Star Wars On Blu-Ray Up For Pre-order

[Inzane]

Mostly because Blu-Ray simply isn't worth it over DVD most of the time,

Oooh, you're not going to find too many supporters out there on that point.

I was a late adopter myself (only got a PS3 last december) but the difference in quality is huge. And not just the video, but audio as well.

[Mister Ed]

Mostly because Blu-Ray simply isn't worth it over DVD most of the time,

Oooh, you're not going to find too many supporters out there on that point.

I was a late adopter myself (only got a PS3 last december) but the difference in quality is huge. And not just the video, but audio as well.

Actually, given the small fraction of homes with Blu-Ray (less than 15% last I heard) vs. DVD (over 75%) I'd bet he'd find quite a few supporters for that viewpoint. I'd be one of them. I have yet to see anything about Blu-Ray to suggest that it would be worth it to switch from my perfectly good DVD player. Of course, part of that is, like a large number of people out there, I don't have an entertainment setup that would really take good advantage of any improvement. So to actually experience the "huge" quality difference in sound and picture, I'd likely have to get a new TV AND a sound system.

So yeah, not worth it.

[dWhisper]

The benefit of BRD is all in your head, for the most part. There certainly is a technical advantage to it, but in blind tests, it's a very small percentage who can actually see the difference (I can't find the article, but if I remember it right, it was around 10% of their test group). And since a huge portion of users only operate at 720p (what an upscaler jumps to) or 1080i (worse than 720p), it's somewhat moot in the long run.

It's the main reason why BRD has had such a hard time trying to make headway into the DVD market space. By this point in its lifecycle, DVD was absolutely crushing VHS, because the difference between them was apparent for anyone with eyes. Sound is another point, where it only matters if you're running an absolutely juiced system, which the vast majority of consumers (myself included are not). The super-system at Best Buy is not the normal. The $600 LCD at Walmart is, and that's what matters. I'm not going to spend an extra grand or two to get what could at best be called a marginal gain.

I do typically buy a BRD in the rare case I buy a movie, but mostly because I buy the packages with the DVD and digital copies as well. But I'd much rather watch it via Netflix, and digital distribution is the future, not BRD, which is why my PS3 as the only BRD player isn't that big of a deal. I have DVD players in everything, but haven't ever felt the need to get one for my media center, and I'm not bothered in the slightest that my Mac doesn't even support them.

[Inzane]

So to actually experience the "huge" quality difference in sound and picture, I'd likely have to get a new TV AND a sound system.

Not true at all. While I am currently building a dedicated home theater room in my basement which accommodate a 1080p projector and screen as well as be wired for 7.2 surround, my bonus room currently has my "old-school" gear which is my litmus test for the argument. This old setup has an 11 year old 5.1 A/V receiver, and a 7 year old crt-based RPTV which only supports up to 1080i (no 1080p). (I also have a new Samsung LCD 1080p set in another room)

I have been enjoying upscaled DVDs for many years now on the above system. For a long time I was skeptical of the benefits of blu-ray, seeing as how I didn't have a 1080p set in the house at the time capable of taking advantage of the maximum resolution.

Well, in december I took the leap.

Let me tell you there absolutely is a difference viewing a Blu-Ray at true 1080i vs. a DVD "upscaled" to 1080i. Not only that but a typical blu-ray player today will actually do a better job of upscaling your DVDs than older DVD players with that feature. So pay attention. I'm not even talking about 1080p yet. I am saying a blu-ray at true 1080i is noticeably better looking than an upscaled DVD, let alone a dvd at standard 480p. (Now if I want to enjoy 1080p, that Samsung LCD I mentioned which was a mere $700 set of course takes the visual quality up a whole other level).

That's the visual. Now on to audio. It's not just a matter of channels. There are different types of audio tracks, DTS, DTS-HD, etc. My "old" receiver can't do any of the new formats, only standard Dolby-digital and DTS. Doesn't seem to matter. The soundtracks that come off a blu-ray movie vs. a DVD sound better, even on my old gear. I can't explain all the technical reasons behind it. Maybe the audio data is less compressed on a blu-ray disc. I don't know. But by making no tweaks to my system I can't believe how GOOD blu-rays sound.

