Next TV format is chosen

[Smokey]

That would be Ultra High-Definition.

The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) Oct. 18 put a name to the next generation of home displays, putting the Ultra HD tag on TVs with more than eight million pixels of resolution, four times the resolution of today’s widely available HDTVs.

CEA’s Board of Industry Leaders unanimously approved the term and minimum requirements for a set or projector to earn the Ultra HD designation, which requires resolution of at least eight million active pixels (minimum 3,840x2,160). Displays must have an aspect ratio of at least 16x9 and must have a digital input capable of carrying native 4K video, instead of relying solely on up-converting.

Current Blu-ray Disc players do not support Ultra HD video. But for content, issues are already being addressed: According to Sony Pictures, nearly 60 films have been mastered in Ultra HD since 2004, and Sony and Luxembourg-based satellite company SAS Astra said they successfully broadcast an Ultra HD transmission in September.

So far two TVs on the market meet the Ultra HD (4K) specifications: Sony XBR-84X900 for $24,999, and LG's 84LM9600 for $20,000.

Consumer Electronics Association Gives 4K a Name | Home Media Magazine (http://www.homemediamagazine.com/consumer-electronics/consumer-electronics-association-gives-4k-name-28627)

[Feanor]

That would be Ultra High-Definition.

The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) Oct. 18 put a name to the next generation of home displays, putting the Ultra HD tag on TVs with more than eight million pixels of resolution, four times the resolution of today’s widely available HDTVs.

CEA’s Board of Industry Leaders unanimously approved the term and minimum requirements for a set or projector to earn the Ultra HD designation, which requires resolution of at least eight million active pixels (minimum 3,840x2,160). Displays must have an aspect ratio of at least 16x9 and must have a digital input capable of carrying native 4K video, instead of relying solely on up-converting.

Current Blu-ray Disc players do not support Ultra HD video. But for content, issues are already being addressed: According to Sony Pictures, nearly 60 films have been mastered in Ultra HD since 2004, and Sony and Luxembourg-based satellite company SAS Astra said they successfully broadcast an Ultra HD transmission in September.

So far two TVs on the market meet the Ultra HD (4K) specifications: Sony XBR-84X900 for $24,999, and LG's 84LM9600 for $20,000.

Consumer Electronics Association Gives 4K a Name | Home Media Magazine (http://www.homemediamagazine.com/consumer-electronics/consumer-electronics-association-gives-4k-name-28627)
Now if they could only do something about my ageing eyes.

Seriously, do we really need higher def? Maybe for even larger screens, but right now I can scarcely see the difference between really good DVD and Blu-ray on my 50" plasma.

[Smokey]

Now if they could only do something about my ageing eyes.

Seriously, do we really need higher def? Maybe for even larger screens, but right now I can scarcely see the difference between really good DVD and Blu-ray on my 50" plasma.

Looking at bluray movies reviews in term of picture quality, you do have a point that some of them don't look much better than same movie on DVDs. So the blame rest on studios that did a shabby job with bluray mastering rather than your eyes :)

Movies on films can be scanned at 4K rersolution, so the content is there if hardware becomes available.

[E-Stat]

That would be Ultra High-Definition.
As for me, it will be dead on arrival if it continues the "punish-the-buyer" format of taking forever and a day to sync its copy protection scheme and prevent computer server use. Just like with SACD and Blu Ray music for which I will never invest.

[Smokey]

As for me, it will be dead on arrival if it continues the "punish-the-buyer" format of taking forever and a day to sync its copy protection scheme and prevent computer server use. Just like with SACD and Blu Ray music for which I will never invest.

I don't understand your post as this for for video format not music :)

[E-Stat]

I don't understand your post as this for for video format not music
You've never heard of a media server? Hint: both kinds of content are digital. From a computer's perspective, there's no difference. I've put many a DVD based TV series on wifey's iPad using Handbrake for when she travels.

Do you really think that whenever the millions of Netflix customers selects VOD, there's a guy back there somewhere pulling a disk out of a sleeve and putting it into a player? Are you serious? :)

M-E-D-I-A---S-E-R-V-E-R!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Now if they could only do something about my ageing eyes.

Seriously, do we really need higher def? Maybe for even larger screens, but right now I can scarcely see the difference between really good DVD and Blu-ray on my 50" plasma.

Bill,
If you cannot see a difference, then you are likely sitting too far away from the screen. I use a distance calculator to match the size of the sets to the distance I sit from them. I shoot for SMPTE and THX requirements for distance. The assures me I will see every pixel that is active. I must tell ya, I don't own any DVD's that look even close as good as my Blurays. Animation comes close, but it is not a cigar.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Looking at bluray movies reviews in term of picture quality, you do have a point that some of them don't look much better than same movie on DVDs. So the blame rest on studios that did a shabby job with bluray mastering rather than your eyes :)

As I told Bill, you have to sit the proper distance from the set in order to see a difference. If you cannot see much of a difference, then you are likely sitting too far back from the set.


