Criterion Blu-ray

[TheThe]

P.S. Oh, by the way, the only exception to my DVD buying moratorium is if they release a DVD of Last year at Marienbad... because that would be a vast improvement to my internet downloaded version.

[Rsdio]

What's wrong with the excellent Optimum release? Surely that would be a big improvement too?

[TheThe]

What's wrong with the excellent Optimum release? Surely that would be a big improvement too?

Yes, but I unfortunately don't have multi region capabilities yet. And starting now also seems to be futile with the whole HD thing.

[keeproductions]

but all I am saying is if you have a choice, wouldn't you all also go with the better definition of HD? Well, it looks like soon we will have that choice. So why spend the money now? In the mean time you can either rent them or get them for free from the library. So what's there to argue?

I'm not arguing HD at all. In fact, it's gotten to the point where I ignore the 250 standard definition cable channels and only choose from the 30 (mostly crappy) HD channels that are currently offered when I do watch TV.

My point, and it's been brought up by others previously, is that you are not going to get an appreciable difference from watching the current DVD of - for argument's sake - Haxan than waiting for that elusive Blu-Ray of same.

For me, I know own a very good copy of a movie that just isn't predisposed to take advantage of today's technology.

[TheThe]

For me, I know own a very good copy of a movie that just isn't predisposed to take advantage of today's technology.

True. But I still wonder what the CC team could accomplish on an old copy of a 1920's film using the technology that is available today (and by today I mean technology that was released in the last 6 months). I work in the film post production world and I can tell you that it is amazing the stuff that has come out. It is all part of the brave new world called "Digital Intermediate" or DI for short. The technology is still maturing as we speak. It hasn't even been standardized yet. And film restoration is planted right in the middle of all that since it draws from the same concerns as modern feature film production (namely: how to get the best possible digital scan from a less than perfect film negative).

For example, some of today's 35mm film scanners include an 'alfa channel' whose entire purpose is to digitally map out the dirt, scratches, and defects of the print that is being scanned. This information is then used to 'reverse engineer' the damage out of the film print. Contrast ratios and grain integrity can be recreated to the original negative specifications (or surpassed if desired). In other words, big things are soon coming to a TV set near you.

[Thomas J.]

Of course, a digital scan -- 2k, 4k, 8k or otherwise, whereby one's eye might not even be able to detect discernible differences between 6k and 8k scans -- standardizes the element so that each playback of the DI remains constant from frame to frame, and among the various iterations of its playback. Film is organic in that the way one's eye interprets the light interacting with the film frame differs from playback iteration to iteration, and frame to frame, because the organic substrate nature of film is always changing from moment to moment vis a vis its interaction with projected light. So to accomplish a truly film-like presentation via digital intervention, an "x"k scan where x = 2 or 4 or 8 or whatever, will be insufficient in itself. Rather a "perfect" scan would still be a means to a greater end. And outputting that scan back to film wouldn't be the answer either, because you're just outputting the standardization/flattening inherently caused by the digitizing process.

However, for born-digital moving image material, I'm sure the future knows no bounds.

[arsonfilms]

Just to temper the fervor a little bit...

It was four or five years into the life of the DVD format before I started buying, and I never felt left out or regretted waiting. There are few DVDs that came out prior to my getting involved that I feel - even now - were worth having. Of those very few, most were Criterion, and most were reissued.

I work in film production as well, and I've seen some pretty amazing things in terms of the technology of image presentation. I don't doubt for a minute that one day we WILL see stunning 4K scans of silent films projected in our own homes... we're still a long ways off.