The benefit of BRD is all in your head, for the most part.

That statement is pure ignorance. Sorry. If a person can't SEE the difference between 1080p, 1080i/720p and480p, then they must be unobservant people.

in blind tests, it's a very small percentage who can actually see the difference (I can't find the article, but if I remember it right, it was around 10% of their test group)

I have a hard time believing that, but I have not seen this test you refer to. I don't see how someone could NOT tell the difference. (As I mentioned I can even discern the difference between 1080i BR and upscaled DVD, let alone 1080p).

And since a huge portion of users only operate at 720p (what an upscaler jumps to) or 1080i (worse than 720p), it's somewhat moot in the long run.

Again, no it is not moot. As I already mentioned my own initial litmus test was using my 7 year old 1080i set. And I'm telling you the difference is noticeable.

Sound is another point, where it only matters if you're running an absolutely juiced system,

Again, like I said even with old audio gear (within reason) there are noticeable differences in sound as well. (While my "new" system for the basement could probably be called "juiced" I wouldn't say my 11 year old gear is).

The $600 LCD at Walmart is, and that's what matters. I'm not going to spend an extra grand or two to get what could at best be called a marginal gain.

I'm not sure what this has to do with audio? Are we back to video now? A $600 LCD will absolutely give you the benefit of 1080p. HD flatscreen tvs are becoming rediculously cheap.

But I'd much rather watch it via Netflix, and digital distribution is the future, not BRD,

Netflix has a long way to go in Canada. We don't have anywhere near the selection available up here, yet. And from what I'm told most streamable movies are not available in 1080p yet. Physical media might be an endangered species in the long run, but it will be a while before blu-ray is completely obsolete.

[Mister Ed]

Don't get me wrong, I can see a difference in Blu-Ray picture (though that's in store, where I can't tell how much of the difference is the Blu-Ray and how much is the much better TV they have it playing on). I just don't see it as being enough to be worth upgrading (especially since I assume the difference will be LESS dramatic on my low end TV). And my "sound system" consists of the speakers built into the TV. That's it. I have a hard time thinking that the sound upgrade will blow me away given that fact.

If you add in the fact that Blu-Ray discs cost more, and the horror stories I have seen about firmware upgrades (which I would have to get mailed to me on disc, as my Blu-Ray would NOT be hooked to the internet) sometimes locking one out of viewing legally owned discs by certain studios (I'm sure that's a rare occurrence, but having something like that happen even ONCE is too often), and I feel like the only reason I would EVER get Blu-Ray is if it became the new standard at some point, which, quite frankly, it doesn't look to EVER be doing given its poor market penetration at this point, and the apparent growth of downloading content.

[Inzane]

I just don't see it as being enough to be worth upgrading

I guess only the individual can define "worth" to them. Samsung and Sony entry-level blu-ray players can be had for $120 or less (that's in Canada. Maybe even less in the US). That's cheap, imo. And if you like gaming anyway, and want the latest console gaming has to offer + the ability to watch blu-ray movies, a PS3 console now costs only $250.

If your tv is just not up to snuff, prices on LCD & plasmas have really crept down. You can buy decent sets now for the $400-600 range. (that's the kind of dollars lego is charging for UCS sets these days. ) If your current set is old enough that it can't even do 1080i or 720p, chances are it might not even be a "widescreen" set, but 4:3. A person could use that as another justification to buy a new TV, if they were in that situation. (Once you're used to 16:9 you'll never want to go back.)

And my "sound system" consists of the speakers built into the TV. That's it. I have a hard time thinking that the sound upgrade will blow me away given that fact.

Yep. Unfortunately I have to agree with you there. I have that situation in my living room with that new Samsung LCD & sony blu-ray player. No real sound-setup to speak of in that room at the moment.

If you add in the fact that Blu-Ray discs cost more,

Well, this is certainly true on brand new titles. (Although it seems new dvds are fairly pricey as well). But I can't believe the bargains on blu-rays I've found everywhere, anything from classics to movies just a year or two old. I go to places like wal-mart, best-buy etc. and it's not uncommon to find great blu-ray deals for $15 or less. Sometimes the $8-10 range. Unless you absolutely have to have new releases as soon as they come out, I've found I've been able to manage the cost of the buying blu-rays just fine. I've even seen cases where I can buy a blu-ray in one store cheaper than the dvd in another store. No joke.

