I don’t think the extra 28GB would provide a noticeably better image for the film, but what it COULD do, is allow special features to be included on the same disc as right now, most special features have to be placed on a second BR disc
BDXL ≠ 4K UHD Blu-ray discs. While they use the same underlying technology, they are different formats. That's why studios don't use the 128 GB discs, they're out of spec and players are unlikely to support them. Some players like Oppo can support them, but it has to contain specifically formatted media, and other players like Samsung and Panasonic won't support the disc at all. You won't see 128 GB discs from anyone because no one's gonna want to deal with headache of a bunch of unhappy customers and deal with the potential recalls needed.
Been thinking about 4K movies on SSD drives for a while. I think it makes the most sense considering how affordable they are these days. One consideration would be a bit rate that is higher in quality but can still be easily read by your device, TV or dedicated player, without stuttering. But you could put the each LOTR trilogies on one 2 TB with EE and you’d be set.
@@thelastmoviestanding this is another problem with Kaleidescape, no packaging really, it's downloaded to your hard drive. I guess we'll be showing off our racks and racks full of SSD's. 😂
This is what a boutique label had to say if you were curious about this as i was after watching your video "128GB discs are not something on our radar currently. It is unlikely that the improvement in image quality would justify the additional cost, which is still very high at this point, because there are only very limited production lines that can even replicate these discs. In addition, I’d like to see them in the market first because we simply cannot afford to be the first ones out and then have them fail all over the place because of player issues, etc."
First: Great video as always. Update: Thanks to your CLZ video I have currently curated 1005 discs in my collection. Roughly 1/3 the way through. Such a great app!!! Can't thank you enough.
I was just looking up the DCP files movie theaters get from studios and it said they use files that are like 250-500mbp/s for a full feature film that goes up to around 300GB total. I thought it would be more considering the bitrate/s. I agree we might start moving towards getting drives in the future. The cost would be higher but I'm sure there's a market for it. We don't have Klaidascape (I dunno how to spell) here but are their files bigger?
I think my concern with moving to hard drives is how much would the players be? But, I have to admit moving to a hard drive makes a lot more sense than moving to 8K discs…
@@willnoiles2001 I didn't think of that until you just said it but you're right, 8k discs don't make sense, 4k is more than fine, the problem isn't higher resolution transfers, it's better storage for compression for better quality
4K Bluray discs use H.265 as the compression algorithm, which relies on movement between frames and detecting what has changed. DCP on the other hand uses JPEG2000 to compress individual frames independently of each other, this method is less efficient than H.265 but has the benefit of less artifacting. So, although the bitrate of DCP is way higher than 4K Bluray, the increase in quality is not at high as you may think.
@@lp7399 Larger file size makes sense for long older movies. H.265 inherently has issues with film grain, especially some older movies were shot on film stock with heavy grain. Once Upon A Time in The West is a 3 hour movie and was released on a 66 GB disc only, leading to compression issues.
I backup my movies on disc to HDD. On my media 14TB HDD, I compress my rips to a smaller size, so I can hold more movies. I vary the bit rate it gets compressed at, depending on the source movie using Handbrake. I definitely find that settings matter for reducing size but keeping good quality. I'm currently using MKV files HEVC 265X 10 Bit (NVENC) setting for video and uncompressed audio files for English language. Some foreign movies, I'll change audio to native language with subtitles. For me, the better audio is worth a little more size. I've never like MP4 compression using Handbrake, so I don't use it. I'm willing to try AV1 but I kind of like my current system. I just change it from 2160P for 4k and 1080P for standard blurays.
This is a fantastic video. More please. Follow up question, when you make a movie does Amazon or Apple send you a checklist of what they need to make the movie streamable? Do they ask you if it is 4K or does it include HDR etc. ?
I did an edit of Troy and when I was exporting it the default setting was 15GB. I had to compress it to 4GB so I could put it on my external hard drive. And I could tell the quality difference in real time Didn't actually know that about MP4 Vs MOV files.
Something the size of compact Flash cards would have been perfect. Also SSDs made for movies could be cheaper as they would theoretically be read only so there would be less required such as DRAM and all of that as it would be in the player. This is sort of like the FLAC vs MP3 arguement for music.
I like the SSD storage idea better than flash storage because of the dependability being much higher. I still know, it will be way more expensive than discs, even with being read only.
