By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Blu-Ray isn`t dead, but it also isn`t the DVD killer

V-r0cK said:
Does anybody know an approx. file size of a 4K video and how much bandwidth it takes to stream?

I've read that streaming an HD episode on Netflix takes around double the size of bandwidth than it would to just "download" the episode.

As convenient as streaming is, there are many countries that doesn't have the luxury of having a large/unlimited bandwidth at an affordable price.

You need an internet speed of like 22 mb/s or something to stream "4k content" on Netflix.

I put 4k content in quotes, cause its really about as good as blu ray physical media is in quality. 



Around the Network

Bluray market may be small, but at the end of the day, it's high end media... it was nevertheless meant to replace DVD'S.

Studios know this which is why they are hoping to make money off the so called collectors and enthusiasts who adopt early tech / always double dip.



Its kinda funny that physical media is the niche market now. Who knows how long before UHD Bluray becomes the norm. If it becomes the norm. I think DVDs are the sweet spot and it will be tough to make people give them up.



V-r0cK said:
Barkley said:

If they're the same video file then streaming and downloading would take exactly the same data.

According to netflix streaming 1 hour of there 4k content will use approximatley 7gb of data, compared to 3gb for HD.

Thanks for the info!

Crazy just thinking that if you were to stream BvS extended edition (or Titanic) in 4K that's 21gb of bandwidth.  I know some of my friends and family members have around 60-80gb a month for bandwidth so I doubt they'd want to stream anything 4K just yet.

I believe you both misunderstand the meaning of the term "bandwidth".  
It refers to the RATE of data transfer, not the total amount.
So indeed, you can download the same size file with an arbitrarily smaller bandwidth, it just takes longer.

And to the broader point, it ISN'T the same video file, current 4k streaming is massively compressed vs. what UHD discs provide.
Netflix is talking about 4k streaming being 15mbs, while non-UHD BD spec is 54 mbs... UHD-BD is 84-128mbs! (almost 10x streaming)
People like to talk about cost of BD and UHD-BD discs (seemingly focusing on purchasing, rather than rental scenario),
but consumers will need to pay for higher bandwidth internet AND providers will have higher costs to recoup.
(afaik, Netflix is already offering less choice of streaming than it does from DVD mail service)

I've heard that the sales curve for UHD TVs and the like is significantly outperforming original HD TVs.
So curious how that reflects oh UHD-BD.  Could very well be that HD was not considered worth it, while UHD is.
And it also is due to profiteering by media companies wanting to charge premium prices for BD, and now UHD. 
I think there will also be a future dynamic from if streaming gains enough, physical channels will want to compete more.
(and the ultimate potential profits from price-gouging UHD-BD discs becomes less than if charged reasonable price to larger market)
So they might very well insist on getting UHD-BD discs at non-price-gouging prices, to better compete with streaming.
And at that point, media companies may well play along, so that they will not be prisoner to streaming oligopolies.
(sure, relatively little direct barrier to new streaming service, but consumers want to pay one fee to one streaming library service)



The problem is average consumers aren't happy rebuilding their collections. Pricing certainly doesn't help. I remember the first BR I bought (Kung Fu Panda) and it was £35! At the time, buying on DVD would have cost me around £12.99.

I used to collect films on VHS, DVD and BR. Even had a few special editions and collectors edition but I've just given up now having to rebuy etc. Additionally, it don't help that I find TV series far better in quality that most big movies. I've gone from mostly watching films to hardly any series to mostly watching series and hardly any films.

Just think about the quality series we have:

1) TWD
2) GOT
3) Billions
4) Westworld
5) Ash vs Evil Dead
6) Elementary
7) Brooklyn Nine Nine
8) Lucifer
9) Grand Tour
10) Mr Robot
11) Into the Badlands
12) Suits
13) Flash
14) Arrow
15) Jessica Jones
16) Luke Cage
17) Dare Devil
18) Modern Family
19) The Middle
20) Dirk Gently
21) the Night Of
22) The Night Manager

The list can go on and on and to watch them all for few months would still be cheaper than buying a new UHD.



Around the Network
mutantsushi said:
V-r0cK said:

Thanks for the info!

Crazy just thinking that if you were to stream BvS extended edition (or Titanic) in 4K that's 21gb of bandwidth.  I know some of my friends and family members have around 60-80gb a month for bandwidth so I doubt they'd want to stream anything 4K just yet.

I believe you both misunderstand the meaning of the term "bandwidth".  
It refers to the RATE of data transfer, not the total amount.
So indeed, you can download the same size file with an arbitrarily smaller bandwidth, it just takes longer.

And to the broader point, it ISN'T the same video file, current 4k streaming is massively compressed vs. what UHD discs provide.
As another poster stated, the (playback) bandwidth rating 4k streaming is roughly similar to normal Blu Ray discs.