In summary I'm saying I feel the perceived price barrier that may have existed initially is becoming less and less of an issue.

Regarding the firmware issue, I haven't encountered any problems like that. Although to be fair I've had the sony blu-ray player plugged into my LAN since day one (6 months ago), and just recently plugged my PS3 in as well (a few weeks ago). Yeah, I can't deny the convenience of automatic updates when you're online.

[StoutFiles]

This is pretty funny since you all assume that Lucas is using film that will upscale to 4k for a good Blu-Ray picture. He's not.

The CGI in the SE was scanned in at 1080p, so that's what you'll be getting. Theyll clean up audio/video some, but that crystal clear Blu-Ray picture? Not happening!

[Walter Boy]

Wow, I just noticed this topic had '1977' views at the time I was viewing it. Wasn't that an important date for something?..

I have to say I don't know what to think of most of these changes. They seem somewhat random too. The CGI Yoda in Episode I won't bug me though, because although I loved the puppet Yoda from V and VI, I couldn't stand the one from Phantom Menace. He didn't even look like Yoda, atleast to me.

[dWhisper]

Talking quality... it seems that it depends far more on if you enjoy what you're watching than the actual quality.

Ignorance has nothing to do with it. Citing actual studies and testing, not my opinions. You only get benefit from 1080p in a narrow band of technology, and the vast majority of people have not, and will not, invest in it.

[cas]

The addition of CG Yoda in Episode I was a selling point for me with this set. Other than that, I'm getting weary of all the changes. There are many technical changes I welcome, such as fixing the look/color of the lightsabers, but I want Lucas to come out and defend and explain changes he makes. I want to understand and get a clearer picture of what is going through his mind. I'm not going to get frustrated or angry (like a few people tend to get around Internetland). I'm not going to cancel my preorder because of some of these ridiculous changes. I want to watch each movie as a movie and not as something of any significance more and judge for myself in the greater context what works and what doesn't.

[Inzane]

Talking quality... it seems that it depends far more on if you enjoy what you're watching than the actual quality.

Interesting. So we can tend to skew our own results with our own subjectivity of the subject matter. I guess that's not surprising.

You only get benefit from 1080p in a narrow band of technology,

If you mean that you can only benefit from 1080p on a set capable of displaying 1080p, then yes I would agree with you that statement. But do you really consider that a "narrow band of technology" today? If you look at any consumer electronic store, in just about any price category, wouldn't you say the number of 1080p-capable sets outnumber the non-1080p now? (This maybe wasn't the case a year ago, but I think it's a fair observation today). And those various sets are made of a variety of technologies: Plasma. LCD. DLP. LCoS. etc.

and the vast majority of people have not, and will not, invest in it.

I cannot agree or disagree with that. And I'm not sure how you could make that statement either. You think it's a big stretch for someone to invest in a ~$400 entry level plasma or LCD?

What I will grant you is depending on screen size and viewing distance from screen, there are supposed cutoff points where the difference between 720p and 1080p is unnoticeable to your eyes. These are generally well established among industry experts and enthusiasts alike. So yeah, a person could make the argument if they are so far away, or their screen is small-ish, then they wouldn't benefit (as much, or at all) from the extra resolution.

[Blacknight]

The addition of CG Yoda in Episode I was a selling point for me with this set. Other than that, I'm getting weary of all the changes. There are many technical changes I welcome, such as fixing the look/color of the lightsabers, but I want Lucas to come out and defend and explain changes he makes.

Too bad they missed the opportunity to really do this again. You know there's that article on Starwars.com talking about how they've supposedly fixed the green lightsaber Luke acquired in the dvd release of A New Hope when training on the Millennium Falcon? Well it turns out from the leak that all they did was fix the colour in that one shot, which means for the rest of the scene his lightsaber is still white, not blue like it should be. Also Vader's lightsaber is still pink in Empire Strikes Back.