Another big thing, historically speaking, is compression algorithm. Blu-ray started with VC-1 (a Microsoft codec), and progressed to h264. Now with 4k we're on h265/hevc. It's not of any quality benefit after-the-fact but one could re-encode h264 into h265 and save additional space at the same quality just because of the improved compression algorithm. Combining the two advancements, algorithm as well as disc size, is what gives you the ability to fit tons more STUFF on the disc. STUFF can be either duration, special features, or resolution/quality.
Just my opinion here But if movies came on a TB heart-drive or even SSD drive the price for the drive would outweigh the price of collecting I know it’s not the same but it can be a comparable scenario My PS5 has 8TB it was $900 I also collect scream factory 4K Collectors Edition’s and I have every 4K Collector edition from scream factory (75 so far) if they where on SSD’s or even drive they would be over $100 each or more for the bigger drive and would make the cost of collecting not worth it in my opinion
Some of this could come down to diminishing returns, also the cost of playback equipment and optical media increases when its a higher capacity. Often this stuff only becomes viable when equipment costs drop or mainstream public playback equipment justifies the upgrade, we still have a lot of TV stuff thats not 1080p yet let along 4K or above.
I couldn’t help but chuckle a little bit each time I heard “disc size” and does “disc size matter.” I’m so immature lol 😂 But seriously broski - good vid 👍
Compression is a big factor, but disc sizes are often not used to their full potential. I've found that most blurays only use about 70-85% of the available capacity for the actual movie. So you may have a 25GB disc, but the movie only takes up 16GB. Also, there was an attempt to put movies on flash drives at retail about 10 years ago. I believe they were in the UK. The one I remember seeing was the original Ghostbusters on a flash drive in a retail blister pack.
My concern with them releasing a 4K 128 gig Blu-ray is some current players would probably have real trouble running them. Of course they would firmware update them that they could play larger disc, but it wouldn’t work perfectly. I don’t think they would work perfectly it until they start manufacturing new models for example, my old Sony4K player X700 (launch Model) had a lot of problems playing 100 gig disc. I recently re-purchased that player recently manufactured and it works perfectly fine playing 100 gig disc I would rather they just go to 8K then just put another version of 4K Blu-ray out.
I never cared about the size until you started mentioning it. I get the whole compression aspect. Grumpy/Grumpier Old Men are both on the same disc and I hate it, but honestly I think they look pretty good.
We should get a cleaner and purer image the less compressed the disc is. No need for 4K enhancement really. I loved the 4K for Titanic. But i can still see that shimmer on certain details. Thats gotta be compression. One of the great things about laserdiscs is that there is virtually no compression. The picture is pure
Movies won’t be sold on SSDs anytime soon because you would need a massive increase in production capability and even then you would be looking at $200+ movies.
It doesn't matter because the BDA (Blu-ray Disc Association) has come right out and stated that 4k Blu-ray in its present form is the LAST physical media format for consumers.
I’ve wondered the same thing. The technology is cheaper than it used to be. I think we will get there eventually. Some company will have to make a device to play them too. Would be great and potentially save a lot of space. I mean look at the Nintendo switch. Similar technology being used for video games. Shouldn’t be to hard to use it for movies and shows
1 terabyte drive awsome !.....though problems are at the production level. I am into great film audio immersivness and bigger disk wont make up for poor sound engineering mixs ......for example recently watched bluray of Iron Man 3 and was blown away how good it sounded even better compared to many Atmos 4ks and i am comparing to Godzilla New Empire. Iron man 3 won and it bluray😂
Here is my first thought why 128GB discs are not used by what you said about it being 4 layers. Will current players be able to read the 4 layers? How many of the current players handle triple layers well? I read comments all the time of issues with triple layer discs. After a couple years of use my LG started having problems and I had to open the case open and clean the lens with an alcohol swab. While not dying physical media sales are down to the point player makers are leaving the market. First Oppo back in the day, then Samsung of all companies. More recently LG stopped. Sony use to offer 3 4K player models and are now down to two with no updates in years. Panasonics haven't updated in years. How much is the manufacturing process? If a triple layer is double the cost of a dual layer, is quad layer double the cost of triple layer? I imagine those are the reasons why.
Yeah, I was thinking about HD costs before you mentioned it. LOL. Where disc-stamping plants have been around for ages. Another big issue would be the players. As it is, the low-end 4K players has issues with BD100 discs. I have the Sony x700 and it gets glitchy with those triple-layer discs...enough that I plan on upgrading player in few months. Agree that the average person will not notice the difference. Look at some of the current 4Ks out there. It's hard to image them looking any better. Prices are already getting out of hand, so throwing more money at new tech that I will probably not notice the difference would be a waste.