Will the Varda films come out on Blu-Ray eventually? Will The Last Emperor, or This Sporting Life? Odds are pretty good this will happen, and probably even within the next 5-10 years. Trouble is though, DVD is a format thats over a decade old, and yet every week there are still films coming out that had never been released on home video before. Blu-Ray is looking more and more like the next big format, but bear in mind that not only is it only a niche market, the only major draw of the format is the spectacle. I doubt very much that we will see ANY of the small, beautiful, delicate films we all love show up on the format until DVD is dead, simply because they don't show off the glizz and glamour of hi-def. DVD of course will have a hard time dying, because its the only digital format compatible with the majority of TVs out there. As cheap as the disks and players get, you have to contend with the fact that most people will need to purchase a new TV to go hi-def, and that fact alone will hurt the format more than anything.

As far as Criterion joining the game, I'd say it'll be a few years after they stop pictureboxing, and even then I think it will be a low output in conjection with the ongoing DVD line. Support of Hi-def in the industry seems to me to be a lot like religion in politics; there is a very vocal minority of supporters, and a lot of pandering needs to happen to satisfy them, but ultimately the direction of the business will reflect the will of the majority.

[TheThe]

Yes I agree with all that is being said. But I think a few things are being misunderstood (and I mean no disrespect by this). The switch over is not going to take that long and HD releases are going to explode in the coming months. Here are three reasons I see for this:

POINT ONE: Hdtv switchover is federally mandated...

There is a federal mandated date when all SD transmission in this country has to stop. This will be backed up with heavy fines to any company or business who insists on still transmitting or delivering SD signals. This is the reason Best Buy got rid of all their SD TV's ... because they didn't want to risk a $2,500 fine for each occurrence of a sale of an SD set which is now forbidden). And this federal mandated date is THIS year. Yes, 2008.

POINT TWO: 2K, 4K, and 8K as consumer standards is not silly... Just read this story.

Now if Japan starts doing this, you know that Europe will not be far behind. And if Europe goes that route, then the U.S. will grumpily follow along. And as far as not being able to 'see' the difference in resolutions... I tell you: Yes you can! It's day and night.

And as far as film having 'random grain' and digital being rigid... that is a very tired argument. Let me ask the second to the previous poster, What happens when the resolution gets so good that each frame has each chemical speck of film grain captured to perfection, so that you retain the original randomness? Well that is what 4K does.

POINT THREE: The HD war is over... really... Again, please have a look at this post (from today).

The war is over. All studious, whether they admit it or not, are racing to prepare Blu-ray releases to be there with a plump library of discs when the 'switchover' happens later this year and everyone starts to wonder what else they can play on the new sets that the government 'forced' them to buy.

So, getting back to my original post, investing heavy cash into SD right now is just a plain bad idea in my opinion. And buying several CC titles and box sets just to place them into one's shrine is the very definition of investing heavy cash in the home video world. So if you guys think that it's fine, then go ahead. But just don't feel burnt when CC announces 12 months from now that spine numbers 350 to present are suddenly going to be available in HD. And don't think for a minute that they haven't secured HD rights for all the recent films that they have issued. We all know they have. What do you think all those Spirit 4K transfers were for.

[Luke M]

I think I'll end up a sucker for Criterion blu-rays. I have The Seventh Seal import it's frickin' gorgeous and worth every penny as is the La Haine import HD-DVD.

Yes, they will more than likely be quite expensive. I hope they offer some sort of a more affordable bare-bones version of their movies for all of us who already have the extras in SD.

[arsonfilms]

POINT ONE: Hdtv switchover is federally mandated...

There is a federal mandated date when all SD transmission in this country has to stop. This will be backed up with heavy fines to any company or business who insists on still transmitting or delivering SD signals. This is the reason Best Buy got rid of all their SD TV's ... because they didn't want to risk a $2,500 fine for each occurrence of a sale of an SD set which is now forbidden). And this federal mandated date is THIS year. Yes, 2008.

This is a MAJOR misconception, and totally false. HD as a resolution is IN NO WAY federally mandated. What you're thinking of is digital vs. analog broadcast signal. The ONLY people affected by this changeover are people with older sets who use an antenna. People with older sets who use cable or satellite, and people who get their channels from digital antennas will see absolutely no change in their content or the quality of their images. Best Buy is not getting rid of SD, they are getting rid of analog receivers.

