Blu-only Releases?

[Tribe]

here is a label saying it could do more were people to support it going Blu Ray only where possible. While it is down to choice I would hope people would be prepared to acknowledge that if MOC and others go that extra mile, take that risk, that they would in kind and go that extra mile as well to enable more films to be made available in high quality editions.

You're preaching to the choir, friend. I understand a business decision.

[akaten]

Edit: posting this at the same time as david who covers some of the same ground.

Apologies tribe, put it down to my current patch of insomnia for the lack of clarity on my part, I was trying to make a distinction between expecting people to adopt the new format and how its unfortunate that its less compelling for some than others making this cross over period likely to be more drawn out than it was with VHS and DVD.

While it is down to choice I would hope people would be prepared to acknowledge that if MOC and others go that extra mile, take that risk, that they would in kind and go that extra mile as well to enable more films to be made available in high quality editions.

But I don't think MOC's proposal of becoming all-Blu-ray is an admirable idea and I wouldn't swear a loyalty oath to them even if I had a player already. Moving away from an accepted format to a new, still tenuous format is ballsy and if they want to alienate potential customers and take that gamble, well then that's certainly their choice and it could very well pay off. But they are proposing such a change because they see it ultimately benefiting their bottom line, not because they love moviegoers so much that they want only the best for them. This isn't a selfless act of love, it's one of financial investment. MOC presumably sees the numbers going either way, which explains the dithering. As some of the most vocal champions of the label, they asked our advice. This is classy, and I thank Nick for seeking our input. But I'm very uncomfortable with this "Let's blindly support them for their brave decision" line of argument. Being one, I'm not convinced that such a move benefits all of MOC's loyal customers

I respectfully disagree with you Domino, I don't consider this to be a business led decision (but those factors make it desirable for all concerned for a quick rather than lengthy period of format change) rather a promise that more films could be made available by boutique labels such as MOC were they not having to create, print and distribute two versions of the same film to be sound. I also consider it to be first and foremost a sincere and genuine viewpoint from a professional who feels the hardwork by many behind the scenes, and indeed the creative talent involved on the films themselves is better represented on Blu Ray than DVD.

Where I do agree with you is on the decision to ask usfor our views on the matter is something to be welcomed. Especially at a time when directors and producers from major studios have adopted a culture of feature creep on changes to films, or debatable decisions being imposed on the viewer such as the choice of aspect ratio in Touch of Evil. Its a sign of respect, and recognition that home viewers are proactively engaged in the critical and commercial reception and reappraisal of contemporary and classical cinema.

[domino harvey]

And, maybe I shouldnt say this, but I will - bear in mind going Blu makes pirating of those titles far less worthwhile - there's a minimal amount of HD downloading and virtually all of it is to 720p avchd or h264 codecs (in other words inferior to the original) so their profit margins on these titles are not going to be eroded in the way that sharefiling full (or compressed) DVDR rips already does to their product.

Actually, this argument makes the most sense for the label, but I wonder how the number of new forced buyers will compare to those honest consumers left behind in the format war?

[TMDaines]

What should be said, first off... is that you need an HD TV to view Blu-rays. The pixel resolution of the set needs to be 1920 x 1080p and you absolutely need to be connected by HDMI (or DVI). Anything less will not do.

You know I'd love to use my WSXGA+ 1680x1050 PC monitor as a stop gap for Blu-ray until I can afford a decent HD TV but I'm not sure how they would look. Would it at least look slightly better than DVD or would it not even work? It isn't as if Blu-rays cost that much more than DVDs now anyway, especially during sales. I'm not interested in the audio/visual awsomeness right now, just simply whether I'll be able to start purchasing Blu-rays over DVDs where there is a choice if I did this.

[Ben Cheshire]

This is a very interesting issue; is it worth the costs to supply format stragglers with a copy of City Girl, or should you aim to suport Blu Ray, assuming

The truth is DVD is going to be a while dying, as everyone has said over on that thread:

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=10214#p266135" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But if MoC is feeding a mainly cinephile niche market; its not that big a gamble to suggest all of them should be on blu ray anyway...

I think the main losers of this move, if its made, will be educational institutions as David and others have pointed out above.

It won't affect me and anyone else who's already blu, because we know forthcoming blus from MoC are going to be great. Their quality control is just too good!

[Particle Zoo]

.
And yet you won't buy a Blu Ray player...

Life is cheap

You are consuming whether the medium is VHS, DVD, Blu Ray or paying to go to the cinema...and I was refering to the technical side of watching films, not making them.