I haven't had that issue with my Sony 4k X700 player on larger discs. I only have a couple, but it has played it fine. One fix is to turn off 4k upscaling on the player. I've done that since I bought it about a year ago. I've also heard older models have more issues than more recent ones... or maybe I just got lucky.
@@frommatorav1 I got mine in 2019. So it has some age on it. Those BD-100 discs are the only ones it has issues with. Again, not all the time, just once in while. Sometimes one might play fine and then next time I watch it, it glitches. Other than that, it's been a great player. Looking at switching to a midlevel Panasonic next year.
Movies sold by the studios on an SSD would be dope and the art could be the retro VHS line. Movie cartridges are the future if they could get the cost down.
@@chrisburns7979 Discs are still being ripped and copied now. They mine as well make better discs with less DRM or cartridges in the future. It won't change the current landscape at all. Just my opinion, that they're wasting more money on encryption, without getting the result it's intended to get. Movie studios probably won't agree with it.
Reason why is it’s 4 layers and lens are not reading well enough. Pushes it to the max of the tech. Why 4k have so many read issue more so then blu ray
@@thelastmoviestanding it's crazy for sure. But maybe it's some path forward as far as a future with less compression 🤔. One thing I'd be interested to know your opinion on, say you get a 100GB 4K disc from VS (or whoever), does that necessarily mean they used every bit of storage that was available on that disc? Couldn't they theoretically be putting 60GB of data on a 100GB disc? Is there a way to tell? I mean, I wonder if getting the larger storage always translates to optimized movies? If that makes any sense?
128 GB Bluray disc don't work in Bluray player who is created for 25/50 GB discs and DVD's/CD's. I have understand 4K player's prefer 66 GB because players must work hard with 100 GB based on how much Audio/Subs are on it. That's reasen why Twister is 100 GB disc in Europe. Max of Bluray disc is 50 GB and 4K disc is 100. 128 GB means that 4K player almoost must work twice so hard as 66 disc. Disc size should have used more for space then only video/Audio. Give me Bluray with English DD 2.0 (or /and DD 5.1 in 448) with Dutch subs in 4:3 Full Frame (no blackbars) of The Saint S3 & S4 and some extra's.
I'm usually shy to talk about disc size
😂😂😂😂 Love it!
Lol
Just go for it, my guy. Whip that disc out in public for all to see!
Me pulling out my copy of Super Mario Sunshine on Gamecube
Big Disc energy
😂
Out here talking about size without shame. Proud of you.
✊🏻Big Disc Energy 😂
I don’t think the extra 28GB would provide a noticeably better image for the film, but what it COULD do, is allow special features to be included on the same disc as right now, most special features have to be placed on a second BR disc
BDXL ≠ 4K UHD Blu-ray discs. While they use the same underlying technology, they are different formats. That's why studios don't use the 128 GB discs, they're out of spec and players are unlikely to support them. Some players like Oppo can support them, but it has to contain specifically formatted media, and other players like Samsung and Panasonic won't support the disc at all. You won't see 128 GB discs from anyone because no one's gonna want to deal with headache of a bunch of unhappy customers and deal with the potential recalls needed.
Been thinking about 4K movies on SSD drives for a while. I think it makes the most sense considering how affordable they are these days. One consideration would be a bit rate that is higher in quality but can still be easily read by your device, TV or dedicated player, without stuttering. But you could put the each LOTR trilogies on one 2 TB with EE and you’d be set.
No matter the size of your disc always use protection
Aww snap here we go!!!! Youre the man! Lets go!!!!!
The future man... think you are right. Wont get strached; hopefully will be made to last. Thanks for continuing to put out great material!
Love the idea of movies on drives, kinda like retro video games. Such cool packaging possibilities
right! I also see cool packaging ideas they could do
@@thelastmoviestanding this is another problem with Kaleidescape, no packaging really, it's downloaded to your hard drive. I guess we'll be showing off our racks and racks full of SSD's. 😂
I’ve had that with sponsors.
I’ve had to upload video to RUclips as private and then send link to sponsors for approval
Disc Size Matters
Keep it up. You’re doing a great job.
🙏🏻🙏🏻
This is what a boutique label had to say if you were curious about this as i was after watching your video "128GB discs are not something on our radar currently. It is unlikely that the improvement in image quality would justify the additional cost, which is still very high at this point, because there are only very limited production lines that can even replicate these discs.
