DVD still in 2017?

DVD still in 2017?

Dont tell me you actually use DVDs for anything other than old tv show boxsets on a CRT.
>720x480 max res
>2017

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine#Soft_and_hard_telecine
rationalqm.us/dgpulldown/dgpulldown.html
my.mixtape.moe/wqsjci.webm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Too comfy watching sailor Moon in VHS.

they go up to 720x576, actually

This. OP a dumbfag

>visit library
>rent DVDs
>rip DVDs
>hoard resulting files

Also
>round up your most important data
>encrypt it
>burn to disc
>give it to a friend
>enjoy offline, offsite backups! You'll have your password manager database even if your house burns down

I remember doing that in like 2001. Good times.

>DVD still in 2017?
Cheap backups.
>720x480 max res
Compression. Most screens are 1366x768 anyways.

I like this user.

>physical media
>2017

what kind of retard actually pays money for entertainment instead of pirating it all?

Fourteen-year-old me had an incredibly difficult time fapping to chubby Usagi. It wasn't like we had deviantart back then

Everybody I know who habitually buys DVDs is a complete wreck. My mom's cleaning lady slips in and out of alcoholism self help groups and has the biggest collection I've seen. Guy at work is 45 lives with his mom has no car but dammit he has Logan on DVD. Doesn't seem like a good investment, especially when you have TWO superior formats and torrents with a million seeds.

I only buy DVDs when it's an obscure lifetime favorite I want on my meme shelf that doesn't have a BD/UHD release. Just picked up The Anchoress (1993).

So how did 720x480 work? It looks squished in 4:3 and stretched in 16:9?

non-square pixels
DVD titles (videos) are flagged as either 4:3 or 16:9, and support a range of resolutions up to 720x480 (NTSC) or 720x576 (PAL)
including some odd combinations like 480x480, 352x576, etc

Even worse than the shit resolution is the interlacing. Nothing like watching the jitter of 3:2 pulldown. The only advantage that DVDs have over Blu Ray is that they have negligible DRM. The engineers of the Blu Ray DRM were actually competent. Blu Ray has higher image quality than streaming or whatever shitty P2P site you use, and actually supports 3D, HDR, and UHD.

>Nothing like watching the jitter of 3:2 pulldown.
was only really an issue in NTSC regions
in PAL regions most 24fps content was simply sped up slightly to 25fps, then doubled to 50fields/s, effectively yielding progressive frames with no jitter

I have PAL DVDs with content sourced from film, NTSC, and native PAL and it's a fucking mess to watch. Of course it's hard-coded too, and not just flags in the mpeg stream.

i live in a PAL country, and have only once run into a fucked up PAL DVD, it was one that was sourced from an NTSC DVD (!!)
the NTSC version of it wasn't really any better though, a mish-mash of 24fps telecine, 30fps and 60field/s content all within the same video

In reality we should be using laserdisc. dvd quality with better packaging, no drm, analog hipsterism, and less quality loss vs damage

DVD is way out of date and the fact that people still actually have any is disturbing to me

I even avoided Blu-Ray completely because of the shitshow of a DRM scheme they included. Somehow I have a BD-ROM drive but I've never even used it.

The viewing experience on either dvd and blueray is shit though.
Who thought it was a good idea to add warnings and commercials for other movies and then expect people to pay for it?
Compared to pirated content where you don't get any of that shit, no wonder they lost customers.

i pretty much stopped using DVDs by about 2009, but i have yet to own or even touch any bluray discs or players
i just download bluray rips/remuxes

>He uses Optical Media
VHS all the way.

OR use a cheap used laptop and burn MP4 files to DVD, I can easily burn high quality 1080P movies to DVD, only downside is that you can't play it on anything besides a PC, but seeing how cheap they are these days there is no excuse

you could make bluray-compatible AVCHD dvd's

Some films are not available as BDs. Then some are, but the DVD transfer is still better. An example is Le Samourai, which does have a French BD release, but the transfer is worst than the Criterion DVD.

i still grab 480p/dvd rips of movies. shitty rural internet.

