The thing is, most people see digital and they think "better". Having worked in analog and digital communications I don't fall for the bias. The difference in them is mainly in reproducibility and not quality. A digital print can be copied theoretically an infinite number of times and you'll always get the same result. While analog print can vary wildly and a copy of a copy of a copy isn't anywhere near the same as the original most times.
I like blu-ray because it's the best thing to 35mm prints you can have in the house. But it's still not the best thing possible. Certainly not better than a solid 35mm print.
The thing that gets me is that with the steady improvements in home entertainment over the last 50 years, you would think that theatrical pictures would have been constantly improving too in order to keep their competitive edge. But apart from the initial introduction of widescreen, Technicolor, and the occasional 70mm epic, the opposite has been true. Home video has gradually gotten bigger and better, while theatrical formats and venues have gotten smaller. With HD and 2K cinema now the respective standards, the two have essentially converged - you can now get almost exactly the same product at home that you get in a theater. So where's the upsell? Even 3D doesn't count - that's already coming home too.
To be fair, HD isn't quite the standard yet. And someday hopefully 4k will be the theatrical standard. But, at least in terms of resolution, I expect that's where things will come to rest pretty much permanently.
Comments 2
I like blu-ray because it's the best thing to 35mm prints you can have in the house. But it's still not the best thing possible. Certainly not better than a solid 35mm print.
Reply
To be fair, HD isn't quite the standard yet. And someday hopefully 4k will be the theatrical standard. But, at least in terms of resolution, I expect that's where things will come to rest pretty much permanently.
Reply
Leave a comment