Movies on films can be scanned at 4K rersolution, so the content is there if hardware becomes available.

Sony and Disney have been doing 4K scans for years. Warner has done some select titles(Lawrence of Arabia being one of them) at 8K resolution. The whole industry has been pushing towards 4k scans at least five years.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

If anyone thinks that ANY high definition video format will come unencrypted to the public, they are fooling themselves. It will NEVER happen. The film industry is already kicking themselves in the butt for allowing DVD playback on computers.

[Smokey]

You've never heard of a media server? Hint: both kinds of content are digital. From a computer's perspective, there's no difference. I've put many a DVD based TV series on wifey's iPad using Handbrake for when she travels.

I am not familiar with media server :)

But I imagine some kind of compression is used to to transfer video to media server as one DVD occupy around 4.5 Gb uncompressed. That probably would not work for me since I prefer picture quality above everything else.


I must tell ya, I don't own any DVD's that look even close as good as my Blurays. Animation comes close, but it is not a cigar.

There is no denying superiority of Bluray over DVD, but it also might be worth noting that all not blurays are created equal.

For example look at this site where they grade movie picture quality on bluray and DVDs. Alot of films on blurays getting grade "C" in picture quality. So stepping up from DVD to bluray on those movies might not be a big step in terms of picture quality:

DVD Movie Guide - Review Archive: #, A - C (http://www.dvdmg.com/archiveac.shtml)

[E-Stat]

...as one DVD occupy around 4.5 Gb uncompressed
A 2 TB drive (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=842094&Q=&is=REG&A=details) is capable of storing over four hundred movies at that resolution. Cost? $105. Convenience? Priceless

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

There is no denying superiority of Bluray over DVD, but it also might be worth noting that all not blurays are created equal.

For example look at this site where they grade movie picture quality on bluray and DVDs. Alot of films on blurays getting grade "C" in picture quality. So stepping up from DVD to bluray on those movies might not be a big step in terms of picture quality:

DVD Movie Guide - Review Archive: #, A - C (http://www.dvdmg.com/archiveac.shtml)

Smokey, when reading these reviews on lesser tiered websites that do reviews, one has to understand the review requirements the website puts on their reviewers. For Bluray.com which is THE top tiered website for Bluray reviews, all reviewers systems must have a Cedia trained calibrator come to their houses to calibrate both the audio and video on their systems. Bluray.com pays for the service, and we are required to get a yearly system checkup. I know of no other website that has such a policy You also have to have a very good understanding of film, video codecs and sound. One of the most interesting things I experienced as a reviewer is when I reviewed the a movie and came to a conclusion on sound and picture, and another website(s) does a similar review on the same disc, and comes to an entirely different conclusion. The knowledge and education of the reviewer on what he is reviewing is extremely important.

Let's take just one or two of his reviews. The 7th Voyage of Sinbad for example since I own this disc and have seen this movie multiple times. He give the picture quality a C- and his main reason is grain. It is apparent to me he does not understand the affect of stop action animation has on film stock. Because stop action animation is layered onto real images, grain will be more apparent. The more layers, the more grain. Based on that knowledge, I would give the movie a solid B rather than a C- because I understand the process better than most do. Grain has a different affects on different display devices, so often the display device is causing more problems than the source itself. Grain(if it is coarse) may cause a digital display to exhibit digital noise far more than a projector will. A digital projector will present grain a bit different than a analog projector.

Another review of a disc I have, and have reviewed is A-Team. He gave the PQ a B. He reduced his score because he didn't like the artistic choice the DP and Director made. That is not the way to use a video score. You drop a score because of edge enhancement, shimmering, picture inconsistencies, flickering, and various other artifacts, not because you don't like the choices the DP made.

Then there is the most important aspect....the equipment. Most reviewers do not get their set professionally calibrated, but use calibration discs. When it comes to sound, the get the levels right, but do nothing about room acoustics. The quality of the equipment will also affect the review score. 4 strategically placed H-PAS subs that have been highly calibrated is going to sound quite different than a single subwoofer that has not been. A speaker that has cabinet resonances(his Michael Green speakers have a severely under-damped cabinet) will sound different than a speaker with no audible cabinet resonances.

I personally think your example is pretty poor(no offense). I would not consider Colin review system as a reference system up to the task of reviewing anything.

[E-Stat]

If anyone thinks that ANY high definition video format will come unencrypted to the public, they are fooling themselves.
Decrypters exist as they do for the DVD format. Reminds me of the Mad magazine Spy vs. Spy storyboards.