What is this?!?! I understand that Blu-Ray will look and sound better. But, what is this gall where some Blu-Ray fadists are taking shots at how other people decide to spend their money

A very few are missing the point...their fanboyish, slavish enthusiasm only turns me off.

You are quoting me out of context, you need to read the post I was replying to...humoursly if you didn't notice the smiley.

[Ben Cheshire]

You know I'd love to use my WSXGA+ 1680x1050 PC monitor as a stop gap for Blu-ray until I can afford a decent HD TV but I'm not sure how they would look.

I totally think that's an excellent idea. Film Archivist and Restoration Expert Robert A. Harris over at Home Theatre Forum tells everyone to invest in well-made blu rays for such time as they are able to have a HDTV that will truly showcase them. He says that a good blu ray is about as valuable as a good quality 35mm print projected; though often the resolution is even better. So don't feel bad; hook up your computer, you'll probably find the colours are truer than on DVDs; its basically just like buying a really high bit rate file... but super super high.

[Particle Zoo]

Film is, after all, a visual and aural medium and the way we experience it can often be crucial to our reaction to it.

I doubt that it's the Blu that made you appreciate "Pierrot le Fou" suddenly (as opposed to just rating it a little higher than before); I would much rather suspect it's the second or third viewing of the film itself. Sometimes it takes longer before a film 'clicks'.

Tommaso, I suspect you may be right and you make very good points about the cinematic experience enhancing films that are good rather than great.
Like you amongst my most treasured possesions are a crappy home subbed boot of Victor Erice's 'EL Sur' and a VHS of bands from the early 90's taped off air.
The experience of watching film in the best quality format however, is for me, such an aesthetic pleasure and film is such a sensual medium, that I don't think the quality of viewing can be completely separated from one's reaction to it. In other words, the quality of the medium is part of the filmaker's intention. This is obvious, I know, but I think it bears repeating. Yes, a great film is still great film on a VHS tape, but it is diminished to the point where its sensual pleasure is merely an echo. Of course, I will happily watch a VHS or a torrent if a film exists in no other format, but where we can have the best current quality, ie MOC Blu Rays and more of them if released on blu alone, its a shame to not to!

[Tommaso]

. Yes, a great film is still great film on a VHS tape, but it is diminished to the point where its sensual pleasure is merely an echo. Of course, I will happily watch a VHS or a torrent if a film exists in no other format, but where we can have the best current quality, ie MOC Blu Rays and more of them if released on blu alone, its a shame to not to!

I agree with that, of course. But as others have said, the quality difference between VHS or avi and a DVD is far greater than that between DVD and Blu. I received a lot of sensual pleasure from Fox' "City Girl" SD.

Another point discussed earlier in this thread: the sales of the MoC "Sunrise" DVD vs the Blu. I think this might be a particularly misleading comparison."Sunrise" on DVD had been out for years, not just from MoC but also from other comapnies in Europe, and many people wouldn't see any need for upgrading to the new DVD release, at least if they don't much care for the Czech print. Others who do care for the Czech print will already have had it via the Murnau-Borzage-box, so these will also not have bought the MoC set. Only those who don't have "Sunrise" at all AND want it on SD will buy the new MoC-DVD. And I suppose these are not so many people, considering the status of that particular film. So it's no wonder that with the new edition the sales figures for the Blu variant are high, and perhaps higher than for the SD, because seeing the film in Blu is probably the main reason for buying the new edition at all, at least if you're a silent film devotee and had that film for years.

[MichaelB]

I agree with that, of course. But as others have said, the quality difference between VHS or avi and a DVD is far greater than that between DVD and Blu. I received a lot of sensual pleasure from Fox' "City Girl" SD.

But for me it's the sensuality that marks the most dramatic difference between DVD and Blu-ray. I've had a chance to compare the DVD and Blu-ray of Soul Power, and what the framegrabs can't convey is the way the Blu-ray reproduces the original grain structure so well that I'd swear someone was rear-projecting an actual print into my television screen.

As for Nick's general point, my two main qualms are region-coding and restricted viewing options. Region-coding obviously isn't an issue for me vis-a-vis MoC stuff, but it is with Criterion's 100% region-locked output, and it seems to me that the state of multiregion Blu-ray is much the same as multiregion DVD was in 1999 - overpriced players, mixed results. I also strongly doubt that my wife would tolerate yet another player below our main telly, and with good reason, as we'd need another shelf.

