criterionforum.org

movielocke wrote:If you consider inflation, the fact that Criterion's price has stuck at 39.95 since 1998 has significantly lowered the 'hit' that I perceive buying one of their releases.

And, on the other end, who actually pays $39.99 for a BD release ? I mean, Amazon usually get them for $28, and you can go as low as $20 with B&N.

hearthesilence wrote:Blu-Ray may maintain a significant demand to sustain itself for years, but it will never be the mass market format DVD once was, not by a long shot.

Point is also due to the very close format (disc). The switch from VHS to DVD was also the switch to magnetic tape to digital. That was a huge step, meaning support which would last multiple viewings without degradation, digital sound, 5.1 track, original language and multiple dubs + subs, extra features, OAR more and more respected.
These are all the things BD offers today, except in better quality. That's the "only" upgrade : better quality. So of course, when you start counting, the switch from VHS was much more interesting. Unfortunately, not enough people understand how the "better quality" should be the point of all this. Because they simply don't need this better quality, which is why streaming and DVD are perfectly adequate for them. It's convenient and cheap enough, so why going overkill ?

Moe Dickstein wrote:But when you replace a broken DVD player at this point it makes sense to get a Blu machine even if you don't have an HD TV, you're simply ready for the new TV when you get it

Looking at all the DVD players in sale here and there, I'm quite sure a lot of people still replace a broken DVD player by an other DVD player. Alos because technically speaking, a DVD player is still less expensive than a BD player.

Blu also offers greater capacity on one disc, not only better quality.

Nobody cares though. You are coming at it as someone who cares which is different from the majority.

"Nobody cares" is a pretty big exaggeration in relation to the U.S., at least. More than half of all households now have a Blu-ray compatible device, and those still buying physical media are turning to Blu-ray in pretty striking numbers, causing the format to gain as rapidly as DVD is declining, and singlehandedly maintaining the major significance of physical media in the home entertainment market.
Of course the majority still don't care a lot about the advantages of Blu-ray. Most of those inclined to care a lot already adopted some time ago. In general, new formats that are complete no-brainers that people collectively rush to adopt are rare. DVD was an exception. Before that, many appeared to rush to adopt CDs over vinyl but in fact what happened was that music retailers had to stop carrying vinyl or accept punitive terms, so they were pressured into favoring the overpriced CD format. Currently with Blu-ray, DVD, and streaming, all have various advantages and drawbacks for people, so it shouldn't be hard to understand why DVD will die hard as long as a lot of people still want to use physical media.

Retailers were pressured to stop carrying vinyl? Interesting. I didn't know that. With that said, there's a clear difference between CD and Blu-Ray, since the latter is clearly a technological improvement on its predecessor, which is not the case with the former. And I'm certain that can partially serve as an explanation for why vinyl seems to be making a comeback of sorts. So CDs were overpriced? I mean could they have been any more "overpriced" than Criterions are today?

Gregory wrote:"Nobody cares" is a pretty big exaggeration in relation to the U.S., at least. More than half of all households now have a Blu-ray compatible device, and those still buying physical media are turning to Blu-ray in pretty striking numbers, causing the format to gain as rapidly as DVD is declining, and singlehandedly maintaining the major significance of physical media in the home entertainment market.
Of course the majority still don't care a lot about the advantages of Blu-ray. Most of those inclined to care a lot already adopted some time ago. In general, new formats that are complete no-brainers that people collectively rush to adopt are rare. DVD was an exception. Before that, many appeared to rush to adopt CDs over vinyl but in fact what happened was that music retailers had to stop carrying vinyl or accept punitive terms, so they were pressured into favoring the overpriced CD format. Currently with Blu-ray, DVD, and streaming, all have various advantages and drawbacks for people, so it shouldn't be hard to understand why DVD will die hard as long as a lot of people still want to use physical media.

Interesting. Though close data analysis will show that week-for-week market share is dependent on specific releases of any particular week, overall trends confidently show that Blu-Ray's market share is growing. However, it may be a while before it hits 50% - it does manage to surpass 40% on some weeks with certain high profile releases, but once these cool off, it can plummet below 30%.

Looking elsewhere confirms that DVD's market share is declining more out of declining sales than Blu-Ray's growth. Quarter-for-quarter, Blu-Ray's gains have been offset by declines in DVD sales.

Regarding the percentage of homes with Blu-Ray capable devices, keep in mind that this includes anything that isn't primarily a home video device, including video game systems like PS3 (and I guess PS4 - is that out yet?) Every major report I've seen on this will emphasize that, sales of those devices make a huge difference, and I definitely know plenty of people who own devices like those who don't buy or play that many Blu-Ray discs, it really is mostly a video game device to them.

rrenault wrote:Retailers were pressured to stop carrying vinyl? Interesting. I didn't know that. With that said, there's a clear difference between CD and Blu-Ray, since the latter is clearly a technological improvement on its predecessor, which is not the case with the former. And I'm certain that can partially serve as an explanation for why vinyl seems to be making a comeback of sorts. So CDs were overpriced? I mean could they have been any more "overpriced" than Criterions are today?