I don't use DVDs, never have. I can honestly say that I never bought a DVD ever. I bought a "CD" that locked up my CD-player in the 1990s and I had to pry the CD tray open and a close-up inspection of the disc revealed the text "copy protected disc, not CD format". That was the last disc I bought, ever.

As for the DVD-format, I can't watch that garbage anymore. If it's not a minimum of 720p then I ain't watching it. I honestly don't see that big of a difference between 720p and 1080p if it's a good rip (like 8 GB for a full movie) but once you go down to DVD quality it's just bad.

VHS? Seriously? It must be 15 years since I gave my VHS player and all my tapes to my NEET brother. He's still hoarding it in my mom's garage (he lives off her, him being a NEET and all)

The commercials were always a fun background stimulation for while I got the popcorn and snacks ready and switched off all the lights and settled into the couch just in time for the movie to start

a good quality 720x576 downscale of a bluray is certainly watchable, just a bit soft

>some people use PAL, not NTSC

yes, some people use the superior standard

I prefer more frames.

for video games, sure
but for tv shows and movies, 50fps is smooth enough, and the 24>25fps speedup is far nicer to watch than what telecine introduces

Most films are shot at 24 frames per second. NTSC conversions are plain telecined garbage. With PAL you get artifactless conversion and higher detail count for when the image is stretched to 16:9.

Depends on the downscale filter used really.

There's also 352x288 and 352x240 that only supports progressive and comes from Video CD standard.

60000/1001 fields/sec is smoother for sports.

Sports is one of the things you should probably watch in HD so you actually know what is going on.

>tfw you don't have a blu-ray drive but have a 4K TV and are stuck waiting for a reliable way to rip UHD blu-rays

Yeah, though, my local rental shops only have DVDs for MMA and such.

Recently got the Blu-ray collection for Space Dandy, the sound quality is amazing.

yea, there's a bunch of options for width and height, many if not all of which can be mixed-and-matched

i used to use some lower resolution settings in order to squeeze entire seasons of anime onto single discs to share with people

yea, though again, 50fps is also fairly smooth, the additional resolution is also pretty important for sports
though i don't watch sports, so i don't have a preference one way or the other

The recording frame rate is the best because I hate blending. I would prefer PAL DVD for those made in Europe.

of course, "best tool for the job"
if the source is 30/60fps, then use NTSC, if it's 24/25/50, use PAL

My parents have a 4k TV and use a Wii for 480p Netflix

Basically this.

Going NTSC > PAL and vice versa won't get you anything extra.*

*the exception is HD > PAL, but otherwise no.

there is something to be gained from inverse-telecining a 24>60f/s NTSC source over to a 25fps progressive PAL video

keep in mind 99% of movies are made at 24fps, including in america
so it would be beneficial to use PAL even for american-made movies

I meant more with PAL/NTSC native material.

I completely understand how film has benefits on both formats.
Films on NTSC DVDs are increasingly only soft-telecined anyway. This means that the stream is actually 24p, but the telecine is performed in the payer.

It's a matter of preference with film material.

I used VHS until 2010, it was fine
You can live with DVD

>Films on NTSC DVDs are increasingly only soft-telecined anyway. This means that the stream is actually 24p, but the telecine is performed in the payer.
is that possible with DVD?
i know bluray supports 24fps progressive video streams, but last i checked DVD was only 25, 30/1.001 fps progressive, or 50, 60/1.001 interlaced

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine#Soft_and_hard_telecine

>On DVDs, telecined material may be either hard telecined, or soft telecined. In the hard-telecined case, video is stored on the DVD at the playback framerate (29.97 frame/s for NTSC, 25 frame/s for PAL), using the telecined frames as shown above. In the soft-telecined case, the material is stored on the DVD at the film rate (24 or 23.976 frames/s) in the original progressive format, with special flags inserted into the MPEG-2 video stream that instruct the DVD player to repeat certain fields so as to accomplish the required pulldown during playback.[14] Progressive scan DVD players additionally offer output at 480p by using these flags to duplicate frames rather than fields.

Some older players may not play the video properly though.

Soft telecine is not bad because it's basically progressing 24 fps with 2/5 flags.