The biggest limitation today is storage. Leading edge drives have 4 TB capacity. Five years from now, 20 TB units will make it practical. :)

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Decrypters exist as they do for the DVD format. Reminds me of the Mad magazine Spy vs. Spy storyboards.

The biggest limitation today is storage. Leading edge drives have 4 TB capacity. Five years from now, 20 TB units will make it practical. :)

Regardless, it is still not practical to store a 50GB disc when almost nobody owns a leading edge disc drives. When 4K hits, it will be even less practical

[E-Stat]

Regardless, it is still not practical to store a 50GB disc when almost nobody owns a leading edge disc drives.
Which is why I answered the question the way I did. When 20 TB drives cost $105, it will most certainly become practical as it is for DVDs today.


When 4K hits, it will be even less practical
In almost every case, I find that Blu Ray offers both superior image and sound quality in my mid-fi HT. Having said that, 4k will likely be limited to theatre projector use (where it is sorely needed) and serious video aficionados (of which I am not).

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Which is why I answered the question the way I did. When 20 TB drives cost $105, it will most certainly become practical as it is for DVDs today.

Agreed.



In almost every case, I find that Blu Ray offers both superior image and sound quality in my mid-fi HT. Having said that, 4k will likely be limited to theatre projector use (where it is sorely needed) and serious video aficionados (of which I am not).

If I am not mistaken, the whole Bluray format is pushing towards 4K, and it is not likely you will have a choice between it and 1080p. 1080p will likely go away totally. Now, you may keep your display which will likely downconvert any 4K sources to 1080i/p, but the source will certainly be 4K.

[E-Stat]

Now, you may keep your display which will likely downconvert any 4K sources to 1080i/p, but the source will certainly be 4K.
Are most BR players BDXL compatible today? If not, that would be a bummer. Yet another upgrade.

As with the display resolution you could choose how you want to save the rip.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Are most BR players BDXL compatible today? If not, that would be a bummer. Yet another upgrade.

The first generation PS3 is the only player I know of that is. It just needed a firmware upgrade to bring it to compliance. The later PS3 don't have this ability. However, you can bet going forward that some Bluray players going forward with have some level of BDXL compatibility as this does add value to the player.


As with the display resolution you could choose how you want to save the rip.

And of course you have to live with the artifacts of that process as well. No data reduction process is perfect.

[E-Stat]

However, you can bet going forward that some Bluray players going forward with have some level of BDXL compatibility as this does add value to the player.
And the need to buy new units. Again.


And of course you have to live with the artifacts of that process as well.
I could easily live with slightly compromised 1080p quality in order to provide server convenience and eliminate all the blinking, waiting, switching and farting around required to play a single BR disk. :)

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

And the need to buy new units. Again.

Ahhh Pobrecito, quejandose de un reproductor de Blu-ray $200. Lastima que tan triste.



I could easily live with slightly compromised 1080p quality in order to provide server convenience and eliminate all the blinking, waiting, switching and farting around required to play a single BR disk. :)

Then you should welcome getting an upgrade because none of my players do what you describe. The PS3 does not have this problem, and neither does the Oppo.

[E-Stat]

Then you should welcome getting an upgrade because none of my players do what you describe. The PS3 does not have this problem, and neither does the Oppo.
You miss my point. I don't want to buy another player. I want server functionality that renders *players* obsolete.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You miss my point. I don't want to buy another player. I want server functionality that renders *players* obsolete.

Good luck on this.......I wish you well even though the Supreme court in California has said ripping DVD(and Bluray) to a server is illegal. Look up Realnetwork versus DVD CCA, and Kaleidescape versus DVD CCA. Now you can do it under the radar, but with the new encryption they are encoding disc's with these days, you may not get any sound even if you can rip it to the server.

[E-Stat]

Now you can do it under the radar,
As I've said before, the movie industry penalizes legitimate customers with its archaic practices and limits the vast world of convenience technology provides.

Then wonders why business is down. :)

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

As I've said before, the movie industry penalizes legitimate customers with its archaic practices and limits the vast world of convenience technology provides.

Then wonders why business is down. :)

Your sour grapes are pitful, and your facts are inaccurate. DVD sales are down, but Bluray sales are up, and income from streaming is way up. The industry is very healthy thanks to diversified income sources. The studio's no longer have to depend on disc sales alone for revenue.

Yes you said it before and you where wrong then. Now you are saying it again, and you are still wrong.

The majority of those that purchase disc don't do it so they can rip it to a server. Survey after survey has pointed this out, and this is why content sharing has not been implemented on Bluray. The majority just want to put it in a player and push play. So your perspective is not a shared one.

