senatorpjt said: I don't understand why "Only 11% of HDTV owners care about HD films." If they didn't care, why did they buy a HDTV?

maybe cause they

1) wanted a bigger TV

2) it takes up less space then a crt

 

think man think...

in 2009 HDTVS Will take off

Space20man said: in 2009 HDTVS Will take off

They have already taken off. 

LordTheNightKnight - Why you are so narow minded?

I'm Blu-Ray supporter because I own PS3. What's wrong with it? Nothing.

I'm happy I've chosen winning format. You are crying, because You've chosen loosing one. Just admit it. Bottom end.

Is nothing worse for HD market then two fighting formats. It is going to end. Alleluja.

Get a grip and buy yourself a Blu-Ray player, maybe it will stop You crying. "8"

makingmusic476 said: LordTheNightKnight said: makingmusic476 said: LordTheNightKnight said: BTW, it just occurred to me about what material to release. Since sports and nature documentaries get the most HD ratings, more of those should be released. Planet Earth has some of the best legs in either format, so it shows there is a market for these in HD. Anything that is visually appealing, really. The Lord of the Rings? Star Wars? Hell yes. Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail? Um...what's the point? It's not quite anything that is visually appealing. Nature shows and sports can be filmes specifically for HD, while films can't, not yet. So no, those films are not likely to push their sales in HD based on visual appeal alone. All films are filmed in analog, and .35nm film has a theoretical pixel count in the millions, if it were to be scanned and converted into digital. Most films are filmed in much much higher than HD.

Visually appealing is an artistic term. You can't just switch to pixel count, since even films that look like crap have that. 

makingmusic476 said: LordTheNightKnight said: makingmusic476 said: LordTheNightKnight said: BTW, it just occurred to me about what material to release. Since sports and nature documentaries get the most HD ratings, more of those should be released. Planet Earth has some of the best legs in either format, so it shows there is a market for these in HD. Anything that is visually appealing, really. The Lord of the Rings? Star Wars? Hell yes. Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail? Um...what's the point? It's not quite anything that is visually appealing. Nature shows and sports can be filmes specifically for HD, while films can't, not yet. So no, those films are not likely to push their sales in HD based on visual appeal alone. All films are filmed in analog, and .35nm film has a theoretical pixel count in the millions, if it were to be scanned and converted into digital. Most films are filmed in much much higher than HD.

QFE. Although, you obviously meant millimeter not nanometer.

 

Although film doesn't strictly have a resolution, even 16mm film has a grain that gives finer detail than HD-video. 35mm has far, far greater definition than HD, hence being able to watch it on a cinema screen.

Blu Ray is great. I got all 3 Pirates of the Caribbean movies on Blu Ray and they are amazing.

jjseth said: I'd be all for less expensive HD movies. That may be the only way they can really get the mainstream to adopt the technology if they have the equipment for it. Right now I wouldn't buy a BR movie unless I had money to burn or giftcards to waste and nothing else that I needed right now. (which is why I did splurge on a couple of movies tonight). If they can get the price point to the $15-20 range on all of the movies, they will sell like gangbusters. And they can keep regular DVD's at their current pricing for new releases (which is usually in the $15-20 range) and either way the movie companies will make their money. And in some cases, they may make even more money by offering a way to pick up HD movies for the same cost as a regular DVD.

they are in that price rang.... no HD or BD movie is more the 25 bucks and thats 2 disk sets.

LordTheNightKnight said: makingmusic476 said: LordTheNightKnight said: makingmusic476 said: LordTheNightKnight said: BTW, it just occurred to me about what material to release. Since sports and nature documentaries get the most HD ratings, more of those should be released. Planet Earth has some of the best legs in either format, so it shows there is a market for these in HD. Anything that is visually appealing, really. The Lord of the Rings? Star Wars? Hell yes. Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail? Um...what's the point? It's not quite anything that is visually appealing. Nature shows and sports can be filmes specifically for HD, while films can't, not yet. So no, those films are not likely to push their sales in HD based on visual appeal alone. All films are filmed in analog, and .35nm film has a theoretical pixel count in the millions, if it were to be scanned and converted into digital. Most films are filmed in much much higher than HD.   Visually appealing is an artistic term. You can't just switch to pixel count, since even films that look like crap have that.

In regards to your sig: it only seems like all of the assholes are lining up behind Blu Ray right now because Blu Ray appears to be winning.  I can recall about a year ago when you heard nothing from the HD DVD supporters but "LOLZ BLU RAY R SONY FAGZ" and yet another final nail in the Blu Ray coffin.  Now these same people who were gloating(not pointing at you, as I don't recall seeing a single post like that from you) are bitter because they're having to taste the same medicine they were dishing out last year.  I personally will not gloat, but fuck those guys.  They're getting what they had coming.

phil said: LordTheNightKnight said: makingmusic476 said: LordTheNightKnight said: makingmusic476 said: LordTheNightKnight said: BTW, it just occurred to me about what material to release. Since sports and nature documentaries get the most HD ratings, more of those should be released. Planet Earth has some of the best legs in either format, so it shows there is a market for these in HD. Anything that is visually appealing, really. The Lord of the Rings? Star Wars? Hell yes. Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail? Um...what's the point? It's not quite anything that is visually appealing. Nature shows and sports can be filmes specifically for HD, while films can't, not yet. So no, those films are not likely to push their sales in HD based on visual appeal alone. All films are filmed in analog, and .35nm film has a theoretical pixel count in the millions, if it were to be scanned and converted into digital. Most films are filmed in much much higher than HD.   Visually appealing is an artistic term. You can't just switch to pixel count, since even films that look like crap have that. In regards to your sig: it only seems like all of the assholes are lining up behind Blu Ray right now because Blu Ray appears to be winning. I can recall about a year ago when you heard nothing from the HD DVD supporters but "LOLZ BLU RAY R SONY FAGZ" and yet another final nail in the Blu Ray coffin. Now these same people who were gloating(not pointing at you, as I don't recall seeing a single post like that from you) are bitter because they're having to taste the same medicine they were dishing out last year. I personally will not gloat, but fuck those guys. They're getting what they had coming.

Yeah, I remember all the HD fanboys back in Nov/Dec of 2006.  First it was, "the ps3 won't change anything."  Then it was, "It's only temporary.  Ps3 owners are cashing in their free coupons.  The bubble will burst soon," 

Then later in the year, "studios don't care about toal sales.  Attach rates are where it's at." and "studios don't want to rely on gamers."