>DVD still in 2017?
I still have it sure.

I'm trying to get blu-ray but the buyer is a lazy SOB and wount give me his bank details. SO how the fuck am i going to fucking pay

REEEEEEEEEEEEEE~

how old are we talking? i've never heard of putting 24/23.976fps video onto a DVD before, and i put a lot of time into researching dvd encoding/authoring many years ago
this is interesting news to me

You have kebab tastes!

-- that said, most of my research revolved around PAL stuff, since i live in a PAL region, therefore almost all of my DVDs were PAL, and i never had to deal with (hard) telecine content (thank fuck, i've tried handling some more recently and it's a cunt)

You can make a proper ntsc film dvd with DGpulldown and a 23.976 MPEG-2.

rationalqm.us/dgpulldown/dgpulldown.html

Is the DVD patent free yet?
MP3 and DAB is.

Its debut was 21 years ago, so it might be.

It carries multiple standards like MPEG2, MPEG1, AC3 audio. To be patent free all of them would have to be in the public domain.

wut? dvd is only from 1996--
>1996 was 21 years ago

you don't have to use them all at once though
for example, you could use just PCM or MP3 audio, and not touch AC3/DD

I like proper reds in my vintage videos, thanks.

You mean MP2 because DVDs don't support MP3.

I'm thankful that I basically skipped out on DVD by being a kid during its peak. Parents would only buy the rare DVD like a fucking pan and scan Star Wars trilogy. I ripped and burned a few hundred DVDs from Netflix and got into the whole high-quality, multi-DVD Taiyo Yuden disc rips and shit which inevitably led to Blu-Ray.

But Laserdisc is best. Satisfying to page through special editions like Platoon where you basically get a book with production images and info or collect rare, Japanese only releases of movies or concerts. Still want to grab a Pioneer CLD-97 or an HLD-X0 if I become insane.

maybe not officially, but i used mp3 audio tracks pretty often, and they always worked

I heard the original AC3 is now patent free.

They don't have to be.

There is copyright, which applies to the specific standard definition itself, and implementations.
There is also patent law, which applies to the concepts and ideas used in the standards.

MPEG going patent free will let you make your own implementations legally, for example.
Particularly where reverse engineered.

That's only if you use nonfree implementations. Nothing is stopping you from using free ones like ffmpeg or writing your own.

Companies that pay for AC3 today only do so to use the Dolby logo and official Dolby decoder.

MPEG1 and AC3 is patent free now.
I think MPEG2 Video is going to be patent free next year.

Flipfag here
yes, we have torrents and shit but pirated DVD is still popular if there is no internet/ultra slow internet.

flipfag?

Who are you coming here to attack you dumb sperglord? Why do you care even if there's 2 people on here who watch things on DVD?

The most powerful race in the world.

>24fps telecine, 30fps and 60field/s content all within the same video
Jesus
What was it

Welcome to the NHK

wasn't too happy with existing encodes of it, so i got a hold of the ntsc dvd's, and... i can see why the encodes aren't great

Sone old weeb shows like Pani Poni Dash contains thise various framerates.

Not him, but that doesn't sound that uncommon in the analogue days.

Television cameras were bulky and awkward, so you could only use them in a studio.
Video was also impractical for editing.
Film was used for anything outside or requiring frame-accurate editing (think title sequences).

In Europe, this would mean a mix of 50 field and 25 frame content. Early Doctor Who episodes are a perfect demonstration of this.

In America though, the framerate conversions weren't as clean, so I could easily imagine it becoming a confusing mix of 60 field and 24 frame (with pullup).

>not watching your BDs and VHS with the same device

yes the philippine islands

i found an old clip from the bbc in the early 1970s
the indoor shots are recorded interlaced to video at 50 fields per second
the outdoor shots are recorded to film at 25fps
as was typical in the day
my.mixtape.moe/wqsjci.webm

lol
this is why i always preferred pal/sécam stuff

ntsc had:
>video games at their normal speed

pal had:
>accurate colours
>higher resolution
>easier mixing of film and interlaced content
>stuff like teletext