King Kong comparison *PIX* - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 390 Old 01-13-2009, 09:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
shadowrage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya View Post

Now what is up with the contrast difference? Right now I prefer the slightly darker HD-DVD, but that is just me.

That's the difference I noticed too. I agree that it does look better. Kind of looks like they mastered the two at different color temps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya View Post

Frankly some of the softness may solely be due to compression issues and not necessarily DNR/EE.

When it doesn't look like DNR for sure, which is the case here, it's the VC-1 codec.

I'm telling you(not you specifically KMF) unless it's a high bitrate VC-1 encode it just doesn't get along with Blu-ray. Not slamming VC-1, but you got to give it room to breathe on BD. To prove my point I present the case of the Uni BD that's shown biggest improvement, so to speak, from it's HD-DVD counterpart - Miami Vice. According to the specs thread it has a bitrate around 30Mbps, more than 16. If Bourne doesn't follow this same pattern, I'll eat a tiny hat. Since Bourne has a highbitrate, if no DNR is used, I'm betting it will look non DNR-ish.

BTW - does Universal have two separate teams one for catalogs and one for day and date titles. Every single catalog is VC-1 and new releases are AVC? I just think that's weird, that's all...

Ridiculous codec tier sig gone. Still AVC/24bit lossless fanboy.

Studio quality tier
Most Major studios>Small Studios>dogs>cats>Warner(the guys that do new movies)
shadowrage is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 390 Old 01-13-2009, 10:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mr. Hanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Here's my theory on what went on- some hot shot encoder dude made a bet that he could best the result that was achieved by the MS team the first time around. So he set out to duplicate the relative quality as best as he could at a whopping 150 Kb/s less than the hdvd version. While the 2 encodes may not be utterly identical frame for frame, it's plausible that the goal was to make them as close to identical as possible, short of simply using the older encode.

Alternately, maybe it was the same encoder guy between these 2 versions, but his thought was that he could squeeze another 150 Kb/s out of the encode if he just tweaks a few more things this time around.

I need your sweet love, Rosetta Stone girl!
Mr. Hanky is offline  
post #93 of 390 Old 01-13-2009, 10:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sharkshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto, eh?
Posts: 2,424
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hanky View Post

I don't think his comment was suggesting that extras were a waste of space. I thought he was saying that leaving 11 GB of the disc blank (as opposed to putting something in there like the movie or some extras) is a waste of space.

no, of course, I was referring to Mr. Corwin's post directly above my own. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

So, that leaves me with the Kong Production diaries, the SD set, the HD DVD set, and now I guess the new BD.

Wacky.

sharkshark is offline  
post #94 of 390 Old 01-13-2009, 10:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MSmith83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hanky View Post

Here's my theory on what went on- some hot shot encoder dude made a bet that he could best the result that was achieved by the MS team the first time around. So he set out to duplicate the relative quality as best as he could at a whopping 150 Kb/s less than the hdvd version. While the 2 encodes may not be utterly identical frame for frame, it's plausible that the goal was to make them as close to identical as possible, short of simply using the older encode.

Damn, you figured me out. I'll try not to be such a hot shot next time.
MSmith83 is offline  
post #95 of 390 Old 01-13-2009, 10:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
I think it looks great, but my concern is that it could look even better, and they didn't take advantage of that...
42041 is offline  
post #96 of 390 Old 01-13-2009, 10:48 PM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 13,002
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hughmc View Post

Yes, at least on this one it seems we have turned a corner. I was worried a bit earlier that we might be heading down the highway to PQ debate hell, but it seems everyone is taking the high road. Unless a few of us get it home and see the KK BD and say it looks like crap. Seriously though isn't it welcomed and a nice turn?

VERY nice turn!

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is online now  
post #97 of 390 Old 01-13-2009, 11:46 PM
 
jrcorwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

I think it looks great, but my concern is that it could look even better, and they didn't take advantage of that...

Sorry, I was trying to make a joke. I don't think it went very well however.
jrcorwin is offline  
post #98 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 05:31 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Xylon is offline  
post #99 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 05:51 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator View Post

Wow. I think we may be in for a rough ride once more pics are out there- looks like the two releases have almost entirely independent compression artifacts.

So far, it looks to me like the Blu-ray is just a little bit less artifact-y than the HD DVD, but the artifacts are almost never common between the two.

Bingo!
Xylon is offline  
post #100 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 05:53 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henke007 View Post

You can clearly see traces of DNR, take a look at Naomi at closeup there is more grain and fine texture at the HD DVD and the lipstick is more red.

I looked and peered no obvious DNR side effects. Its just different grain pattern.
Xylon is offline  
post #101 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 05:54 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

If you check in the other Kong thread, you'll see the BD having slightly more detail in fast-moving scenes. I don't think it's additional DNR in either case; I think it's just the way they are encoded.

Maybe Xylon can post some of those "action" images - zooming them.

True. I agree. Done.
Xylon is offline  
post #102 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 05:55 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator View Post

I don't think this is the case. I think what you're seeing is a product of the lower relative color-saturation level of the BD. Look at the freckles on her cheeks- the detail is there, it's just lower contrast. This is why "the lipstick is more red" on the HD DVD- lipstick de-reddening not usually being a byproduct of DNR.