This is actually a major reason HD will NOT explode the way you say it will. Believe it or not, a lot of people actually do still watch their television content via analog broadcast. These people will be forced to get digital receivers once their sets go dark in the coming months, but that won't make their sets HD compatible, and it probably won't make them bother getting cable, either. HD and HDTVs have such a small market penetration right now that it will be years before HDTVs are even close to comparable to SD TVs. It may be true that more HDTVs are being sold than their SD counterparts - I don't have those figures in front of me - but sales and actual percentages of households are two very different figures, just as digital broadcasts and HD resolutions are not even comparable.

[neal]

POINT ONE: Hdtv switchover is federally mandated...

There is a federal mandated date when all SD transmission in this country has to stop. This will be backed up with heavy fines to any company or business who insists on still transmitting or delivering SD signals. This is the reason Best Buy got rid of all their SD TV's ... because they didn't want to risk a $2,500 fine for each occurrence of a sale of an SD set which is now forbidden). And this federal mandated date is THIS year. Yes, 2008.

I, too, am afraid that you're muddling some of the basic facts here. The halting of analog broadcasts isn't mandated until February 17, 2009, which is NEXT year. Yes, 2009. There is NO federal mandate that forbids the selling of SD TVs.

The mandate THIS year is regarding digital/analog tuners, as arsonfilms said, and even this rule does not forbid store from selling TVs with analog tuners. Retailers may continue to sell off their existing inventory, but they must label the TVs. Best Buy's being lazy and sees an opportunity for upselling to naive consumers.

As of March 1, 2007, FCC rules prohibit manufacturers and other responsible parties (as defined in FCC rules) from manufacturing, importing, or distributing any device containing a broadcast television analog tuner unless it also contains a digital tuner. Despite this prohibition, retailers may continue to sell analog-only devices from existing inventory. Potential purchasers, however, may not be aware that this equipment will not be able to receive over-the-air-television signals after February 17, 2009. Consequently, effective May 25, 2007, anyone selling television equipment that has an analog tuner but not a digital tuner must post the required Consumer Alert to inform consumers that the equipment is “analog-only” and will not be able to receive over-the-air television signals after February 17, 2009. This requirement reflects the FCC’s commitment to minimize the burden on consumers and maximize the opportunities offered to them by the digital transition.

Source.

[TheThe]

I, too, am afraid that you're muddling some of the basic facts here. The halting of analog broadcasts isn't mandated until February 17, 2009, which is NEXT year. Yes, 2009. There is NO federal mandate that forbids the selling of SD TVs.

Okay, okay, you guys are right. The deadline was extended from December 31, 2008 to the new date (I forgot about that). But the whole spirit of the regulations is to bring the entire country into the HD world, not just digital transmissions. All this is happening in steps.

Okay, here are some facts (I hope they are facts this time)

1. Right now more than half the country's households have Digital Televisions. Source.

I would say that this is significant. All these sets are capable of at least displaying the signals ATSC and of any blu-ray players (even if they don't all display the max resolution).

2. The ATSC broadcast standard provides for a mish-mash of different resolutions and aspect-ratios... So built in flexibility is the new way. That's why on the back of HD discs you'll see a handy chart stating what that title has to offer.

3. With this built-in flexibility, it is obvious that content providers will want to cover all bases by providing the highest resolution to start with; then let consumers play back the thing at whatever resoluton their current system allows for. So in other words, if you have a blu-ray disc, it doesn't mean that you can't play it back to a SD television. You can, it's just not going to be in HD.

4. Yes, DVD will be with us for a long time more. There are countries that have their digital switchover planned for 20 years from now. So DVD's will certainly continue to be sold there if nothing else.

5. But here in the US, and this is where I state my opinion based on the above, HD discs are going to become the norm 'sooner than you think' (to borrow a phrase from the FCC website).

