Why does this ancient format still exist? Who is buying and watching movies in 480i in 2026?
it works and it is cheap
>>220445964Evidently nobody since few of the big retailers even carry them anymore.
>>220446000blu rays are better and they are like $5
>>220446001Somehow it's still outselling current formats. Is it just retarded boomers with bad eyesight buying them?
>>220445964I do
>buying mediazoomers and boomers are subhuman
i never made the jump to bluray
>>220446000blurays are often just as cheap.even for the new releases the price difference is usually pretty small.what's the point of buying something in standard definition when even streaming has a much better quality.
>>220445964There is probably tons of people who own a Blu-ray player but buy DVDs for it because they don't know any better.
>>220446017>>220446079>>220446108Blu-ray is also an ancient obsolete format. The tv industry hasn't even made a tv with less than 4k resolution in over a decade. There's no reason why both blu-ray and dvd shouldn't have been 100% replaced by 4k blu-ray by now. It's not like it costs any more money to stamp a 4k blu-ray than a dvd.
>>2204460794k isn't worth it, but the bluray improvement over DVD is clearly noticeable.I could understand ditching physical media altogether and going streaming only, but still buying DVDs in 2026 is retarded.
>>220446181Streaming only is retarded. You need to own your movies
>>220445964Indians and Pakis.
>>220446181>4k isn't worth itSounds like a poor that doesn't have a 4k tv and player.
Plenty of low IQ people stilldon't know what blu-ray is still, much less 4K
>>2204461621080p is good enough for 99% of people.I own a 4k OLED TV and a 4k bluray player, and the improvement over standard bluray is really not that mindblowing.I would buy 4k discs if they were a lot cheaper, but they're often 3-4-5 times the price of the same film on bluray, especially for older stuff.
>>220446297Who cares whether or not the difference is mindblowing? The movies already exist in 4k masters and everyone has a 4k tv, so why is the quality intentionally being reduced between the two? There's no increased bandwidth cost like there is with streaming and the cost of production of the discs is identical. The players might be more expensive but that's only because they're not mass produced in high enough quantities. They would cost exactly the same if the industry got rid of the old formats and pushed everyone to 4k blu-ray.
You guys might get a kick out of this, but when I worked at microcenter there was like 4 or 5 black guys who came in and bought bulk dvd's, like every week. 1k-2k id say. And they were just ripping movies and selling them on the side. One time one of them came in with his big tower burner, im not sure what its called but it had one like master drive thatd burn whatever down to the 7 other drives. And it wasnt working and so I took a look at it for 20 minutes figured out one of the dvd drives was bad, found a refurb for like 15$ in the back and fixed it for him. Dude was so happy he came back the next day and gave me a big fucking binder of movies he had ripped, like 60 of them. I watched a few and some was like movies still in theaters but they'd have spanish subtitles or some shit. One of the movies just ended half way thru. It was all fuckin terrible quality. Loved those black guys. They were funny as fuck and would ask if you wanted any movies made and shit if you talked to them a bit. Wonder if they still do that. That was in like 2016
>>220445964MeBecause the kinos I watch can't afford a blu ray release
>>220446449>2016That used to be a thing in the 2000s. Crazy people were still doing that in the 2010s.
>>220446228>Sounds like a poor that doesn't have a 4k tv and player.wrong. I own a 1000 euros Panasonic player and I still think that, for watching stuff from a normal viewing distance, the improvement is kinda subtle.The difference is noticeable when you stand close to the screen, but nobody watches films like that.I bought it because I wanted to try 4k and I have no problems spending a grand on that, but I could live with just a standard bluray player.
So many blurays have fucked up color grading or dumb bullshit like James Cameron's obsession with digitally removing film grain until they look like smeared ass that it's debatable if they're really much of an upgrade over DVDs.
>>220446537*Crazy that people
>>220446544>but nobody watches films like thatNo it's because you really are poor, being a eurocuck who can't afford a house big enough to put an 85" tv in like we do here in America.
