Is this a good time to start collecting blurays or is there some new technology just behind the corner that will make them obsolete in a year or two?
I think its an excellent start
4K discs is what you have to look into if you're concerned.
4K = 4Ublu = 35mm
2K = bluray = 16mm
1K = dvd = 8mm
4k blus are going to play on bluray though right?
so at least buying a machine now wont hurt far as i know op
I feel sorry for the HD DVD adopters.
>>62968269
no its the other way around
blurays will still play in 4k players
>>62968516
Don't. I'm willing to bet that my xbox 360 drive and the ten discs I have cost less than most of Bluray fags whole collection and I learned my lesson about spending money.
>>62968516
I was thinking the same a few weeks ago. What's the quality like ? (Un)fortunately I never could experience them
So, I've been trying to collect blu-rays, but I have this paranoia that the movies I buy are going to be DNRed to Hell and back, thus removing much of the grain and detail, and have color "correction" that deviates from the original look of the film (I hear studios do this to make them look more "modern"...Fuck that.). I just want to be able to watch films as close to how they looked when originally released in theatres as possible.
What am I supposed to do? Is there a database or something that I can consult to figure out what the best release of a movie is?
>>62969288
http://caps-a-holic.com
>>62969288
http://www.blu-ray.com/ is great for looking at the quality of the Blu-Ray, they have high resolution screenshots of the movies.
You generally don't have to worry about Classic Movies, the people doing the restoration have enough respect to know that a movie made in the 70s and earlier should have film grain and all that.
It's 80s and 90s films that get awful transfers. I absolutely hate what they did to Terminator 2, it looks too clean.
>>62968133
yes
>>62969323
Holy fuck...Thank you for this. This is exactly what I need.
>>62968540
My HD DVD player gets good use. I waited until the fire sale and got 100 movies for less than 50cents each
>>62968133
4K discs are around the corner but i doubt the format will ever have anywhere near the range of available titles for it that Blu-ray has
>>62969417
exactly and given the fact that people won't shell out for 4k straight away as it will be tremendously overpriced blu ray won't be obsolete for a long while if at all
The only reason to buy films is if you want to rewatch them multiple times. otherwise it's fucking retarded.
>>62969401
>got 100 movies
So, all of the HD DVD movies twice over?