In terms of the whole 1080p thing, because I'm poor I abdandoned using my living room as my entertainment center (I still have an old CRT there), and now do all my gaming/movie watching/internet surfing in my home office on a 27 inch 1920x1080 computer monitor which I got for $400 early in 2010. I imagine they're even cheaper now. I compared my DVD version of Narnia Prince Caspian to my blu-ray and the difference was significant. The only thing that bugs me a bit about blu-ray is there's no option for alternate aspect ratios like there was on DVD, so the viewable picture area of releases that have big letterboxes is kind of small on a small screen. But anyway, if you do go down the monitor route as an all-in-one cheap solution, you'll be sitting close enough to the screen that the difference in resolution is quite noticeable. In games, the difference between 480p, 720p and 1080p (the latter really only available in PC games) is completely night and day. Movies, maybe not quite so much but then if you have a PS3 you might as well use all its capabilities (and again, if you set it up beside your computer there's no problem keeping it up to date with the latest firmware). Regarding sound system, I just use a computer stereo speaker set with a sub-woofer - hardly 7.1 sound but still better than built in TV speakers. I don't notice any difference in sound with blu-ray but then I'm no audiophile and my system isn't set up to detect it.

So anyway, combining my "home theatre" and my computer system is my whole solution to the cost/quality tradeoff, and it saves a lot of room too 'cause you only need one screen. If you sit close, it's the same as if you owned a big TV, all you're missing out on is being able to lean back on a couch but a puffy padded office chair is still comfortable and is better for your posture.

[dWhisper]

By narrow band of technology, mostly talking refresh rates and size of screen size, mostly. The most common sizes for what sells is between 26-42", with pretty quickly decreasing numbers at 46" and up. Since the point where the switch from 720 to 1080 gets noticeable is around 46", most people will not purchase a TV large enough to perceive any difference.

More than that, content depends a lot on it to. HD is far more apparent in stuff like Avatar or an action film, not so much in animation or comedies.

Anyway, on the HD topic... I wonder if Leia still looks dolled up like a fifty-cent hooker in ANH. Watched it in HD on Spike a few months back, and there was probably a half inch of makeup on her. Looked like she was on her way to the circus...

[Blacknight]

Ja, a few days ago I saw a youtube video of either the HD broadcast or a promotional clip from the blu-ray of Leia on the sail barge before they push Luke in, and her makeup is also quite apparent there (plus of course she now really is wearing the outfit of a h*****). Sometimes, HD shows stuff we just don't need to see. One of these days I expect Lucas to decide that Return of the Jedi really should be a movie entirely for kids, and he'll have his team add extra digital clothes to cover up slave Leia. You heard it here first folks.

[Gingerbeard Man]

I want Lucas to come out and defend and explain changes he makes. I want to understand and get a clearer picture of what is going through his mind.

Me too. No matter what I personally think of some of the changes, that would be very interesting. Instead we get

Audio commentary from archival interviews with cast and crew

Huh? So somebody has created a new commentary track by cutting and pasting old interviews. That could be "interesting" as well, but maybe not in a positive way.

[Blacknight]

I agree - if he explained his reasoning for some of these things, at least people could say he's simply a misguided artist or deluded perfectionist rather than a nutty hack who seems to like to troll his own fans.

[dWhisper]

It's all about money. Nothing more.

[cas]

Money's a good motivator. If I had a "big idea" I'd probably milk it for all it was worth and more. I'd start out with the the idea of artistic integrity, but the second I notice people lapping it up, whoosh, out the window she goes.

I don't believe Lucas is too concerned with what the fans think, given that so many people willingly throw money in his general direction. That is the voice he and Lucasfilm hear: they're buying so they must want more of it. I would assume that if this BD set bombed (it's not going to), he might rethink some of his revisions and additions to the movies. I also assume that over the next few years, people will cool to these newest changes and the cycle will continue. I'm sure we'll see another Star Wars set on BD before the format disappears.

[Blacknight]

But what I don't get is, he'd make more money not tampering with the original movies, at least in terms of the story. Fanatic Star Wars fans want to buy the exact same movie they've seen a hundred times before. How does the Nooooooooo! profit him? Unless you're a conspiracy fan who believes he makes these insane changes just so he can later remove them and get fans to buy the thing all over again in the future.

[buriedbybricks]

Honestly, some of these changes just seem nitpickingly stupid.

http://theforce.net/latestnews/story/Bl ... 140346.asp