In addition, I’d like to see them in the market first because we simply cannot afford to be the first ones out and then have them fail all over the place because of player issues, etc."
First: Great video as always.
Update: Thanks to your CLZ video I have currently curated 1005 discs in my collection. Roughly 1/3 the way through. Such a great app!!! Can't thank you enough.
A subject you didnt think you would talking about, and the comments are GOLD! 🤣
@@damondelgado4603 😂 BDE baby! Big Disc Energy 😂 🤣
I was just looking up the DCP files movie theaters get from studios and it said they use files that are like 250-500mbp/s for a full feature film that goes up to around 300GB total. I thought it would be more considering the bitrate/s. I agree we might start moving towards getting drives in the future. The cost would be higher but I'm sure there's a market for it.
We don't have Klaidascape (I dunno how to spell) here but are their files bigger?
Yea DCP files are huge! I’ve had to deliver them for theaters & they take forever 😂
I don’t think I know Klaidascape? 🤔
I think my concern with moving to hard drives is how much would the players be? But, I have to admit moving to a hard drive makes a lot more sense than moving to 8K discs…
@@willnoiles2001 I didn't think of that until you just said it but you're right, 8k discs don't make sense, 4k is more than fine, the problem isn't higher resolution transfers, it's better storage for compression for better quality
4K Bluray discs use H.265 as the compression algorithm, which relies on movement between frames and detecting what has changed. DCP on the other hand uses JPEG2000 to compress individual frames independently of each other, this method is less efficient than H.265 but has the benefit of less artifacting. So, although the bitrate of DCP is way higher than 4K Bluray, the increase in quality is not at high as you may think.
@@lp7399 Larger file size makes sense for long older movies. H.265 inherently has issues with film grain, especially some older movies were shot on film stock with heavy grain. Once Upon A Time in The West is a 3 hour movie and was released on a 66 GB disc only, leading to compression issues.
I backup my movies on disc to HDD. On my media 14TB HDD, I compress my rips to a smaller size, so I can hold more movies. I vary the bit rate it gets compressed at, depending on the source movie using Handbrake. I definitely find that settings matter for reducing size but keeping good quality. I'm currently using MKV files HEVC 265X 10 Bit (NVENC) setting for video and uncompressed audio files for English language. Some foreign movies, I'll change audio to native language with subtitles. For me, the better audio is worth a little more size.
I've never like MP4 compression using Handbrake, so I don't use it. I'm willing to try AV1 but I kind of like my current system. I just change it from 2160P for 4k and 1080P for standard blurays.
Me and my girlfriend are happy with what we have. And besides she said the big discs hurt
😂😂
This is a fantastic video. More please. Follow up question, when you make a movie does Amazon or Apple send you a checklist of what they need to make the movie streamable? Do they ask you if it is 4K or does it include HDR etc. ?
I did an edit of Troy and when I was exporting it the default setting was 15GB. I had to compress it to 4GB so I could put it on my external hard drive. And I could tell the quality difference in real time
Didn't actually know that about MP4 Vs MOV files.
How about movie's on a micro SD card ? With smaller boxes like Sony vita game box's
That too would be dope too
@@pauldoake6188 flash storage like SE cards have a much shorter shelf life than optical media
Something the size of compact Flash cards would have been perfect. Also SSDs made for movies could be cheaper as they would theoretically be read only so there would be less required such as DRAM and all of that as it would be in the player. This is sort of like the FLAC vs MP3 arguement for music.
I like the SSD storage idea better than flash storage because of the dependability being much higher. I still know, it will be way more expensive than discs, even with being read only.
Another big thing, historically speaking, is compression algorithm. Blu-ray started with VC-1 (a Microsoft codec), and progressed to h264. Now with 4k we're on h265/hevc. It's not of any quality benefit after-the-fact but one could re-encode h264 into h265 and save additional space at the same quality just because of the improved compression algorithm.
Combining the two advancements, algorithm as well as disc size, is what gives you the ability to fit tons more STUFF on the disc. STUFF can be either duration, special features, or resolution/quality.
My Floppy Disk Is 3.5 Inches Long...