The predecessor of CDs was the cassette as much as vinyl, and so the arguments in favor of adopting CDs were that they offered the best convenience, and "perfect sound, forever" (unlike vinyl or cassette, they wouldn't wear out after being played x number of times or accumulate pops and surface noise). For the industry in the early '80s, however, the reasons to introduce the format were that it was a new way to sell more units and that the discs were considerably cheaper to produce than vinyl albums. Yet they were priced higher (thus overpriced), even higher than what people pay for most Blu-rays today (adjusted for inflation) I'd guess, due to steeper discounts off retail on the latter. The high price hurt sales of CDs and made many consumers reluctant to adopt it, so all the major music distributors decided to force everyone to adopt CDs by killing off vinyl, and the main way they did that was by decisively stopping retailers from being able to return unsold vinyl stock, effectively forcing them to stop carrying that format. My larger point is that all formats have their own peculiar circumstances and advantages and disadvantages in the market that determine how widely they're adopted, so it can be tricky to make solid analogies between between them.

In response to hearthesilence'ss post: I definitely agree that the number of households that have Blu-compatible devices can be a deceptive figure because so many are not using the devices for that purpose, but it's just one of many metrics the industry uses to gauge "penetration" so to speak.

Moe Dickstein wrote:But when you replace a broken DVD player at this point it makes sense to get a Blu machine even if you don't have an HD TV, you're simply ready for the new TV when you get it

But if people are hardly using their DVD players and streaming instead, the players are much less likely to break for a long time.

Buried at the end of the article:

Eclipse will remain a DVD-only line, in keeping with its original goals and identity.

swo17 wrote:Buried at the end of the article:

Eclipse will remain a DVD-only line, in keeping with its original goals and identity.

Also of note: The boxes will be BD-sized.
We can all finally sleep easily.

Though seriously: The part where they plan to retire split BD/DVD editions and release them in dual-format cases is intriguing.

Came here to post the same article from The Criterion Current. I think it's a very rational explanation for the new approach.

Today, something like 60 percent of the discs we sell are Blu-rays, 40 percent DVDs.

Which was what MoC was selling when they decided to go BD only, and probably when they went DF after again a few split releases.

Anyway, it's a quite straight forward and logical letter about why DF but I don't think there is anything new as for "why", but more in terms of "how".

Every part of the thought process makes total sense.

Yaanu wrote:The part where they plan to retire split BD/DVD editions and release them in dual-format cases is intriguing.

Kinda similar to other packaging changes when older supplies finally sold out (Dual Keepcase -> 2-Disc Clear Case)

criterionsnob wrote:Why Dual-Format?, by Peter Becker

Here is the irony of the decisions Criterion has reached:
(1) They have determined that there are enough people out there that will spend $180 (discounted price) to buy the Zatoichi box set.
(2) They have determined that they need to continue with DVD's in the form of dual-format editions, because there are significant number of people who are not prepared to spend $88 to buy a Blu Ray player (The least expensive SONY player on Amazon as of this writing).
I have no doubt that their data-gathering is accurate. However, these two decisions, based on their respective premises, show the irrationality of the masses.
I am sure this observation is going to provoke responses from some dedicated DVD-proponents on this forum. I have not read a compelling reason for their attitude. (A blanket reason is that "we want freedom to do what we want": a reason Americans would recognize being used for all kinds of behavior.)
A dual-format item is guaranteed to waste 50% of its content (waste = lack of use). If the unused component is retained, it wastes space (They cannot convince me that the Zatoichi box would not have been smaller if it contained only one format); if the unused component is discarded, it corrupts the environment; if the unused component is re-sold in plain DVD cases, it is unethical and will reduce Criterion's revenues.
This is an attitudinal problem. And the attitude will persist if it is nourished.

It costs much more than $88 to upgrade to Blu-ray--there's the TV/sound system to make the upgrade worthwhile, not to mention the compulsion you will then feel to upgrade much of your DVD collection to Blu-ray.

And if the Zatoichi box only contained 9 Blu-rays, the only dimension that would change is the width, which would only decrease by maybe 1-1/2 case widths.

Additionally, they said that a large chunk of the DVD buyers are libraries and universities. These groups would be very likely to buy a Zatoichi box over a blu-ray player.

You are correct, dual format is not the most environmentally friendly decision. Neither is releasing booklets with essays rather than putting them on the disc, or issuing the DVDs in any packaging other than a thin paper sleeve. In fact, you could argue that most art is bad for the environment in one way or another (how much energy is wasted making a film? How much oil has gone into the paintings of the world?) You have to draw a line and accept environmental loss somewhere.

As with everything, there is a trade off. If we want Criterion to continue to release a wide variety of quality films, then we need to accept the fact that it is financially prudent for them to go with dual format.

Yeah I was gonna say the same thing. Actually I was recently converted back to DVD-only after moving to a smaller apartment and expecting to move again soon. So the Dual-Format thing is such a timely change for me and I can continue buying the stuff, knowing in the future I will go blu again and enjoy the other part of the product that will have to be 'wasted' for now.

Yaanu wrote:
The part where they plan to retire split BD/DVD editions and release them in dual-format cases is intriguing.


