High definition is an aspect of home entertainment that I have yet to embrace. I don’t have the money with which to embrace it, and I still do not comprehend its appeal. My friends all tell me, “Oh, but once you watch sports in HD, you’ll never want to see them any other way again.” Since I never watched sports to begin with, that means very little to me. On the rare occasion I have watched sports, I have never thought, “Boy, if only I could make out the individual blades of grass, the game would be so much better.” So what am I left with? Movies and television shows. And I’ll be perfectly honest: I do not understand what the hype is.

There was a time when those in charge of shooting a film or television show would use soft focus lenses with abandon. (Anyone who works on something in which Barbara Walters appears probably still does). The studios felt that the world did not need to see every wrinkle, crinkle and imperfection to be found on people, on sets, on locations, etc. Today, if a film makes heavy use of soft focus and is released on DVD or Blu-ray, the picture quality is more often than not criticized for being fuzzy and muddled, a direct result of the focus used, not the quality of the transfer to the disc. It is an aesthetic choice, not a conspiracy to bilk Blu-ray users out of their money.

I have no problems with a clear image. DVD gives me that. It gives me a clear, reasonably detailed image that I can watch on a TV and regard as something significantly better than VHS. You do remember what VHS is right? I only ask because I recently saw a play in which the cast members had no idea how to use a record player. I just want to make sure that everyone is on the same page about outdated media formats.

Let me give an example: the re-imagined “Battlestar Galactica,” which just came to an end last spring. One of the stars of that show, Edward James Olmos, who plays Admiral Adama, is not a pretty man. Even in standard definition, the man has a face that is ravaged with scars, pock marks and age lines. It’s a great look for the character, a world weary war veteran. However, I do not want to imagine having to look at him in high definition. I do not need to see every subtle detail of Edward James Olmos’ face. He is a great actor, but his crystal clear face is far more than I ever want to see.

To be fair, I have only seen one film straight through in high definition, and that was the director’s cut of 2009’s Watchmen. My thoughts on the film itself aside, the picture looked pretty good. It was clear. I have since seen portions of it in standard definition. You know what? There is actually a difference. The high definition image is better. But honestly, for me to go through the whole to-do and upgrade everything I have just for a slight boost in picture quality is way too expensive. I can live without the clarity if it saves me money.

I have a slight astigmatism. My vision, day–to-day, is pretty much normal. However, on certain occasions, I’ll wear glasses if I’m really far away from a blackboard I have to read, just to give myself a slight edge. I am not going to shell out money for contact lenses that I will have to wear all the time just so I can see the blackboard sometimes. If a standard definition television, cable hookup and DVD will give me what I need 99 percent of the time and cost me less than a plasma TV, an HD feed, a Blu-ray player and the grossly overpriced discs, I do not see a reason to upgrade.

Unfortunately, the reality of the situation is that, like it or not, I will have to upgrade at some point. Blu-ray players are already coming down in price, and the televisions have been down for a while. Select Blu-ray discs are on sale for $10 sometimes. More obscure titles like Tango and Cash and A Room With a View are quietly being released to a medium that does not really benefit them. Upgrading at some point in the future will be unavoidable.

My real concern is this: I own over 300 DVDs. That is a lot more than most own, and scarily, not as much as some others own. The day will come, as it did with vinyl, audio cassette and VHS, when the DVD format is no longer supported by anyone. Sure, there are players now that handle DVD and Blu-ray, just as, for a time, there were for DVD and VHS, as well as cassette, vinyl and CDs.

But one day, disc players will only work with Blu-ray. My obsolete DVD player will not work with whatever new televisions or variants thereof that are developed. And I will be stuck with my investment of 300+ DVDs that I can no longer watch. So I will dutifully go to the store, and as I place my money on the counter to upgrade and replace everything I own, I’ll have just one question to ask the clerk: “What’s the difference?”

Vince Balzano is a senior in the College. He can be reached at balzano@thehoya.com. The Reel Deal appears every other Friday in The Guide.