>>2204460263rd world probably
>>220446559Grading isn't a fault of blurays, it's on the studios and directors. Cameron is an outlier because he's retarded and thinks grain is le bad. There are DVDs with fucked color grading as well.
DVDs are cheaper than Blu-rays. Blu-rays also have a tendency to have batshit insane color grading which wrecks the movies visuals.
>>220446619Don't forget what Peter Hackson did to the LOTR trilogy too.
>>220446619>it's on the studios and directors.But they tend to whip out this color grading on blu rays. Lots of DVDs were just thrown together so there was no remastering or color grading done. The Friday the 13th blu rays look horrendous.
>>220446653Left image was a legit mistake with the blue grading. The other 2 films don't look like that.The 2020 4k remasters have their own problems. Tons of DNR makes the image look very soft and the warm glow in some scenes has been removed.
>>2204463774k has always remained a niche format exactly because they have never pushed it as the standard film format.players are still very pricey, the discs are a lot more expensive than standard blurays, so normal buyers are still ok with older technologies.
>>220446666Checked and True Lies is the worst thing I've ever seen. It looks like an emulated SNES game with all the smoothing filters turned on.
Don't most tv's upscale it to 1080i? That's good enough for 90% of stuff
>>220445964For new shows I agree it's outdated but for older shows it's great and it looks amazing on a CRT. SD on blu-ray is also good.
Probably just for old people who can't wrap their heads around the difference. I'd say new DVD printing will probably be dead in like 10 years
>>220446653>>220446724This is why I only watch movies on VHS
>>220445964Because fuck streaming and buying a "license" to watch what you've already paid for. Yeah you can pirate it but if you lose access to your digital archives under any circumstances then you're fucked.
>>220446078Piratiggers will be jokere'd in prison SOON.
>>220446591Shut up muttoid subhuman
>>220445964Most devices that are capable of playing DVD's have upscaling built in, they are not much different from blu-ray at that point
>>220447616>they are not much different from blu-ray at that point
>>220447722Nice selfie, I have a DVD player that upscales to 1080p and compared it to a blu-ray of the same movie, they look close enough that the average person watching a movie wouldn't care about any difference.
Most people don't have in-home cinemas, nor care to own them. Dial-up quality on a phone is sufficient for most people.
>>220445964>Who is buying and watching movies in 480i in 2026?I'm not watching movies that way but I am playing games that way, having recently set up my original Xbox with an old CRT.A little known secret is that a 30fps game looks and feels smoother on a 480i CRT than on a newer progressive flat panel, because of how interlacing works. 30 frames becomes 60 fields and 60 visual changes per second.Gamers didn't bicker about 30fps vs 60fps during the PS2/Xbox/GameCube gen, at least not as much, and this is why. When you upgraded to an HDTV, suddenly all your 30fps games became more sluggish and choppier
Physical Media owner here. I have close to 600 discs in total with one full 250 binder booklet with half Blu-ray and DVD, two other 100 binder booklets with Blu-ray and DVD and about 120 encased 4K/Bluray combo packs from Vinegar Syndrome and other various horror/scifi boutique labels. I don’t stream. That shit is for nigger faggots. My setup is kino.
>>220446544>I own a 1000 euros Panasonic playerYou own a worthless dust collector you wasted 1000 euro on instead of downloading a 4k webrip like a normal person.
>he says he loves movies.>he doesnt even own a single 4k copy special edition of his favorite filmsi thought film snobs used this board.
>>220447616a DVD can store 5gb of data. a blu ray can store 25gb. they not only put films on their in 720p or 480, but they will also take out colors and sounds to further reduce the size to fit it on the 5gb disc. when you upgrade to blu ray or 4k, its not only sharper lines and better quality. its better color gradient and better sound effects.