Kinda similar to other packaging changes when older supplies finally sold out (Dual Keepcase -> 2-Disc Clear Case)

I wonder if that is part of what has dictated the upgrade release strategy, at least in terms of the non A-list titles--a DVD print run expiring is why seemingly 'unexpected' out-of-nowhere titles have gotten upgraded, like Fat Girl or My Life as a Dog.

And that might also partly explain why the upgrades have not continued at the pace of the glorious 2011. Prior to 2011 there were much fewer blurays to choose from, so I imagine DVD sales of back catalog titles were still robust during the 2010 BN sales, resulting in many print runs selling out, and triggering the deluge of 36 upgrade releases in 2011. Now that there are over 200 bluray releases, I hardly ever see anyone looking at the DVD criterion sections in BN. Consequently, upgrades have slowed to less than 50% of the 2011 pace.

***
on the environmental issue:
two plastic cases. Two paper booklets, two covers and two kinds of discs all add up to much greater environmental impact than one plastic case, one paper booklet, one cover and two kinds of discs.

They're greatly reducing the environmental impact of their production by switching to dual format.

People just PERCEIVE DF as a greater environmental impact because they see an extra disc in their case and think, "what a WASTE, I have an extra." but they completely forget their perception is hopelessly skewed by being excessively local. If one was in the habit of buying both the DVD and the Bluray, then one would realize how substantially DF reduces the environmental impact of a criterion release.

movielocke wrote: ***
on the environmental issue:
two plastic cases. Two paper booklets, two covers and two kinds of discs all add up to much greater environmental impact than one plastic case, one paper booklet, one cover and two kinds of discs.

The problem with this argument is that it assumes everyone who gets a dual format disc previously bought both blu and DVD, which I really doubt is the case. Instead, everybody who bought previously bought only blu gets a DVD as well, and everybody who previously bought DVD gets an extra blu.

But still, I think the environmental issues are pretty minimal in the grand scheme of things. Just today, I was forced by my work to burn and destroy 4 DVDs just because of security precautions and the government ban on flashdrives. I don't mean to disregard the environmental impact of wastefulness, but going after Criterion is like chiding Bart Simpson for littering when Mr Burns is standing down the road hiding nuclear waste in a tree. (my analogy well seems to have run dry)

jindianajonz wrote:

movielocke wrote: ***
on the environmental issue:
two plastic cases. Two paper booklets, two covers and two kinds of discs all add up to much greater environmental impact than one plastic case, one paper booklet, one cover and two kinds of discs.

The problem with this argument is that it assumes everyone who gets a dual format disc previously bought both blu and DVD, which I really doubt is the case. Instead, everybody who bought previously bought only blu gets a DVD as well, and everybody who previously bought DVD gets an extra blu.

But still, I think the environmental issues are pretty minimal in the grand scheme of things. Just today, I was forced by my work to burn and destroy 4 DVDs just because of security precautions and the government ban on flashdrives.

Do you work for the Guardian?

Also, it's less about the people who buy and more about what gets put out to market. Like movielocke said, the end result of production is either two of everything (two booklets, cover slips, cases, and discs), or one booklet, cover slip, and case, and then two discs. That's three-eighths of the previous amount of output gone.

jindianajonz wrote:

movielocke wrote: ***
on the environmental issue:
two plastic cases. Two paper booklets, two covers and two kinds of discs all add up to much greater environmental impact than one plastic case, one paper booklet, one cover and two kinds of discs.

The problem with this argument is that it assumes everyone who gets a dual format disc previously bought both blu and DVD, which I really doubt is the case.

Oh for crying out loud. It's explained in one and two syllable words in Becker's article: it's the minimum print runs required for two different formats that causes the cost and wastage (which is what I said about the Zatoichi set when this was all first announced).

Also, if you're looking in the long term, a lot of people who bought the DVD on release may well also buy the BluRay when they upgrade their system. Even if that's a couple of years later, the net 'wastage' is the same.

jindianajonz wrote:Just today, I was forced by my work to burn and destroy 4 DVDs just because of security precautions and the government ban on flashdrives.

At my place of employment we destroy hundreds of BDs and DVDs a month for security reasons. Sometimes thousands.

Oh, for crying out loud... I hope to god this dual-format policy does not last long. Waste is waste. If you have a blu-ray player, as most people do now, then you don't need the DVDs. If you only have a DVD player, then it might be time to go to Sears, Kmart, or Target and get yourself a $50 blu-ray player. I didn't expect Criterion to keep producing LDs when DVDs became popular and the format of choice. Grow/change or die. Soon another format will emerge and we'll be expected to convert over to it once it becomes cost effective to do so. I realize this... and BDs will go bye bye. I understand and expect this. I'm not going to expect Criterion or any other company to cater to my outdated whims.

Yes, by all means, fight waste by running out to buy a new piece of electronic equipment to replace the DVD player you're perfectly happy with and that has nothing wrong with it. Throw that DVD player in the garbage and GET WITH THE TIMES, MAN.

As has already been said in this thread (and at this point, everything has already been said three or four times), if you are really concerned about waste, you won't buy physical media at all.