I've heard that the sales curve for UHD TVs and the like is significantly outperforming original HD TVs.
So curious how that reflects oh UHD-BD.  Could very well be that HD was not considered worth it, while UHD is.
And it also is due to profiteering by media companies wanting to charge premium prices for BD, and now UHD. 
I think there will also be a future dynamic from if streaming gains enough, physical channels will want to compete more.
(and the ultimate potential profits from price-gouging UHD-BD discs becomes less than if charged reasonable price to larger market)
So they might very well insist on getting UHD-BD discs at non-price-gouging prices, to better compete with streaming.
And at that point, media companies may well play along, so that they will not be prisoner to streaming oligopolies.

I've read that UHD discs are outperforming Blu Ray Discs in the same time frame. 

But you can add me to the list of buyers now. Yesterday I purchased a One S for $215 and also 6 4k movies.

Was gonna wait till Scorpio, but figured, what the heck. It was a good deal and I can trade in One S for a hundred bucks or something for the scorpio if I want it. ONly reason I got One S was for the 4k player, so doubtful I'll need to upgrade seeing as I don't play many ps/xbox games at all.



invetedlotus123 said:
V-r0cK said:

Thanks for the info!

Crazy just thinking that if you were to stream BvS extended edition (or Titanic) in 4K that's 21gb of bandwidth.  I know some of my friends and family members have around 60-80gb a month for bandwidth so I doubt they'd want to stream anything 4K just yet.

H.265 encoding solves the size problem in a way. If 4k needed 4x the size of a 1080p file ( since it`s 4x times pixels), with h.265 it needs only 2x, with the same quality, and when encoding techniques evolve the files size will be even lower. Remember when a 1080p movie needed 20gb~15gb for 2 hours and now we can get files with 4 gb that have no discernible compression artifacts or lower quality unless you are the super crazy videophile. 

I am kind of a videophile, far from crazy though! The difference between Netflix HD and blu-ray is immediately noticeable. I would never mistake the soft look of Netflix to the crisp detailed look of blu-ray. Yet I can't see the difference between ps4 and pro in 1080p unless I switch back and forth between inputs.

Netflix 4K streams at 15mbps, upto 18mbps for HDR titles. Even if h.265 is used optimally, that still only equates to 30 to 36 mbps h.264, or blu-ray quality... (blu-ray reads upto 54 mbps, I've seen video spikes upto 48 mbps) It would be nice if Netflix would use 15 mbps h.265 for crisp 1080p, or downscale the 4K feed to a non chroma subsampled 1080p stream.

I wonder when we'll have lossless compression for video as we have now for audio. It still takes about 4 mbps for a lossless compressed 7.1 DTS HD MA stream. Which is another sore point with Netflix, lossy 5.1 audio.

But sure, if you're coming from DVD, Netflix looks pretty good.



SvennoJ said:
invetedlotus123 said:

H.265 encoding solves the size problem in a way. If 4k needed 4x the size of a 1080p file ( since it`s 4x times pixels), with h.265 it needs only 2x, with the same quality, and when encoding techniques evolve the files size will be even lower. Remember when a 1080p movie needed 20gb~15gb for 2 hours and now we can get files with 4 gb that have no discernible compression artifacts or lower quality unless you are the super crazy videophile. 

I am kind of a videophile, far from crazy though! The difference between Netflix HD and blu-ray is immediately noticeable. I would never mistake the soft look of Netflix to the crisp detailed look of blu-ray. Yet I can't see the difference between ps4 and pro in 1080p unless I switch back and forth between inputs.

Netflix 4K streams at 15mbps, upto 18mbps for HDR titles. Even if h.265 is used optimally, that still only equates to 30 to 36 mbps h.264, or blu-ray quality... (blu-ray reads upto 54 mbps, I've seen video spikes upto 48 mbps) It would be nice if Netflix would use 15 mbps h.265 for crisp 1080p, or downscale the 4K feed to a non chroma subsampled 1080p stream.

I wonder when we'll have lossless compression for video as we have now for audio. It still takes about 4 mbps for a lossless compressed 7.1 DTS HD MA stream. Which is another sore point with Netflix, lossy 5.1 audio.

But sure, if you're coming from DVD, Netflix looks pretty good.

This! Blu Ray still looks a lot better than streamed HD content. Hopefully that will change over time, but I still watch movies on Blu Ray if I have the option.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Yup, and as I edited my above post to include, while standard BluRay is 54 mbs vs Netflix 15 mbs,
UHD-BD (using the newer compression standard, and with HDR) is 84-128mbs! (almost 10x streaming at max)

Another unmentioned factor is UHD/4k vs BD/HD uptake is the differentiator vs. previous video, i.e. HDR color.
Yet another "unmentioned" factor along with actual sales curve data. Hmm... :-O

Personally, I find the focus on individual purchasers/collectors, strange, as I enjoy rentals of high quality BD.
(not on the 4k bandwagon myself yet, in any form)



Important aspect: you can own a physical disc that stays with you for decades and you can sell it if you like. Owning vs. renting a stream.