The other headache is that while I have loads of options for viewing DVDs (I watch them on my regular commute daily, and quite frequently in bed), with Blu-ray I'm restricted to the main domestic TV. Which means I can't watch them at all until the kids have gone to bed, and if my wife's around that usually means that I can't watch the stuff I like until 10.30 at the earliest.

That said, this will definitely change - in fact, the main reason I haven't upgraded my 2006 MacBook is because I'm waiting for Apple to build a Blu-ray player into one. And that will make a huge difference in terms of convenience, even if it almost certainly won't solve the region-coding issue.

[Particle Zoo]

[I agree with that, of course. But as others have said, the quality difference between VHS or avi and a DVD is far greater than that between DVD and Blu.]

Tommaso, I have to say, it really depends on the size of your equipment! (Sorry )

Edit: Actually, MichaelB has put it far better!

But for me it's the sensuality that marks the most dramatic difference between DVD and Blu-ray. I've had a chance to compare the DVD and Blu-ray of Soul Power, and what the framegrabs can't convey is the way the Blu-ray reproduces the original grain structure so well that I'd swear someone was rear-projecting an actual print into my television screen.

[colinr0380]

Moving away from an accepted format to a new, still tenuous format is ballsy and if they want to alienate potential customers and take that gamble, well then that's certainly their choice and it could very well pay off. But they are proposing such a change because they see it ultimately benefiting their bottom line, not because they love moviegoers so much that they want only the best for them. This isn't a selfless act of love, it's one of financial investment. MOC presumably sees the numbers going either way, which explains the dithering. As some of the most vocal champions of the label, they asked our advice. This is classy, and I thank Nick for seeking our input. But I'm very uncomfortable with this "Let's blindly support them for their brave decision" line of argument. Being one, I'm not convinced that such a move benefits all of MOC's loyal customers

I should firstly apologise to peerpee/Nick for adding my thoughts on this subject when I unfortunately have made hardly any constructive comments or critiques of the films Masters of Cinema have released over the last few years, (though I have been loyally keeping my collection up to date!) so I can understand that I have not really built up any bargaining power to use in putting forward my position on this topic.

I agree with Domino - looked at as a pure business decision (and an anti-piracy one) go for Blu Ray only discs if it is causing too much expense to produce for both formats.

However I also feel that there are many people for whom Blu-Ray is still a difficult proposition and more so for whom an enormous HD television is an impractical proposition which would, if the size matters theory is all, be enough to negate any benefits for a home viewer. Just speaking from my own position I have picked up a number of Blu-Ray discs and a Playstation 3 but currently only one of our household's televisions has the capability to play Blu Ray discs in colour (through an adapted Scart cable on the 'main' family television rather than HDMI, which is far beyond any of our current television's capabilities) - so from a business sense you are selling these discs to me but in a cultural sense I can't properly access the content on these discs yet, except during very limited and time sensitive periods. So for instance I've picked up all BFI's Flipside series on Blu-Ray mostly because of the 'exclusive' extras on a couple of the discs that kind of forced the issue (personally this was always the main selling point of the new format to me since I knew that I didn't have the equipment to propery appreciate sound and picture upgrades but the 50gb disc raised a lot of possibilities of far more in depth extra features or the ability to store longer films on just one disc that so far only seem to have been utilised in a few isolated cases) But I have not been able to watch, personally enjoy and maybe even stumblingly critique their quality on the forum yet because of the restrictions I face with the current technology (plus the difficulties of watching 'adult' material with the family! From previous experience I'd have similar problems watching 'boring, subtitled' films properly as well!)

However I can see that you shouldn't move at the pace of your slowest adopters - I may get a 40 inch HD television at some time, but by the time I have gotten to that point who knows whether there will be an even newer format with even higher resolution? In which case there would be another ground zero point from which to re-release the films again. Which brings us to david hare's comment:

He's made it clear that it's financially impossible for them to keep up the current release rate if they have to maintain dual versions of titles that have good HD telecines. I obviously don't know how many titles or what proportion of his output that's going to be over the next 12 months but it surely aint gonna be everything they're signing off on. And if I thought a title like City Girl or M or Une Femme Mariee was going to get a Blu in any region form anyone else I wouldn't be supporting Nick's proposal, certainly for my own viewing benefit, but I frankly doubt the Murnau or the Godard would get any other Blu release. M may become one of those split title things of course with different editions in the US Germany and the UK - who knows. And Metropolis of course. In other words I feel confident the titles Nick and Craig are considering for Blu treatment would in all certainy be MoC exclusives. Someone pelase correct me if they think that's wrong. And almost certainly their Blus would be complementing other companies' SD versions.