>>220446449saw a black guy in Detroit selling homemade DVDs in a parking lot about twenty years ago, he was yelling at people to come buy, it was a sight to behold. he had the latest releases at the time, i still wonder what happened to that bold nigga
>>220445964It's boomers. They see no reason to upgrade. There is also a tonne of DVD-only releases, both library and current. It's pretty uncommon for anything but autism magnet TV shows to get BD releases, whilst network shows still get DVD ones. When you're dealing with shows, there are decades of content without HD materials anyway. Lots was either shot or mastered on tape, with others being too cost prohibitive to rescan in HD. AI upscales are new and have had questionable results. No one but some anime autist labels do SDBDs.>>220446613>third world>>buying mediaNot even why physical media was the dominant home video format.
>>220448465Yeah I didn't think my comment through because even if they eventually get the video games and dvd's in 3rd world releases, they will most definitely buy them if it still costs them 10% of their monthly income to own one 5$ dvd so...
it costs more to stream 4k because the data transfer. so its inevitable that steaming services will penny pinch and find a way to compress it to save money all while you think you are getting 4k quality. they will also do shit like up pricing and you will still get frame dropswith the biggest inevitability will be ads in your 4k 50 dollars a month TV streaming package.enjoy.
>>220445964I like DVD’s. They make me comfy.
>>220446078This>>220447549Yeah any day now retard
>>220445964i wouldn't mind to get movies released before 2008 in old dvd releases
>>220445964Because I can get kino for $2 each at the second hand store
>>220446017blurays are like $20 and boutique labels like criterion/arrow are $30+
>>220446537pirated dvds are still a thing at flea markets. guess mexicans are the target buyers. but you can go to any thrift and find hundreds of movies and tv series for only 2 or 3 dollars. blu rays too
>>220445964>DUDE BLUERAY LMAOScreens didn't improve commensurately enough for the 4k memes (precipitating mass RAPE of 'touched up' films, classic and contemporary). Format switcheroo was bullshit to upsell the same shit to you, again.
>>220448514Pretty much everything but 4K + ads has already happened. 4K has always been bitrate starved on most major streaming services: https://hd-report.com/streaming-bitrates-of-popular-movies-shows/ Most are lower than 1080p BDs. 4K + ads will probably happen when 8K is common enough for them to offer that as a premium option.
>>220446000Trips of truth
>>220448854>Its a scam.lol. lmao even. DVD's are potato vision. upgrade. even blu rays are quality still.
A lot of 4k transfers are straight garbage. Aliens, true lies, titanic, abyss, terminator 2, avatar 1 and 2,etc
>>220448491*or rather not buy them legally
>>220445964> Who is buying and watching movies in 480i in 2026?Me
>>220448959>4k transfers suckso you buy the blu ray and be happy that you have the best quality copy that you can own. Also Titanic is highly praised on blu-ray.com for its 4k release. so.........
Blade Runner in 4k looks amazing. Most 4ks are not worth it. But if it comes with a bluray why not get? It's usually like $5 more.>>220448959>all James Cameron flicks
>>220449021How? It's AI upscale slop. I found it unwatchable. Im forced to keep the 1080p blurays of all Cameron's works because the 4k remasters are bastardized
>>220449076>random condescending anon that probably didnt do shit he saysVS>Professional movie revieweri dont know.
>>220448175Based. Fuck the streaming jews. >>220448514The absolute dogshit streaming quality is a big part of the reason why I dropped my netflix subscription. Any remotely dark scene turns into a mosaic of giant black pixels, any scene with snow or rain turns into confetti, and even scenes with nothing spectacular going on would randomly drop to what felt like 480p for a bit before randomly coming back up. Why the hell should I bother with that when I can pirate a copy with better quality, no ads, and can count on it not randomly becoming unavailable due to it moving to a new streaming platform? Or even spend a few bucks and get all of the previous benefits plus even better quality and a disc to make infinite rips of? Streaming in 2026 is a fucking joke. >>220448959You've got Cameron and his senility induced hatred for grain to thank for most of those. Thankfully I've still got my blu-rays of aliens, abyss, and terminator 1+2 so I don't have to suffer through any of the denoised versions.