[E-Stat]

Your sour grapes are pitful, and your facts are inaccurate. DVD sales are down, but Bluray sales are up
Sorry, I was talking about total volume where its down- not relative gains.


, and income from streaming is way up.
Exactly! No players and winking, blinking ,waiting and farting around to be found here!



The industry is very healthy thanks to diversified income sources.
But down from it's heyday.


So your perspective is not a shared one.
Indeed. Most folks have no idea what is possible. Like Smokey who follows video trends.

[Feanor]

As I've said before, the movie industry penalizes legitimate customers with its archaic practices and limits the vast world of convenience technology provides.

Then wonders why business is down. :)
The rights of consumers these days are dictated by global commercial interests for their money-making purpose. (Same as the rights of citizens: am I whining again?)

I haven't done a lot of DVD ripping, but I know for sure that I'm not interesting in spinning CDs anymore and would love to store my SACDs full resolution on my server.

[E-Stat]

The rights of consumers these days are dictated by global commercial interests for their money-making purpose
Ironically, they continue to shoot themselves in the foot with respect to revenue. You can copy any disc with easily accessible software. Most folks, however, don't and buy less software because of the overt inconvenience of BR copy protection.

It's really pathetic that the movie moguls continue to ignore obvious industry trends. Then wonder why overall revenue is down despite marginal gains in one format vs another.

[Feanor]

Ironically, they continue to shoot themselves in the foot with respect to revenue. You can copy any disc with easily accessible software. Most folks, however, don't and buy less software because of the overt inconvenience of BR copy protection.

It's really pathetic that the movie moguls continue to ignore obvious industry trends. Then wonder why overall revenue is down despite marginal gains in one format vs another.
Greed isn't always rational.

I would buy a lot more SACDs if I could rip them, (DSD stereo layer), to my computer.

[Smokey]

For Bluray.com which is THE top tiered website for Bluray reviews, all reviewers systems must have a Cedia trained calibrator come to their houses to calibrate both the audio and video on their systems. Bluray.com pays for the service, and we are required to get a yearly system checkup. I know of no other website that has such a policy.

Are you sure Sir TT?

I went to Bluray.com web site, and they have about 7,230 reviewers who do bluray movie reviews (link below). I'm thinking it will be quite expensive to have them all Cedia certified :)

Blu-ray.com - Blu-ray Community - Top Reviewers (http://www.blu-ray.com/community/?action=topmoviereviewers)


Most folks have no idea what is possible. Like Smokey who follows video trends.

At least I know how to get [uncompressed] movies, TV shows and music from Internet...for free :D

[E-Stat]

At least I know how to get [uncompressed] movies, TV shows and music from Internet...for free :D
Not uncompressed 4K - which is the context in which I was discussing with Sir T.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Are you sure Sir TT?

I went to Bluray.com web site, and they have about 7,230 reviewers who do bluray movie reviews (link below). I'm thinking it will be quite expensive to have them all Cedia certified

Smokey, that which you have pointed out are not the official reviwers for the Bluray.com website. Those are member submitted reviews, and they don't get paid to submit reviews. The official reviewing staff is made up of six people(I am the seventh but I have not reviewed in a while). They get paid for each review they submit, and each of them has to have a yearly calibration done by a local Cedia approved calibrator.


At least I know how to get [uncompressed] movies, TV shows and music from Internet...for free

Sorry to bust your bubble, but anything on the internet has been heavily compressed - almost compressed to death. Even Vudu which offers 1080p streaming and downloads has had severe compression applied just to make it streamable and easily downloaded. The only uncompressed video in existence what the studio's send to the compression and encoding studios, or what they do themselves. Even Bluray requires AVC encoding(compression) to get all of the data onto the disc. So you understand, a uncompressed movie would take up about 4-6 TB of space, and there is no way that could get on a disc, or on the internet.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Ironically, they continue to shoot themselves in the foot with respect to revenue. You can copy any disc with easily accessible software. Most folks, however, don't and buy less software because of the overt inconvenience of BR copy protection.

There is absolutely no evidence anywhere of your claims, you are now just making $hit up - something you have been doing regularly now.


It's really pathetic that the movie moguls continue to ignore obvious industry trends. Then wonder why overall revenue is down despite marginal gains in one format vs another.

Once again, another lie being told. Overall revenue is not down, just DVD revenue. Get your damn facts straight before posting Ralph. Overall spending for home video entertainment is up 13.3% for the first three quarters of this year.

And all this BS about the studios not keeping up with technology is just plain BS. You ever heard of ultraviolet Ralph? Probably not or you would not be posting the misinformation you have been. Anytime you buy a Bluray disc, it includes a copy that you upload to ultraviolet. From there you can access that movie on any device you want - like Ipads, Iphones, and android devices. Since this new services has come to Bluray, sales of Bluray disc have grown 14% over last year, which was 10% over the year before according to NDP. The studios are keeping up with technology, just not in the way you would like - but that is too bad.