I'd love to believe that the discs would compliment other releases but at this point I feel a little too burned by multiple releases to believe this to be a possibility.

While I understand the economic argument for going Blu only as being an important one, I'm not certain I really buy the argument that releases on both formats harm hypothetical 'rarities' from being released - after all there were years when only DVDs were being released and there were still 'rarities' or 'no shows on DVD' being pushed back in order for General Idi Amin, Salesman, Devil and Daniel Webster to be duplicated from the Criterion, and vice versa with Criterion itself. I'd love to be proved wrong about this but I really don't think this situation will change if MoC goes Blu-Ray only - in fact this practice may actually become strengthened and more essential if For All Mankind being duplicated on Blu-Ray because of the region coding becoming an issue again, is anything to go by.

But again I'd like to thank Nick for at least asking for points of view before making their decision.

[swo17]

You know I'd love to use my WSXGA+ 1680x1050 PC monitor as a stop gap for Blu-ray until I can afford a decent HD TV but I'm not sure how they would look. Would it at least look slightly better than DVD or would it not even work?

This should work just fine. I haven't tried with a PC monitor, but I have fed my Blu-ray player into a 4:3 27" SD TV screen. (It should be noted that both brands of Blu-ray players I've used have settings to account for the aspect ratio and maximum resolution of your TV.) Obviously, this didn't produce Blu-ray quality images, but it looked at least as good as any DVD would.

[doc mccoy]

Another point discussed earlier in this thread: the sales of the MoC "Sunrise" DVD vs the Blu. I think this might be a particularly misleading comparison."Sunrise" on DVD had been out for years, not just from MoC but also from other comapnies in Europe, and many people wouldn't see any need for upgrading to the new DVD release, at least if they don't much care for the Czech print. Others who do care for the Czech print will already have had it via the Murnau-Borzage-box, so these will also not have bought the MoC set. Only those who don't have "Sunrise" at all AND want it on SD will buy the new MoC-DVD. And I suppose these are not so many people, considering the status of that particular film. So it's no wonder that with the new edition the sales figures for the Blu variant are high, and perhaps higher than for the SD, because seeing the film in Blu is probably the main reason for buying the new edition at all, at least if you're a silent film devotee and had that film for years.

Fair point, Tommaso. I forgot that MoC had released Sunrise previously.

Then Mad Detective, Tokyo Sonata, Soul Power would be better yardsticks for comparison, as they had simultaneous DVD/Blu-ray releases.

[TMDaines]

You know I'd love to use my WSXGA+ 1680x1050 PC monitor as a stop gap for Blu-ray until I can afford a decent HD TV but I'm not sure how they would look. Would it at least look slightly better than DVD or would it not even work?

This should work just fine. I haven't tried with a PC monitor, but I have fed my Blu-ray player into a 4:3 27" SD TV screen. (It should be noted that both brands of Blu-ray players I've used have settings to account for the aspect ratio and maximum resolution of your TV.) Obviously, this didn't produce Blu-ray quality images, but it looked at least as good as any DVD would.

My local Audi may get a visit over the Christmas period then. At the moment I'm trying to avoid buying DVDs of films where a superior Blu-ray is available as I know that in the very least I'll be Blu-ray enabled in the next year or two and I don't want to mess about with buying and selling.

[peerpee]

But they are proposing such a change because they see it ultimately benefiting their bottom line, not because they love moviegoers so much that they want only the best for them. This isn't a selfless act of love, it's one of financial investment.

That's a very cynical and untrue reading of the situation, Domino. This emanates from the heart. We're spending a lot of our valuable time making dual formats and we're in love with the Blu-ray format. We want to get on with pure Blu-ray releases so that we can release more. As punters, we want Blu-ray only.

The "bottom line" is that we'd be able to get more titles released if we went Blu-ray only, and that's a win win situation (except for those who are unwilling to upgrade).

At the end of the day, those that are unwilling to upgrade are not our main concern, I'm afraid. Our Blu-ray vs. DVD sales are such that we can make this huge leap before anyone else... and we want to make it as soon as possible.

[foggy eyes]

(except for those who are unwilling to upgrade).

We are, but it seems that more than a few of us can't afford to be quite so flippant with our cash. Send us the necessary fancy plasma screens + region-free players and we're all yours.