>>220448959I have zero issue with how Avatar 1 and 2 look on 4k Blu-ray. My only gripe with them is they did two different 4k releases of Avatar 1, spaced apart by months, with the theatrical and then extended cuts, to encourage double dipping, and not making it clear that the extended cut was not included in the first one
>>220449152>Based. Fuck the streaming jews.All day, everyday, my nigga.
>>220449420This
>>220445964More films/shows are on DVD than on bluray/streaming combined.>>220448252>4k webripNTA but those are so compressed, the resulting image quality isn't even as good as a 1080p bluray.
>>220448175>I have close to 600 discs in total with one full 250 binder booklet with half Blu-ray and DVD, two other 100 binder booklets with Blu-ray and DVD andthose discs will all be destroyed due to being stored in binders like that
>>220445964They are fun to collect and can watch them anywhere I don't need a dedicated player it could be anything with a dvd reader including fun stuff The real draw is just making huge collections of them including tons of pirate movies shit you can't do with bluray
>>220445964480 dvd on a crt looks better than 720p digital with jpeg artefacts everywhere and poor contrast
>>220446026Are you going to spend $50 on a single movie when you couple just spend ten bucks and get five movies with the same price? Especially when the visuals don’t usually require high definition.
>>220449770Why are you so bad at being a consumer anon?Don't think of your own convenience, think of the store clerk finally selling something
Depends on what you're watchingYou need DVDs just to be able to watch certain thingsTelecine is a bitch tho and I wish they'd have kept more of the progressive scan masters and sold those on discs too.. fuck an interlaced scan
>>220445964Poor people
>>220449578Nope. I literally just checked them all the other week and not one single disc has shown any type of “disc rot” or traces of “bleeding/separation” of the digital media. Get fucked. Lamo
>>220446724That's the 4K remaster.https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?d1=18814&d2=18817&s1=222872&s2=222887&i=7&l=0&a=0
>>220449844All DVDs are interlaced. It's the player that deinterlaces them, which can be any blu-ray player or DVD player made after like 2002.
>>220449931Doesn't have to be that way.Pulldown flags on soft telecine is way better, and can be unfucked a lot easier than a hard telecine.And don't even get me started on those NTSC-to-PAL field-blending conversions and vice versa. Fuck that noise.Progressive scan... put on disc... that's it, that's all.. done.
>>220446026nobody but retards are buying movies, let's see units moved
>>220450163What's the matter anon?Can't handle a good old consumer choice?
>>220446079When I built my first computer blurays had been common for a few years and still expensive. A bluray drive was around $100. I cheaped out and got a DVD drive thinking I would get a bluray drive later but bluray prices never dropped to price DVD prices.
>>220445964Cheap to make and cheaper to buy then a standard blu ray disc
>>220448325>when you upgrade to blu ray or 4k, its not only sharper lines and better quality. its better color gradient and better sound effects.the problem is they denoise video and audio so the result looks an sounds worse.
>>220445964I do, I have a bluray player that upscales DVDs and a good sony TV, they look fine, picked up For A Few Dollars More a couple of weeks ago
>>220445964People with 480i displays
>>220449806But I’m moving more of their stock, bro
>>220445964DVD resolution is fine if you want a hard copy. Its just good enough. And its cheap. Its so cheap there really isn't an incentive to make a better format. Bluray is overpriced and unnecessary for casual viewing
>>220446000This, and also cheap to manufacture from the studio side. So it easier to find many obscure tv shows/movies not available in any other format.
>>220450418Funnily enough you basically don't want better quality for some older stuff, especially TV shows, because they were made to be viewed on a small CRT television that would hide the shoddiness of the sets/props. So watching in some 5K-HyperHD format will just mean you can see the stitches in the costumes, the gaps between the walls on the set, the literal tape holding things together.