As a business model it doesn't make sense to keep selling a limited product when the same disc in HD format will also play back on SD equipment (provided you have the Blu-ray player). You have to remember that they are fully backwards compatible. This is the point that a lot of people don't understand.

So there is going to be a time (again, sooner than you think) when HD players are going to be commodity items, meaning cheaper then $100 and people will buy one on impulse.

But regardless... I still don't see how any of this has to do with Criterion. They are a luxury line catering to a select upscale market. There is a built-in understanding that Criterion customers will most likelly have the right gear. Back in the day they sold Laser Discs when VHS predominated. I didn't hear anyone then say anything about market penetration of Laser Disc players. Criterion customers are people who want the best editions of significant films. Well, today that would mean in HD. I personally don't care to wait for grandma in the heartland who only watches Jay leno over the air to get HD... it's just not going to happen. So why are you guys implying that CC should wait until there is a significant HD penetration in the US.? Can't we start enjoying HD starting from right now?

[TheThe]

This is a MAJOR misconception, and totally false. HD as a resolution is IN NO WAY federally mandated.

Well, what I meant is that ATSC is mandated. And HD is part of the ATSC standard. So in effect it IS federally mandated. You have to remember that HD is served over DTV. And by the way, HD is NOT just a resolution... It is a standard... one that also saw its own vhs vs. beta battle. That's why we have some network that transmit at the 720P specification while others are at the 1080i one. But thank god that ATSC is flexible and can handle it all.

[CSM126]

Of course, Monsieur The, you forget to mention something:

Criterion laserdiscs were obscenely expensive because it was the only way to turn a profit in that smaller market. The same thing would happen if Criterion jumped to BR: the prices would make your eyes bulge out.

[TheThe]

Of course, Monsieur The, you forget to mention something:

Criterion laserdiscs were obscenely expensive because it was the only way to turn a profit in that smaller market. The same thing would happen if Criterion jumped to BR: the prices would make your eyes bulge out.

My eyes are already bulging out with sets that go for $59.99 for a single movie (The Last Emperor)

But I know they are worth it. But let's say they also offered the Blu-Ray version and would sell for $69.99. I think most people would spend the extra 10 to get HD. By the way, it has been established that HD content right now carries about a $10 premium per title... and people are paying it.

[CSM126]

If you seriously think Criterion would only bump the price by ten bucks you're deluded. The studios like WB bump the price so little because, you know, they already have billions of dollars and don't necessarily need their niche market product to turn a massive product (same reason they can get away with selling their DVD's for so little. Thirty-five bucks for the Jazz Singer SE from WB was a steal, for sure, for the worth of all the content within).

Criterion, on the other hand, is a boutique label that does, indeed, need to turn a big old honking profit on their niche product, or it's bye-bye Criterion! They'd probably have to bump a set like Last Emperor by twenty or thirty bucks, at least, to make a reasonable amount of dough on it at the end of the day.

Releasing films like that on BR effectively would make them a niche market within a niche market.

[TheThe]

Well, this makes me sad. The only thing I want is HD. It would be a shame if Criterion slipped to the status of an also-ran company when it comes to HD.

By the way, I don't think it is that expensive to release HD content. The only difference for CC to release in blu-ray would be the disc and the license. They already have everything else (distruibution, packaging, HD masters, menu-programing and design, etc.). And the replication cost are certainly cheaper than 2 bucks a disc: http://www.newcyberian.com/blu-ray.html (for them it would certainly be cheaper than a dollar). So why must they suddenly jack up the prices beyond $10 per disc. What great cost would they have to offset that they haven't already paid for?

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Just compare the costs on that site. For 10,000 dual layered DVDs the replication cost is $6,600. For 10,000 BDs it's $22,000. 3 times the cost and a bit more.

Plus the extra costs of

- authoring the disc. You don't just slap a HD master on a BD and put a menu on it, the authoring process has been known to take more than a week on some titles. Much slower than for DVD.
- packaging (those smaller blue cases)
- printing new slicks (because of those smaller blue cases).

