Post your DVD collection

DJMastaWes

macrumors 65816
Jan 14, 2006
1,243
1
Montreal, Quebec
(not all are in the photos)


Those are mine.


Bothers (hes messy)


Brother


Brother


Brother


Brother


Mine.. On my brothers floor.

There are probebly 25 missing the photos. There all around my brothers room, on the floor and everything. I'm the clean one :).
 

Shotglass

macrumors 65816
Feb 4, 2006
1,176
0
Chappelle's Show is a must in every DVD collection. Funny thing is I don't own it. They don't sell it here in Germany.
 

bembol

macrumors 65816
Jul 29, 2006
1,023
24
Used to have over 600+ DVD's...I cleaned up, sold for various reasons...one was because of HD-DVD...!!!

I down to less than 300





"The Look and Sound of Perfect" 15 HD-DVD's...Training Day & Ray...IMO the Reference HD-DVD's in Picture/Sound Quality...!!!

 

Shotglass

macrumors 65816
Feb 4, 2006
1,176
0
What's wrong with that?


hang on, who was supporting blu-ray, apple or intel?
Anyway, it doesn't matter, it's just a player, not a drive.
 

DISCOMUNICATION

macrumors 6502a
Jul 7, 2004
831
2
Cambridge, MA USA
Useless boxes

I need to get a digital camera. I usually throw away the cases that DVDs come in. All they do is take up space. It's not like there's any real info on most boxes like CD liner notes. I find them pretty worthless. I store most of my discs in 300+ disc albums. White shelves full of black disc albums look better to me. It's also easier to pick something to watch just flipping through pages instead of scanning shelf after shelf.
That being said... I find it hard to throw away the special edition boxes I import from Japan. The Japanese really know how to design packaging. Most of the boxes are made out of heavey materials that don't scar and fringe around the corners like the cheap US box sets. I also can't seem to part with the cases for my Farscape DVDs. I've been collecting the new Starburst Editions since December. I also watch them a lot so I keep them easily accessable. The only cases I have lined up on a shelf right now are all PSP games and those mini cases that Japanese Game Cube discs come in.
 

noelister

macrumors 6502
Jan 15, 2005
275
0
clayj said:
Erm... most of my DVD cases are in storage. So rather than post a picture of a couple of big weathertight plastic storage boxes, here's a link to a list of the DVDs I own.
:eek: Very nice collection ClayJ !
 

clayj

macrumors 604
Jan 14, 2005
7,475
181
visiting from downstream
noelister said:
:eek: Very nice collection ClayJ !
Thanks... been collecting DVDs since Day One (March 24, 1997)... my first DVD purchases were Goldeneye, Eraser, Blade Runner, and Species... I had to get a friend in Seattle to go to Tower Records and FedEx the discs to me so I'd have something to play in my Pioneer LD/DVD combo player. :)
 

xPismo

macrumors 6502a
Nov 21, 2005
675
0
California.
nice list. its all about s u p e r b i t. mmmmmm good. I'll post my collection once they are out of the packing boxes. I think I have a few of you beat, although I'm a bit embarrased at what movies I have bought over the years...:eek:
 

clayj

macrumors 604
Jan 14, 2005
7,475
181
visiting from downstream
xPismo said:
nice list. its all about s u p e r b i t. mmmmmm good. I'll post my collection once they are out of the packing boxes. I think I have a few of you beat, although I'm a bit embarrased at what movies I have bought over the years...:eek:
Yeah, I always go for the Superbit version if I can... of course, only Sony movies even have that option. I'd rather have maximum picture and sound quality than a bunch of features I'm only going to watch once (if I watch them at all).
 

SilentPanda

Moderator emeritus
Oct 8, 2002
9,993
28
The Bamboo Forest
Funny this thread should come up since I just made this video on Saturday...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDr_Ih4FZnU

I have 233 in my Delicious Library and as far as I know it's complete. I don't have Back to the Future, Indiana Jones Trilogy, and that sorta stuff as individual discs in Delicious Library though... ah well. I'm right at the point where I need to buy a new thing to put my DVD's on... such a waste of money but... *sigh*
 

bembol

macrumors 65816
Jul 29, 2006
1,023
24
Revlefty said:
Aww you bought an HD-DVD I'm sorry to here that.
Sorry, I didn't feel like spending $1,300 CAN on [/b]Blur[/b]-ray...literally LOL just look at their titles...The Fifth Element is a joke...failure to use VC1/Dobly TrueHD...resulting in Extras/Features being cut...!!!