Perhaps you need to stick with two channel audio, because your AV chops are profoundly lacking on so many levels.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Sorry, I was talking about total volume where its down- not relative gains.

You are still wrong. Revenue is up for the first three quarters of this year.



Exactly! No players and winking, blinking ,waiting and farting around to be found here!

And no high resolution as well.




But down from it's heyday.

So what, everything else is up - up high enough to counter the slide of DVD sales. The studios no longer depend solely on DVD sales, they now get income from a variety of sources.



Indeed. Most folks have no idea what is possible. Like Smokey who follows video trends.

No, folks are concentrating on what works for them, not what works for YOU. There is no trend towards movie servers to follow, you are throwing up a red herring here.

[Smokey]

The official reviewing staff is made up of six people(I am the seventh but I have not reviewed in a while). They get paid for each review they submit, and each of them has to have a yearly calibration done by a local Cedia approved calibrator.

Do you have a link that show movies reviewed by the official reviewing staff. Most bluray movies reveiwed on that site seem to be from regular members which I guess does not make the reviews worse or better than what we get from other bluray review site on the net (like the link I posted).


Sorry to bust your bubble, but anything on the internet has been heavily compressed - almost compressed to death. Even Vudu which offers 1080p streaming and downloads has had severe compression applied just to make it streamable and easily downloaded.

What I meant by uncompressed video from net was what we would get strait from the disc :)

I don't have fastest net connection (3 mbps), but really don't like the PQ on most streamable video web sites like Netflix, Hulu or etc. The picture don't look too lively, the colors are flat and I see too much artifacts in the background on dimmly lit scenes.

[E-Stat]

You are still wrong. Revenue is up for the first three quarters of this year.
Maybe this year will turn around the consistently downward trend of the last several years. Quarterly figures don't mean much.


And no high resolution as well.
1080p is sufficiently high resolution for me.


So what, everything else is up - up high enough to counter the slide of DVD sales.
I refer to the entire market. More choices, yes. Total revenue, down.

[Feanor]

...
1080p is sufficiently high resolution for me.
...
Ditto that for me ... I know, I know: I'm a crotchety old man.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Maybe this year will turn around the consistently downward trend of the last several years. Quarterly figures don't mean much.

Quarter figures accumulate to a total at the end of the year - so they do matter even if you want to dismiss this.



1080p is sufficiently high resolution for me.

Well then, it looks like you are gonna have to put up with the disc, beeps, squawks and chirps for a while, cause you are not going to get that with ANY streaming format.



I refer to the entire market. More choices, yes. Total revenue, down.

When a person posts misinformation once, they made a simple mistake. When they do it twice, they are repeating a lie. You have repeated this assertion three times, so what does that make you?

Total revenue is up not down. Total revenue from DVD is down. Total revenue from Bluray, streaming, even with DVD being down is up 13,3%

Where ever you get your information from, give it back to them.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Do you have a link that show movies reviewed by the official reviewing staff. Most bluray movies reveiwed on that site seem to be from regular members which I guess does not make the reviews worse or better than what we get from other bluray review site on the net (like the link I posted).

You are looking in the Community section, not the official review section.

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.

You can also look under the movie section of the front page

Blu-ray, Blu-ray Movies, Blu-ray Players, Blu-ray Reviews (http://www.blu-ray.com/)

[quote]What I meant by uncompressed video from net was what we would get strait from the disc :)

Smokey, even the information on a disc is compressed. DVD uses MPEG-2, and Bluray uses AVC/H.264 Outside of the encoding house and studio, there is no uncompressed video to be found - especially not on the net. There is no video format that can currently process a uncompressed video stream except a avid editor or a compression encoder.


I don't have fastest net connection (3 mbps), but really don't like the PQ on most streamable video web sites like Netflix, Hulu or etc. The picture don't look too lively, the colors are flat and I see too much artifacts in the background on dimmly lit scenes.

You are only getting a standard definition low bit rate feed from Netflix and Hulu. My internet connection speed is 40mbps, and Netflix HD/X-high bit stream looks better than DVD(thanks to lots of high frequency filtering), and Hulu looks about the same as DVD.

[E-Stat]

Quarter figures accumulate to a total at the end of the year - so they do matter even if you want to dismiss this.
If the numbers were consistent from quarter to quarter, they would matter. A rise in one is no assurance of a rise in others.


You have repeated this assertion three times, so what does that make you?
Able to read online reports from the internet about historical sales figures. BR and digital increases have not kept pace with declining DVD sales.