Blu-ray = class war!

[tajmahal]

(except for those who are unwilling to upgrade).

We are, but it seems that more than a few of us can't afford to be quite so flippant with our cash. Send us the necessary fancy plasma screens + region-free players and we're all yours.

Blu-ray = class war!

Well if you haven't gone blu, you have to go to the back of the class!

[Ben Cheshire]

Our Blu-ray vs. DVD sales are such that we can make this huge leap before anyone else... and we want to make it as soon as possible.

The thought of increased number of blu rays from MoC is so exciting, considering the fact that the only minor detraction from me purchasing the entire MoC backcatalogue is the fact that they're SD.

[JAP]

The "bottom line" is that we'd be able to get more titles released if we went Blu-ray only, and that's a win win situation (except for those who are unwilling to upgrade).

Being Blu-Ray enabled and region-free (which in my case was neither cheap or easy), I can heartily support a move in that direction. If only I could get a free upgrade for the Une Femme Mariée DVD...

[Michael Kerpan]

(except for those who are unwilling to upgrade).

We are, but it seems that more than a few of us can't afford to be quite so flippant with our cash. Send us the necessary fancy plasma screens + region-free players and we're all yours.

Blu-ray = class war!

All I know is that it was MOC's release of Blu-Ray material that caused me to jump at the chance to buy a Samsung BR player at half price. I felt that $125 was a reasonable investment -- because I could buy and play BRDs right away (and not have to worry about re-buying things later). We relied on our old SD TV for months (getting no visual "benefit" at all) before we found a suitable plasma on sale. I would have preferred being able to afford a top of the line multi-region BR player (like Oppo), but I decided not to let the best be the (successful) enemy of good.

[accatone]

Just go PREMIUM MEMBERS ONLY! I give a sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeet a la Clay Davis style perfectly happy on DVD.

edit: for the moment - i.e. i am not anti BR or anything like that...i just don't care...

[peerpee]

(except for those who are unwilling to upgrade).

We are, but it seems that more than a few of us can't afford to be quite so flippant with our cash. Send us the necessary fancy plasma screens + region-free players and we're all yours.

Blu-ray = class war!

I hear ya. To clarify: those who are unwilling to upgrade are not our main concern, those who are *unable* to upgrade are definitely of concern to us.

It boils down to sheer units sold. If we sold 10 times more DVD than Blu-ray, we wouldn't be suggesting going Blu-ray only --- but the ratio is more 50/50 so it makes sense to think hard about what we're doing, and where we're going to be in 3-4 years time.

[zedz]

It boils down to sheer units sold. If we sold 10 times more DVD than Blu-ray, we wouldn't be suggesting going Blu-ray only --- but the ratio is more 50/50 so it makes sense to think hard about what we're doing, and where we're going to be in 3-4 years time.

I've been staying out of this since it's hard not to be solipsistic in this kind of discussion, but with those figures now out there, and the other stipulation that you need to make the call on one format or the other, going Blu seems to be the logical choice.

People's technology will catch up and the disc will (presumably) remain in print. I do think the assumption of many posters that people upgrade their technology primarily for the sake of keeping up to date with advances is false. In many cases, through financial necessity, apathy or sheer lack of knowledge (the very existence of BluRay is a confusion or a complete surprise to huge sectors of the population - my Dad has barely grasped DVD), an upgrade will only occur when their existing equipment craps out (and DVD-only players are hard-to-find or expensive - and this is all assuming the region-coding thing gets sorted out). In time, it's likely everyone will involuntarily go Blu, but in the meantime I don't think it's fair to characterise those who don't as deluded Luddites.

Losing the DVD market will be a big step for MoC. On the other hand, going Blu exclusively on a new title (or titles) also presents MoC with an opportunity to make a statement and maybe to attract some attention for what would otherwise be a very niche release. Would this be the first Blu exclusive release in the UK?

EDIT: Another wrinkle that just occurred to me. Presumably everyone who was interested in MoC's previous releases and was Blu-capable would have opted for Blu when they had the choice, so the likely sales figures for City Girl on Blu only would be half those of a dual release. Is that what you're budgetting on, peerpee, or are you optimistic that Blu-only will force the hand of various abstainers and result in 60% / 70% of a dual release?

[peerpee]

We'd be expecting a 10-20% increase in BD sales, partially from fence-sitters taking the plunge, and partially from natural growth in a new format. This will only increase over time. For the last couple of years, DVD sales have dipped slightly (for tons of reasons).