Not to mention the lack of support/releases from ANY Studio and titles/hardware that just keep getting Shuffled/Postposed...!!!
 

Brize

macrumors 6502a
Jun 13, 2004
732
0
Europe
clayj said:
Erm... most of my DVD cases are in storage. So rather than post a picture of a couple of big weathertight plastic storage boxes, here's a link to a list of the DVDs I own.
Clay: I'd be very surprised if those 16:9 aspect ratios that you have listed are correct. Some of the DVDs may be 16:9 enhanced, but most of those films will (hopefully) be presented in their original aspect ratio (OAR), which is highly unlikely to be 16:9, television productions not withstanding.

Suggesting that 16:9 is the 'preferred aspect ratio' for films infers that it's a stylistic choice on the part of the DVD production company. On the contrary, any deviation from the OAR will result in frame cropping, and is therefore avoided by those companies looking to produce a DVD consistent with the original film.

And of course, the reason most television shows (and a lot of older films) aren't available in 16:9 is because they were originally shot in a non-widescreen format, usually 1.33:1 or 1.37:1. Accordingly, presenting the material in a widescreen aspect ratio would necessitate vertical cropping.
 

SilentPanda

Moderator emeritus
Oct 8, 2002
9,993
28
The Bamboo Forest
Brize said:
Clay: I'd be very surprised if those 16:9 aspect ratios that you have listed are correct. Some of the DVDs may be 16:9 enhanced, but most of those films will (hopefully) be presented in their original aspect ratio (OAR), which is highly unlikely to be 16:9, television productions not withstanding.

Suggesting that 16:9 is the 'preferred aspect ratio' for films infers that it's a stylistic choice on the part of the DVD production company. On the contrary, any deviation from the OAR will result in frame cropping, and is therefore avoided by those companies looking to produce a DVD consistent with the original film.

And of course, the reason most television shows (and a lot of older films) aren't available in 16:9 is because they were originally shot in a non-widescreen format, usually 1.33:1 or 1.37:1. Accordingly, presenting the material in a widescreen aspect ratio would necessitate vertical cropping.
Pretty sure Clay knows all this. I think the reason he prefers 16:9 (as do I) is that that is also the aspect ratio of wide screen TV's. Hence it is the aspect ratio he prefers, not necessarily the ones that directors prefer. I know that if I'm "on the fence" about buying a movie, usually having a 16:9 aspect ratio (1.85:1 or 1.78:1 are both close enough in my opinion whereas 2.35:1 and greater usually have "the black bars") usually pushes me to buy it, especially if it has DTS. It doesn't matter... it's just preferred.

I didn't look through all his DVD's but he has the Blade series listed at 16:9 but I'm pretty sure they aren't...
 

Brize

macrumors 6502a
Jun 13, 2004
732
0
Europe
I'm struggling to understand how anyone can have a 'preferred aspect ratio', such that it has a bearing on which films you're likely to watch.

It's unfathomable to me that you'd choose one film over another on the basis of aspect ratio. Do you find the black bars annoying, or is it just that you want the image to be as big as possible?

Clay does make the distinction between 16:9 and the various other widescreen aspect ratios - he lists some films in 1.66:1, 1.85:1 and 2.35:1. So, clearly, he's not using 16:9 as a generic indicator for all wide aspect ratios.
 

SilentPanda

Moderator emeritus
Oct 8, 2002
9,993
28
The Bamboo Forest
Brize said:
I'm struggling to understand how anyone can have a 'preferred aspect ratio', such that it has a bearing on which films you're likely to watch.

It's unfathomable to me that you'd choose one film over another on the basis of aspect ratio. Do you find the black bars annoying, or is it just that you want the image to be as big as possible?
I understand that at 2.35:1 I am not missing out on any picture. I also understand that for Television and the occasional movie (Blair Witch Project for example) that is in 4:3 I am not missing out on anything either. The black bars don't annoy me at all. Some of my friends zoom/stretch pictures to make them fill their whole screen which I can't stand.

I simply prefer movies that do fill my whole screen but I am okay if they don't.

Some of my favorite movies aren't in 16:9 and that's okay... Lord of the Rings, The Matrix Trilogy, The Blade Series, Moulin Rogue, and Black Hawk Down to name a few.