DEG sales figures through 2010 (http://www.degonline.org/pressreleases/2011/f_Q410.pdf)

DEG 2011 figures (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/blu-ray-harry-potter-280185)

"Consumers spent a total of $18.04 billion on Blu-ray Disc, DVD and digital sales and rentals during the year, about 2% less than the $18.43 billion they spent in 2010, according to DEG, which bases its figures on studio and retail data."

By all means, present the data behind your assertion to the contrary. :)

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Ditto that for me ... I know, I know: I'm a crotchety old man.

I know a certain equipment reviewer named Steve Guttenburg who said 4K was a waste on a television set. His tune changed profoundly when he saw the Sony 4K set at CES.

While I understand 4K is not for everybody, that is where the television industry and future AV formats are headed.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

If the numbers were consistent from quarter to quarter, they would matter. A rise in one is no assurance of a rise in others.

You obviously did not read what I posted. The sales have been rising consistently for THREE QUARTERS, not just one.



Able to read online reports from the internet about historical sales figures. BR and digital increases have not kept pace with declining DVD sales.

DEG sales figures through 2010 (http://www.degonline.org/pressreleases/2011/f_Q410.pdf)

DEG 2011 figures (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/blu-ray-harry-potter-280185)

"Consumers spent a total of $18.04 billion on Blu-ray Disc, DVD and digital sales and rentals during the year, about 2% less than the $18.43 billion they spent in 2010, according to DEG, which bases its figures on studio and retail data."

By all means, present the data behind your assertion to the contrary. :)

You post data from 2010 and 2011 and want to be taken seriously here? Are you sure your name is not Bozo, because you sure are behaving like a clown.

Here is first half sales figures.

Hollywood extends slow turnaround in home video sales | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/29/entertainment-us-video-idUSBRE86S0IA20120729)

While a rise of Bluray sales alone have not offset DVD sales declines(3.7% overall loss) according to NDP(which is far more comprehensive than DEG) Streaming licensing sales have increased 38% which tallies to a 35% increase in home video entertainment sales as of the end of the third quarter(September). So there is absolutely no truth to your assertion that the studios are losing money. We have not even talked out licensing income the studios are getting from VUDU, Netflix, Amazon, are other streaming sites which according to NDP has jumped 120% from two years ago. When Netflix first negotiated contracts with the studios to stream their movies, it costs them 300 million dollars to do it. This year Netflix estimates it will cost them $1 billion dollars to negotiate those same contracts. That is Netflix alone Ralph.

Last time I checked, you cannot use sales figures from 1-2 years ago to describe what is happening today This is like taking my birthday from two years ago to tell my age today.. You need to get it through your thick head that the financial health of the studios is no longer tied to the DVD. That is the old financial model. These days the studios get revenue from a plethora of sources - that is the new model.

Get with the times Ralph.

[E-Stat]

You obviously did not read what I posted. The sales have been rising consistently for THREE QUARTERS, not just one.
Sure I did. Any they can tank for the fourth. The game isn't over until it's over. The trend is consistently downhill. Maybe, 2012 will reverse the decade old trend.


You post data from 2010 and 2011 and want to be taken seriously here?
Had you read the link, you'd find that I posted data from 1999 to 2011 to understand the consistent decline since 2004.


Here is first half sales figures.

Hollywood extends slow turnaround in home video sales | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/29/entertainment-us-video-idUSBRE86S0IA20120729)

Very interesting. Let's do some Jethro math, shall we?

"n the first half of the year, consumers spent $8.4 billion to rent, buy or stream movies, a 1.4 increase from last year."

Now double that for four quarters and compare that figure to the $18.04B total for last year. What would be your conclusion in terms of the trend line?


So there is absolutely no truth to your assertion that the studios are losing money.
I've never said that.


This year Netflix estimates it will cost them $1 billion dollars to negotiate those same contracts. That is Netflix alone Ralph.
Your're really getting off track here. What I have consistently said is that sales has been consistently down for the past eight years. At the expense of pointing out the obvious, the public doesn't spend money on "licensing". They buy what they buy.



Last time I checked, you cannot use sales figures from 1-2 years ago to describe what is happening today.
Apparently, you don't understand the concept of *trends*.


You need to get it through your thick head that the financial health of the studios is no longer tied to the DVD.
You continue to struggle with coordinating your rants with whoever you imagine has spoken about the "health of the studios". Now that you ask, I suspect they will continue to make plenty of money. Just selling less product to the public.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Sure I did. Any they can tank for the fourth. The game isn't over until it's over. The trend is consistently downhill. Maybe, 2012 will reverse the decade old trend.

Using trends as a measure, the fourth quarter has never tanked, even when times were really bad for the industry.