🤣 🤣
Psh! I'm old school. Mine is 5 inches long.😂
Lame! My floppy is the FULL 5.0 inches!! Booyah! 😅
Just my opinion here
But if movies came on a TB heart-drive or even SSD drive the price for the drive would outweigh the price of collecting
I know it’s not the same but it can be a comparable scenario
My PS5 has 8TB it was $900 I also collect scream factory 4K Collectors Edition’s and I have every 4K Collector edition from scream factory (75 so far) if they where on SSD’s or even drive they would be over $100 each or more for the bigger drive and would make the cost of collecting not worth it in my opinion
Some of this could come down to diminishing returns, also the cost of playback equipment and optical media increases when its a higher capacity. Often this stuff only becomes viable when equipment costs drop or mainstream public playback equipment justifies the upgrade, we still have a lot of TV stuff thats not 1080p yet let along 4K or above.
This is great information fore those that didn’t know , I been grabbing so many tapes lately Quality is out the window for me lol , great video 🎉
I couldn’t help but chuckle a little bit each time I heard “disc size” and does “disc size matter.” I’m so immature lol 😂
But seriously broski - good vid 👍
lol thanks man! Trust me you’re not alone in the comments haha
I always wonted this. Movie theaters use to use hard drives for movies. Now I think they just stream or download movies to hard drive
Compression is a big factor, but disc sizes are often not used to their full potential. I've found that most blurays only use about 70-85% of the available capacity for the actual movie. So you may have a 25GB disc, but the movie only takes up 16GB. Also, there was an attempt to put movies on flash drives at retail about 10 years ago. I believe they were in the UK. The one I remember seeing was the original Ghostbusters on a flash drive in a retail blister pack.
What you want is the kaleidoscope ecosystem 😮
My concern with them releasing a 4K 128 gig Blu-ray is some current players would probably have real trouble running them. Of course they would firmware update them that they could play larger disc, but it wouldn’t work perfectly. I don’t think they would work perfectly it until they start manufacturing new models for example, my old Sony4K player X700 (launch Model) had a lot of problems playing 100 gig disc. I recently re-purchased that player recently manufactured and it works perfectly fine playing 100 gig disc I would rather they just go to 8K then just put another version of 4K Blu-ray out.
Thanks fo the r clarification on disks.great video
Flash storage is pretty cheap to make these days, a cartridge system would be great.
I think so too, it’s getting smaller too with larger capacities
@@skadooshly flash storage has a shorter shelf life than optical media. With flash media it would be crucial to back up the drive immediately
I never cared about the size until you started mentioning it. I get the whole compression aspect. Grumpy/Grumpier Old Men are both on the same disc and I hate it, but honestly I think they look pretty good.
We should get a cleaner and purer image the less compressed the disc is. No need for 4K enhancement really. I loved the 4K for Titanic. But i can still see that shimmer on certain details. Thats gotta be compression.
One of the great things about laserdiscs is that there is virtually no compression. The picture is pure
Amazing to think Laser Disk came out early 90s ....Sound qualitywas top notch.and now looking at 2024.😢 streaming
Tom Hardy vibes #Daddy
I always thought a file was uncompressed when played back ? If you compress audio to flac its uncompressed to lossless by playback software
Movies won’t be sold on SSDs anytime soon because you would need a massive increase in production capability and even then you would be looking at $200+ movies.
It doesn't matter because the BDA (Blu-ray Disc Association) has come right out and stated that 4k Blu-ray in its present form is the LAST physical media format for consumers.
I’ve wondered the same thing. The technology is cheaper than it used to be. I think we will get there eventually. Some company will have to make a device to play them too. Would be great and potentially save a lot of space. I mean look at the Nintendo switch. Similar technology being used for video games. Shouldn’t be to hard to use it for movies and shows
Interesting video
1 terabyte drive awsome !.....though problems are at the production level. I am into great film audio immersivness and bigger disk wont make up for poor sound engineering mixs ......for example recently watched bluray of Iron Man 3 and was blown away how good it sounded even better compared to many Atmos 4ks and i am comparing to Godzilla New Empire. Iron man 3 won and it bluray😂
My gf says disc size absolutely does not matter....it's a myth haha
🤣🤣
LOL you know where my mind is going every time you say you want to talk about "diSC size" hahaha
You’re a dirty old man 😂
@@thelastmoviestanding 🤪
It's not the size that matters, but how well you use it...
“Criterion mostly uses 66..”
To be clear, like 90% of Criterion 4ks are 100 GB discs
Here is my first thought why 128GB discs are not used by what you said about it being 4 layers. Will current players be able to read the 4 layers? How many of the current players handle triple layers well? I read comments all the time of issues with triple layer discs. After a couple years of use my LG started having problems and I had to open the case open and clean the lens with an alcohol swab. While not dying physical media sales are down to the point player makers are leaving the market. First Oppo back in the day, then Samsung of all companies. More recently LG stopped. Sony use to offer 3 4K player models and are now down to two with no updates in years. Panasonics haven't updated in years. How much is the manufacturing process? If a triple layer is double the cost of a dual layer, is quad layer double the cost of triple layer? I imagine those are the reasons why.