All this so they can sell a few thousand discs, maybe. At the moment there's no way of knowing how many people would buy a Criterion title in any HD format. With the two HD formats accounting for something like 0.5% of the total video market (that may be an old figure now but it's still a tiny proportion), why would they take such a risk?

[exte]

Of course, Monsieur The, you forget to mention something:

Criterion laserdiscs were obscenely expensive because it was the only way to turn a profit in that smaller market. The same thing would happen if Criterion jumped to BR: the prices would make your eyes bulge out.

But it would be worth it. Their transfers would be the standard, bar none. If they had titles like Brazil and shit in Blu-Ray, forget it... Actually, I'd love to see in store demos of Criterion Blu-Ray releases, you know? All in due time, I guess...

[davebert]

Mmm... Brazil...

I think it's about time Criterion did some internal polling to try and gauge the actual popularity behind a very small run of maybe 1-2 HD films. As far as I can tell from anecdotal experience, the vast majority of rabid HD buffs the likes of which you see on HD forums are small-dicked men with overly grand setups just so they can watch crappy action movies. The early adopter market in tech is usually like this and never a great market for Criterion's line of product unless they can bring a whole audience of film fans with them into HD by promising them something currently missing. ("You don't have a Blu-Ray player yet because you don't feel the need to see new releases and demo discs. But what if we told you you could soon own...?")

And judging by their increasingly misguided overscan policy, I'd say the idea of Criterion dragging anyone kicking and screaming into the future is far-fetched without a total policy reversal on their part.

[arsonfilms]

This is a MAJOR misconception, and totally false. HD as a resolution is IN NO WAY federally mandated.

Well, what I meant is that ATSC is mandated. And HD is part of the ATSC standard. So in effect it IS federally mandated. You have to remember that HD is served over DTV. And by the way, HD is NOT just a resolution... It is a standard... one that also saw its own vhs vs. beta battle. That's why we have some network that transmit at the 720P specification while others are at the 1080i one. But thank god that ATSC is flexible and can handle it all.

I think you're a little over zealous in your support of these standards, which I'm sure is at least in part some wishful thinking brought on by a REALLY expensive system. I'm sure it's a great one though, and I'm glad you're enjoying it. That said, the idea behind the DTV switchover is to free up the analog broadcast frequencies for emergency communication. HD only factors in to the extent that it isn't available in analog format, and would thus become available if someone swapped out their old pre-1998 TV for a new HDTV. Thats really all. HD won't become the new standard until the price of an HDTV matches that of an SD TV, and people have no choice but to buy into the new technology.

HD is great. I love looking at it, and I love using it in post production. I don't love shooting on it, because there are only a handful of cameras that even begin to compete with film, but new advancements are always coming. The trouble with the consumer market though, is that not everybody needs or wants a screen thats bigger than 40". If you actually want something smaller than that, and many people do, there is absolutely no reason at all to go HD. Sure it'll look better anyway, but at that level, very few people will even notice the difference, and thats what will ultimately slow the changeover.

Now to get back on topic: Criterion (though wildly successful), is still an independent company without any studio support. I'm sure that the sales figures on some of the more minor titles already released in SD would surprise you, particularly compared to any major studio release. If they did join the Blu-Ray bandwagon before HD became standard, the titles they would release would be strictly their most successful, and they would charge double or triple the cost of the SD package. This doesn't make them an "also ran." The reason you hear so much about HD DVD and Blu-Ray everywhere you turn and the reason everything is 75% off these days is that the studios invested a ton of money into these efforts, and they're selling off at a major loss because they need these formats to take off. Criterion doesn't have anything vested in this, and will pick it up when consumers do. Right now, consumers are slowly getting involved, but the market penetration is still pretty low. It'll be a long ride.

[Antoine Doinel]

Of course, Monsieur The, you forget to mention something:

Criterion laserdiscs were obscenely expensive because it was the only way to turn a profit in that smaller market. The same thing would happen if Criterion jumped to BR: the prices would make your eyes bulge out.

