HD-DVD vs Blu Ray contest is over.

[LavCat]

>For me it was Pirates of the Caribbean. And no, I don't have a television, I am quite content to watch Blu-ray on my computer monitor using PowerDVD.

I actually do most of my viewing on my monitor as well. Simply because it's more of a convenience for me. The people that Sony is really interested in though, my guess is will not use a monitor as their main display.
>What I don't understand is the argument that "DVD's are just as good."

I think for me the argument is not only about the audio-video improvement. It is noticeable, but depending on people's setup and other factors it could be a matter of incremental degrees. For some it's a big degree, for some it's not.

By that I mean the jump from VHS to DVD could be argued as exponential. The jump from DVD to high def DVD, can be argued as incremental. I have seen various high def setup on a computer setup, and in LCD and Plasma. They're all quite nice. The real question to me at this point though, is how much are most people willing to pay for that improvement. For some folks it's worth the whole shebang, some want to wait for their price point, or to leapfrog into a new tech altogether. And some decides they don't need high def and thousand dollars speakers systems.

So when someone says 'DVDs are just as good', they probably don't mean that in the direct video\audio quality comparison. Most likely what is meant is, this is good enough for my own standards. At least that's what I mean when I say DVD's are good enough for me right now.

> How could anyone watch (and listen to) a movie on DVD followed by the same movie on Blu-ray, and then believe DVD was just as good? It isn't.

The same could be said for people like you and me, some videophiles and movie buffs would look at our setup and ask, how could anyone be content watching a movie (especially something that looks great on a really large screen like 'Pirates...') on a monitor?

It will never be as good as seeing it on a high end projector in a dedicated, purpose built home theatre room. Complete with this http://www.amazon.com/Popcorn-Machine-Orig...r/dp/B0002113XU to really um, complete the movie watching experience.

But since this is a high tech consumer area we're talking about, it might be a moot discussion when the next big thing arrives. Then I might have to buy yet another copy of Peter Seller's 'The Party', now on Holocron.

I too am a fan of Sellers, even if satire was intended. I saw many of his films when they were current, starting with The Mouse That Roared, ending with Being There. I never saw The Party though. The DVD of A Shot in the Dark is particularly poor quality, even for a DVD.

Most of the DVD's in my collection are older films such as The Passion of Joan of Arc. I would not be immediately tempted to replace these with Blu-ray, particularly since in the case of Joan, the director specified the film was to be watched in total silence, thereby negating much of the benefit of an uncompressed sound track.

I am pretty satisfied with my monitor for watching movies (except for black level where it is hard to beat a CRT). I am nearsighted in one eye and farsighted in the other, but fortunately both eyes focus more or less at about two to three feet. For me, a 27" monitor viewed from two feet compares favorably to the experience in a movie theater. And except for an occasional cat, no one is blocking my view. For sound I listen with good headphones, using Dolby Headphone, though it is hard to get enough volume with my setup. If I used speakers the police would come. (I have had the police come while playing World of Warcraft -- a neighbor reported domestic violence.)

Popcorn is an issue though. My solution when viewing movies is to abstain from food. I watch movies in as close as I can come to total darkness. PoC 3 is a long movie and I allowed myself some milk and peanuts. While reaching in the jar of peanuts I put my hand in the glass of milk.