Had you read the link, you'd find that I posted data from 1999 to 2011 to understand the consistent decline since 2004.

Old news, and not relevant to today. Besides, DVD sales peaked in 2005, and was growing before then. So from 1999 to 2011 it was not in decline. Try again....




Very interesting. Let's do some Jethro math, shall we?

"n the first half of the year, consumers spent $8.4 billion to rent, buy or stream movies, a 1.4 increase from last year."

Now double that for four quarters and compare that figure to the $18.04B total for last year. What would be your conclusion in terms of the trend line?

First let's get something straight here. DEG always under-reports as they only aggregate 60% of the retail outlets. NDP aggregates 97% which is why the industry pays for the reports from NDP, and DEG information can be found online. So let's go with the most accurate here. NDP states that $8.4 billion is from the first quarter, not the first half. The second quarter results show $4.7 billion, and the third quarter was $4.4 billion. The fourth quarter totals are(based on trends) much higher than any other quarter based on the last four years trends, so there is no doubt this year will surpass last years total - hence why the studios are so upbeat for this year.



I've never said that.

Then wonder why overall revenue is down despite marginal gains in one format vs another.

When one states that revenue is down, they are saying the studios are losing money. Not only is revenue NOT down, and your hedging is not fooling anyone. Overall revenue includes sales of discs, VOD, streaming income, AND liscensing income as well, not just disc sales. OVERALL means everything.



Your're really getting off track here. What I have consistently said is that sales has been consistently down for the past eight years. At the expense of pointing out the obvious, the public doesn't spend money on "licensing". They buy what they buy.

Since you have not added any detail to your "sales have been consistently down" comment, it is meaningless. Sales have been consistently down for DVD, not Bluray, not streaming, and not VOD. You like to paint incomplete pictures and pass them off as finished. Not only is that misleading, but is is disingenuous as well.




Apparently, you don't understand the concept of *trends*.

I understand it quite well. I understand it so well that I know you cannot use "trends" from the last 3 years to describe what is happening today - especially in light of the fact that the trend is moving in the opposite direction of that period.



You continue to struggle with coordinating your rants with whoever you imagine has spoken about the "health of the studios". Now that you ask, I suspect they will continue to make plenty of money. Just selling less product to the public.

You continue to struggle with understanding how this industry works. They are not selling less product, they are selling far MORE product. They are selling less DVD's, but more Blurays, more streaming, and more VOD. Three mores and one less does not equal less product to the public. You continue to look at only one measure, and the film industry is judged by more than one measure.

When you stupidly make a claim that the industry is losing revenue(Then wonders why business is down. , and selling less product, you better have better sources to back up that claim than what you presented here. So far you have not proven your point, and probably won't be able to because you lack accurate information to do so.

[E-Stat]

First let's get something straight here. DEG always under-reports as they only aggregate 60% of the retail outlets. NDP aggregates 97% which is why the industry pays for the reports from NDP, and DEG information can be found online.
You're not convincing without data.


When one states that revenue is down, they are saying the studios are losing money.
Sorry, that's simply not true. Revenue can vary widely for any company above the black line.


Overall revenue includes sales of discs, VOD, streaming income, AND liscensing income as well, not just disc sales. OVERALL means everything.
Exactly. Had you followed the DEG link, you'll find separate figures for hard media, digital and rental. I reported the summed totals.


Since you have not added any detail to your "sales have been consistently down" comment, it is meaningless.
You are free to ignore the DEG data from 1999.


I understand it quite well. I understand it so well that I know you cannot use "trends" from the last 3 years to describe what is happening today - especially in light of the fact that the trend is moving in the opposite direction of that period.
For the past eight years, the numbers have been consistently down. That's called a trend. Perhaps 2012 will reverse the course.


When you stupidly make a claim that the industry is losing revenue(Then wonders why business is down. , and selling less product, you better have better sources to back up that claim than what you presented here.
Then provide some data that supports your position and not that of DEG. :)

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You're not convincing without data.

You are welcome to purchase NDP reports if you can afford them.



Sorry, that's simply not true. Revenue can vary widely for any company above the black line.

More hedging.....



Exactly. Had you followed the DEG link, you'll find separate figures for hard media, digital and rental. I reported the summed totals.


You are free to ignore the DEG data from 1999.