But it would be worth it. Their transfers would be the standard, bar none. If they had titles like Brazil and shit in Blu-Ray, forget it... Actually, I'd love to see in store demos of Criterion Blu-Ray releases, you know? All in due time, I guess...

That would be nice if the people who set up instore demos actually knew what they were doing. I can't tell you how many Best Buy stores and the like I've walked through that had atrocious and terribly setup demos running on their flat panels. Improper cabling, completely messed up screen setups or just brutal monitor settings, it makes me wonder why the managers bother at all.

If it's taking a while for people to adopt to HD, these instores aren't helping. They are making regular DVD players and CRT televisions look great.

[Luke M]

Mmm... Brazil...

I think it's about time Criterion did some internal polling to try and gauge the actual popularity behind a very small run of maybe 1-2 HD films. As far as I can tell from anecdotal experience, the vast majority of rabid HD buffs the likes of which you see on HD forums are small-dicked men with overly grand setups just so they can watch crappy action movies. The early adopter market in tech is usually like this and never a great market for Criterion's line of product unless they can bring a whole audience of film fans with them into HD by promising them something currently missing. ("You don't have a Blu-Ray player yet because you don't feel the need to see new releases and demo discs. But what if we told you you could soon own...?")

And judging by their increasingly misguided overscan policy, I'd say the idea of Criterion dragging anyone kicking and screaming into the future is far-fetched without a total policy reversal on their part.

Your so correct. You can browse the AVS forum and see everyone bragging about how clear Jason Statham looks on their 100" projection screen. On the other hand, a lot of people that have upgraded are cinephiles that would happily check out Criterion discs.

[TheThe]

And judging by their increasingly misguided overscan policy, I'd say the idea of Criterion dragging anyone kicking and screaming into the future is far-fetched without a total policy reversal on their part.

I agree. I think what is happening though is that Criterion's distribution agreement may call that Image Entertinment calls the shots as far as to what formats and where to sell and all that. So it may not be up to Criterion. I was looking into some of Image Entertainment FCC fillings and it is very interesting. Here is what it says:

"On November 1, 2007, we entered into a new exclusive distribution agreement with the Criterion Collection, a
Delaware corporation, to exclusively distribute their DVD titles in North America. The new agreement replaces the
existing exclusive distribution agreement dated August 1, 2005 and, among other things, extends our exclusive
distribution relationship with Criterion through July 31, 2013."

Also of interest is that Image Entertainment has an exclusive manufacturing and warehousing agreement with Sonopress... which has been a solidly Blu-Ray company from the very beginning. But of even more interesting news (well, maybe) is that Image Entertainment is in itself right now being merged (taken over??) by a company lead by producer David Bergstein, who also owns THINKFilm and Capitol Fiilms. And all this because Image Entertainment was/is on financial shaky ground. Here is some of the disclosures in their fillings:

"In management’s estimation, based upon the information currently available, we anticipate that we will not be
in compliance with the fixed charge covenant for the nine month period ending December 31, 2007."

And...

"A default would result in, among
other things, cross-default in other debt causing such debt to be immediately due and payable."

And the kicker...

"If we are unable
to obtain a waiver, an amendment or otherwise refinance our credit arrangement, it would raise substantial doubt about
our ability to continue as a going concern."

Poor Criterion... trapped in the middle of mergers and aquisitions and being sucked into an international 'indie' conglomerate.

[neal]

"On November 1, 2007, we entered into a new exclusive distribution agreement with the Criterion Collection, a
Delaware corporation, to exclusively distribute their DVD titles in North America. The new agreement replaces the
existing exclusive distribution agreement dated August 1, 2005 and, among other things, extends our exclusive
distribution relationship with Criterion through July 31, 2013."

If their distribution agreement is as loosely worded as all that, I think Criterion could go Hi-Def if they wanted to and Image would have no say in anything. Blu-ray releases aren't "DVD titles," right?