>>220450386They already banked on blurays and streaming anon, they don't want us having fun watching movies on dvd again
>>220445964Me. They work, are cheap, and I get to keep them for the rest of my life.
>>220445964Big office PCs come with DVD player/writer as standard, few come with a BD player.
>>220450575Isn't it so much better to have the dvd after paying a reasonable price for it?, looking at the box art having fun with the dvd extrasHaving the option to watch the deleted scenes instead of being an unscapable part of the movie
>>220450601Indeed. Plus director's commentary and I know it will still be there on my shelf whenever I want to watch it again.
>>220450601This is one of the things lost on people who only stream. They miss out on all the extras that come on DVDs. They miss out on cool deleted scenes and alternate endings. They miss out on making of and behind the scenes featurettes. You might get lucky and have some of that stuck uploaded by someone on youtube, but its nice having it all together
>>220450540hd anything is a bad idea. just look at porn. when you can see a woman's moustache hairs you've gone much too far
>>220450629You know what? doesn't have to be there, you can just give it to someone that will look at it every day thinking man I miss that cool guyHe gave me a dvd I still have it, it never limited the amount of devices that could watch it
>>220450640They barely bother to put anything on new physical releases anymore unless it’s Criterion or some other specialist label. They realised most people don’t ever bother watching them anyway. And it’s true. They don’t make the movies sell any better
>>220446591stop acting like joo
>>220450750They just improve the viewing experience
>>220446653>>220446683The only home version of LotR you should ever need.
>>220446017virtually none of my family and friends have blu-ray players. but they do have dvd players
>>220445964grav conneseurs
>>220446449I remember when i first went to el salvador in 2008 and certain shops were selling ripped dvds for like a dollar each.
>>220445964Consummers don't care about quality and never will. The majority of people will never have any idea what the difference between DVD and Bluray is
>>220446162>Blu-ray is also an ancient obsolete format.1080p still looks good in 2026.
>>220445964Me>>220446000Fpbp
>>220446377>The movies already exist in 4k mastersNot true. Most movies with lots of CGI et cetera were mastered in 2K, even relatively recent stuff like Avengers Infinity War/Endgame, etc. There's even lots of old TV shows like Star Trek where the CGI was literally rendered in standard-definition and printed to videotape as the master.
>>220446449>One of the movies just ended half way thru.I remember watching a bootleg DVD of Man on Fire in like 2004 and the movie just faded to black and ended in the middle of a dialogue scene.
>>220446026I think it comes down the price and availability most of the time. People say blurays are cheap, and they can be. Yet, I am trying to justify myself either spending $30 on a movie series on DVD or $70 on that same movie series on Bluray. If you go to Walmart or Target then you can find quite a price difference between the two formats as well. Bluray is overall better, yet most of the time the DVD is totally acceptable if all you are wanting to do is watch the movie.
>>220446162>The tv industry hasn't even made a tv with less than 4k resolution in over a decadeThe fuck are you babbling about?
>>220446544I was gonna buy one of those dedicated Panasonic 4K Blu-Ray players until I found out that a PS5 is virtually identical in functionality?
>>220445964I still regularly import them from Japan. My last order had a $95 photobook (my second copy, since I missed the preorder and got a regular edition with no DVD from Amazon) and a 15min long DVD. It was limited to 300 units, so the price didn't bother me at all.
Every blu ray player I've ever used was a piece of shit, DVD players just work.
>>220446224Theyre use Smartphone now
>>220449970>Progressive scan... put on disc... that's it, that's all.. done.Can't be done, the actual standard DVDs are authored to (720x480/576 MPEG2 video, Dolby ac3/LPCM/DTS audio, interactive menus, all contained in VOB files inside VIDEO_TS folders) requires the video to be interlaced. That's just how the format is. Maybe if Sony, Toshiba, and the rest of the DVD Consortium made the format in 2000 instead of 1995, they could've taken progressive scan into account.
>>220445964Not everyone wants to min max on audio and video. Plenty of autists can still do that but most people just want it to werk and that's good enough