Disc size doesn’t matter, it matters what you do with it.
🤣🤣
Yeah, I was thinking about HD costs before you mentioned it. LOL. Where disc-stamping plants have been around for ages. Another big issue would be the players. As it is, the low-end 4K players has issues with BD100 discs. I have the Sony x700 and it gets glitchy with those triple-layer discs...enough that I plan on upgrading player in few months. Agree that the average person will not notice the difference. Look at some of the current 4Ks out there. It's hard to image them looking any better. Prices are already getting out of hand, so throwing more money at new tech that I will probably not notice the difference would be a waste.
I haven't had that issue with my Sony 4k X700 player on larger discs. I only have a couple, but it has played it fine. One fix is to turn off 4k upscaling on the player. I've done that since I bought it about a year ago. I've also heard older models have more issues than more recent ones... or maybe I just got lucky.
@@frommatorav1 I got mine in 2019. So it has some age on it. Those BD-100 discs are the only ones it has issues with. Again, not all the time, just once in while. Sometimes one might play fine and then next time I watch it, it glitches. Other than that, it's been a great player. Looking at switching to a midlevel Panasonic next year.
We're gonna need 830 Petabyte discs so we can recreate reality in 3 dimensional space. Which would give us "next level" virtual reality. 😉
One day 8k disc will disrupt the market 😮
With the current 66/100gb discs, 4k players reliability isn't great, trying to play 100gb+ discs regularly will burn out a lens in a matter of months.
Size is not important, its how you use it that counts 😅
😂😂
Movies sold by the studios on an SSD would be dope and the art could be the retro VHS line. Movie cartridges are the future if they could get the cost down.
no chance easier to copy
@@chrisburns7979 Discs are still being ripped and copied now. They mine as well make better discs with less DRM or cartridges in the future. It won't change the current landscape at all. Just my opinion, that they're wasting more money on encryption, without getting the result it's intended to get. Movie studios probably won't agree with it.
Online it says BDXL 128GB discs can't be read by older players. That incompatibility isn't worth the extra space.
Reason why is it’s 4 layers and lens are not reading well enough. Pushes it to the max of the tech. Why 4k have so many read issue more so then blu ray
give it time movies will be on a sd card or a ssd. now that would be sick. I like my disc size how a like my men. 100gb.
Yeah Kaleidescape has already been invented although still prohibitively expensive
Kaleidescape is sooooo expensive
@@thelastmoviestanding it's crazy for sure. But maybe it's some path forward as far as a future with less compression 🤔. One thing I'd be interested to know your opinion on, say you get a 100GB 4K disc from VS (or whoever), does that necessarily mean they used every bit of storage that was available on that disc? Couldn't they theoretically be putting 60GB of data on a 100GB disc? Is there a way to tell? I mean, I wonder if getting the larger storage always translates to optimized movies? If that makes any sense?
And so you want to go "back" to what amounts to what looks like a digital hi-capacity cassette tape and decks to play them......???
😂 no haha didn’t say that in this? 🤣
Hey tom hardy
Nintendo Switch is already that way for gaming, so this may be in the future.
Ain't that cartridge limited to like 32GB in size?
no chance of media coming on SSD too easy to copy ect memory isnt that cheap
BDXL discs cannot be read by most players. And to make them work you can only use 2 layers of the disc usually.
128 GB Bluray disc don't work in Bluray player who is created for 25/50 GB discs and DVD's/CD's. I have understand 4K player's prefer 66 GB because players must work hard with 100 GB based on how much Audio/Subs are on it. That's reasen why Twister is 100 GB disc in Europe.
Max of Bluray disc is 50 GB and 4K disc is 100. 128 GB means that 4K player almoost must work twice so hard as 66 disc.
Disc size should have used more for space then only video/Audio. Give me Bluray with English DD 2.0 (or /and DD 5.1 in 448) with Dutch subs in 4:3 Full Frame (no blackbars) of The Saint S3 & S4 and some extra's.
Unfortable the future is stream 😢
If Criterion uses 66GB discs, then why do they charge so much? I always felt like they were high on their own farts. 😂
Criterion actually uses 100 GB discs way more often than not