I Have Thought This For Some Time,

some of the Blu-ray DVD's I have purchased have little or no difference over normal DVD's, and the powerful consumer magazine Which? (as it says in the blurb, 'no advertising, no bias, no hidden agenda, just expert advice from an independent source',) proves me correct, many times consumers are being hugely ripped off by Sony who market the format,

typically, the films cost around double the figure for an ordinary DVD, while many have a recommended price of more than £20, however, a test by Which? found fewer than one in three Blu-ray films delivered an outstanding difference, Which? said: ‘Only five Blu-rays, such as newer films Avatar and Casino Royale, and classics, including Zulu, were of the highest-definition quality we were expecting, a disappointing eight were only marginally better or looked virtually the same as the DVD version.’

Which? asked the body that represents major studios in the UK, the British Video Association, about the vast differences in quality, but it failed to answer the question,

Which? said: ‘We don’t dispute that Blu-ray generally does look better than DVD, but based on our test, a big step-up is not a given.’ the report said the better-quality films were probably transferred from the original high-quality source, and the worst merely converted to HD from copies of the original, so there you have it, before up-grading your DVD collection look at the examples above and decided, do you really want to pay up to £20 just for a pretty blue box? I have, but I will not any more.