Posted by Richard Phillips on 01/08/08 15:01

RCE Defiant wrote:
> I know it's hard to crystal ball it and say never but I don't think
> I'll ever bother with Blu-Ray or HD-DVD unless I buy it by mistake as
> something bundled with something else. They'll have you flipping
> your collection till the end of time if you keep stumping up the cash
> for every new format they can think of. Roll on fibre to the house
> and a �20 per month all you can eat film subscription!

I bought the HD-DVD player for the xbox and have the grand total of King
Kong and Planet Earth for it. I wasn't very bothered about HD, but I guess
the curiosity finally got to me (seeing as the player was so cheap).

My TV is 32" 720p, I find that scenes with little/no motion (particularly
outdoor scenic shots) look superb but any scene with motion and the
difference is negligable, indoor scenes really don't look much different
either. Of course the resolution is higher in both cases but I find I don't
percieve any extra detail, which is really what matters.

Perhaps the difference is worth paying for with a bigger 1080i/p screen, but
I think I'll be buying sDVDs for the foreseeable future, apart from the odd
special purchase, maybe LOTR when it's available. But the bulk of my DVD
purchases are likely to still be sDVD, when I can get them for �5 or �10!

I certainly won't be changing my DVD collection to HD-DVD. Planet Earth
generally benefits quite a bit from the extra resolution, but as far as my
purchases go, it's unusual. Most typical films won't benefit as much, IMHO.
When you are concentrating on a film with a decent story/plot, are you
really worried about whether you can see an actor's wrinkles?!

R.

[Back to original message]