If you look at your own link, DVD was not losing sales in 1999, it was growing. DVD was introduced to the public in 1997

1999 $12.2 $1.1 $0.0 $0.6 $13.9
2000 $11.4 $2.4 $0.0 $0.7 $14.5
2001 $10.9 $5.3 $0.0 $0.7 $16.9
2002 $9.6 $8.6 $0.0 $0.7 $19.0
2003 $6.9 $13.1 $0.0 $0.7 $20.7
2004 $4.4 $16.7 $0.0 $0.7 $21.8
2005 $2.1 $18.9 $0.0 $0.8 $21.7
2006 $0.4 $20.2 $0.0 $1.0 $21.6
2007 $0.1 $19.7 $0.3 $1.3 $21.4
2008 $0.1 $18.4 $0.9 $1.6 $21.0
2009* $0.0 $15.8 $1.5 $2.1 $19.4
2010 $0.0 $14.0 $2.3 $2.5 $18.8


For the past eight years, the numbers have been consistently down. That's called a trend. Perhaps 2012 will reverse the course.

That would be seven Ralph, not eight.



Then provide some data that supports your position and not that of DEG. :)

I already did. Read my posts or purchase NDP's reports. Take your pick.

[E-Stat]

More hedging...
To say whenever revenue is down for a business, that immediately means they're losing money is a hilarious claim. :)

Sales down 5.4 percent...IBM still saw net income fall by four-tenths of a per cent to $3.82bn. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/16/ibm_q3_2012_numbers/)


That would be seven Ralph, not eight.
Mea culpa. Revenue has been consistently down for seven years. We'll see if 2012 changes the trend.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

To say whenever revenue is down for a business, that immediately means they're losing money is a hilarious claim. :)

Sales down 5.4 percent...IBM still saw net income fall by four-tenths of a per cent to $3.82bn. (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/16/ibm_q3_2012_numbers/)

To say because DVD sales are dropping the studios are losing revenue is equally hilarious. Revenue comes from ALL sources, not just disc, streaming, or VOD.



Mea culpa. Revenue has been consistently down for seven years. We'll see if 2012 changes the trend.

It has so far.

[E-Stat]

To say because DVD sales are dropping the studios are losing revenue is equally hilarious.
Mr. Short Term Memory strikes again. :)


Revenue comes from ALL sources, not just disc, streaming, or VOD.
The terms used in the DEG data and your earlier link refer to "home entertainment spending" or "home video sales". Take your choice.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Mr. Short Term Memory strikes again. :)

Mr. Don't know what he is talking about also stikes again.



The terms used in the DEG data and your earlier link refer to "home entertainment spending" or "home video sales". Take your choice.

You don't have to make a choice.....

[Hyfi]

Are you sure your name is not Bozo, because you sure are behaving like a clown.



Do you have the ability to post in any thread without calling someone names?

You talk about respect, your loss of respect for others, but you show nothing for others to respect.

Every disagreement you get involved in ends up with you calling others names.

[E-Stat]

Mr. Don't know what he is talking about also stikes again.
I don't know of anyone who has made your empty claim. Certainly not I. Quote the comment to which you refer.

What is obvious to those who followed the DEG links is that gains in BR and digital have not offset the larger losses with DVDs.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Do you have the ability to post in any thread without calling someone names?

You talk about respect, your loss of respect for others, but you show nothing for others to respect.

Every disagreement you get involved in ends up with you calling others names.

And here is my demonstation of how I lost respect for you. Go screw yourself......

Now I hope you understand how I truely feel about you,

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I don't know of anyone who has made your empty claim. Certainly not I. Quote the comment to which you refer.

What is obvious to those who followed the DEG links is that gains in BR and digital have not offset the larger losses with DVDs.

If you use DEG figures(which nobody does), you are right. But DEG only reports 60% of retail, so it is not an accurate picture - and why nobody in the industry will pay for the information.

If you use NDP(which everyone does, and pays for because it is accurate) which reports 97% of retail, then you are wrong.

Take your choice, inaccurate = conclusion or accurate = conclusion. Your choice....

[Hyfi]

And here is my demonstation of how I lost respect for you. Go screw yourself......

Now I hope you understand how I truely feel about you,

As if I really care what you think. You show us who you really are in every thread you post in.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

As if I really care what you think. You show us who you really are in every thread you post in.

Good...then go screw yourself......

[Hyfi]

http://bbsimg.ngfiles.com/14/19917000/ngbbs4a991786dd103.jpg

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

http://bbsimg.ngfiles.com/14/19917000/ngbbs4a991786dd103.jpg

The coward I invision you are runs faster.

[Hyfi]

The coward I invision you are runs faster.

Nobody is running anywhere but I have decided you are more of a Mr T than a Sir T always telling everyone to "Shut Up You Fool"

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Nobody is running anywhere but I have decided you are more of a Mr T than a Sir T always telling everyone to "Shut Up You Fool"

Great, now go screw yourself....

[Hyfi]

says

Great, now go screw yourself....Fool

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Great, now go screw yourself....Fool

Do you always talk to mirrors?

That's kind of weird you know........