else, the possible space savings and possible slight improvement on quality.

Seggers
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 24
2/7/09 at 9:32am
Thread Starter 
the "perceived value" knife cuts both ways as well. If advertising sells the fact that the content is either EXACTLY the same or better on the smaller set AND it costs less (thanks to smaller packaging/shipping/media costs) the perceived value of the smaller set will exceed that of the bigger set. hell, it can even cost the same or more if it's sold correctly (as mentioned).

example:

I have the entire series of farscape in the "starburst editions" these were actually sold as 3 per season sets for, I think, $19.99. the first two seasons were 2 disc sets for a total of 6 for each season. they were double sided/dual layer discs. there were also full season boxes available but the "starburst editions" had some extra features not included in the other box so even though I probably spent more money for less physical discs, the value of the smaller sets was higher for me. the latter 2 season abandoned the dual sided discs and went with 4 discs per set so by this definition, I should value the latter 2 season by roughly double even though the price was the same and content comparable. but a season is a season.

I'm not saying that the marketing of multi-disc sets is totally meaningless but frankly, it is becoming less so than it as in the early days of dvd. simply the fact that many blu-rays are marketed as "2-disc set!" when the second disc is nothing but a "digital copy" for your computer is, at least to me, jading me somewhat to the allure of more discs=better value. I may be a statistical outlier but being able to watch more content before having to get up and change discs is a HUGE perceived value to me.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 24
2/7/09 at 9:53am
Quote:
There appears to be a few of us that would like to see SD on BD, if for nothing else, the possible space savings and possible slight improvement on quality.

Selling TV shows on BD means people have to have a BD player to watch them. Putting them out on DVD means any one can. The other option is master two different sets of disks. I can't see the studios lining up for either option right now. In the future when there are more players out there you may see it happen.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Software Media Discussion

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HDTV Software Media Discussion › A missed opportunity for Blu-Ray?