I agree
Xylon is offline  
post #103 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 05:58 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Xylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Liecheinstein
Posts: 7,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by 30XS955 User View Post

I just knew this was going to get DNR'd, and lo and behold. Not that I thought the HD DVD looked that great to begin with.

Tsk, tsk look what you started.
Xylon is offline  
post #104 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 07:07 AM
 
FoxyMulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

I looked and peered no obvious DNR side effects. Its just different grain pattern.

If the still is exactly the same shot and same frame on both then why would there be a different grain pattern ?

I looked at it again and i still think the Blu Ray has had some very minor DNR work done to that scene because the grain is fine on the HD DVD shot yet shows tell tale signs of minor degraining on the Blu Ray shot. It's the backgrounds i'm looking at when i make that assessment.

Not saying it makes the Blu Ray bad but i'm just disagreeing with you about that shot of Naomi's face. I may be very wrong but i gotta go with my gut instinct here.

I'm sure the actual film when in motion looks just fine though.
FoxyMulder is offline  
post #105 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 07:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
spectator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,036
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

If the still is exactly the same shot and same frame on both then why would there be a different grain pattern ?

Different source materials?

I don't feel special...
spectator is offline  
post #106 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 07:50 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,346
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 415
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

If the still is exactly the same shot and same frame on both then why would there be a different grain pattern ?

I looked at it again and i still think the Blu Ray has had some very minor DNR work done to that scene because the grain is fine on the HD DVD shot yet shows tell tale signs of minor degraining on the Blu Ray shot. It's the backgrounds i'm looking at when i make that assessment.

Not saying it makes the Blu Ray bad but i'm just disagreeing with you about that shot of Naomi's face. I may be very wrong but i gotta go with my gut instinct here.

I'm sure the actual film when in motion looks just fine though.

But the way they are encoded can affect the minor differences we are seeing in grain pattern and sharpness. As I said before, the encode seems to favor the BD on fast moving scenes, but the HD DVD on slowing moving scenes. I too don't see any DNR in this case, nor does it make sense to me they would do just a very light DNR in that particular shot.

DavidHir is offline  
post #107 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 07:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Deviation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Posts: 2,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Thanks for the comparison shots, Xylon. Especially with how early you have them up - I'll feel a lot better about picking this one up next week knowing how it turned out.
Deviation is offline  
post #108 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 07:52 AM
Member
 
JimboTHX1138's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 95
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I don't know but to me the the BD looks a little sharper in a couple of shots. However I can see slightly more grain in some of the HDDVD shots. But I agree with the notion that it's just a different grain pattern and that the colors are slightly of lower saturation on the BD version. Both look excellent and IMO is all down to a different encode. Both look great IMHO.
JimboTHX1138 is offline  
post #109 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 07:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sharkcohen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

If the still is exactly the same shot and same frame on both then why would there be a different grain pattern ?

I looked at it again and i still think the Blu Ray has had some very minor DNR work done to that scene because the grain is fine on the HD DVD shot yet shows tell tale signs of minor degraining on the Blu Ray shot. It's the backgrounds i'm looking at when i make that assessment.

Not saying it makes the Blu Ray bad but i'm just disagreeing with you about that shot of Naomi's face. I may be very wrong but i gotta go with my gut instinct here.

I'm sure the actual film when in motion looks just fine though.

Because it is a different encode. Every single time there is a difference, you call DNR.

Back off man, I'm a scientist.
sharkcohen is offline  
post #110 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 08:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lgans316's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Barking, Essex, London
Posts: 6,819
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Xylon,

Thanks for the confirmation. I hope the members who were worried about DNR will now calm down and accept the facts. Unlike eric.exe, you seem to have chosen some peculiar frames for comparison.

Blu-ray : 340
lgans316 is offline  
post #111 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 08:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Kram Sacul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,257
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Personally I think it's just lousy vc-1 encoding that looks like dnr.
Kram Sacul is offline  
post #112 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 08:46 AM
Toe
AVS Addicted Member
 
Toe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 13,002
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Liked: 419
Now that all the shots are up, I still say its a draw overall between the two. Both look slightly dif from eachother in some shots, and some shots I simply cant see any dif between the two, but both look fantastic and it is too close to declare a "winner" IMO.

JVC 3D: Been there, done that, bought a DLP
Toe is online now  
post #113 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 08:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,346
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 415
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgans316 View Post

Xylon,

Unlike eric.exe, you seem to have chosen some peculiar frames for comparison.

I'm glad Xylon chose different frames. It would be repetitive to use similar frames that eric used.

DavidHir is offline  
post #114 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 08:59 AM
Advanced Member
 
webdev511's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 528
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
First, thanks to Xylon for the grabs. Excellent work as always.

My first reaction was that the BD had very slight DNR, but after looking at the shots, you can clearly tell that while the video frames are spot on, the film grain indicates otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kram Sacul View Post

Personally I think it's just lousy vc-1 encoding that looks like dnr.

+1

Why are studios still leaving space on their BD50 releases? Can't they figure out how much room the extras & sound tracks are going to take and then use the remaining space for a nice high bit rate encode? Is there some technical or quality problem that we don't know about that's making the studios hold back?

Either way I'll rent this so I can be the judge on how it looks and sounds on my own setup.

Webdev511
San Jose, CA
TrueHD = DTS-MA = LPCM
Low Bit Rate AVC > Low Bit Rate VC-1
High Bit Rate VC-1 > High Bit Rate AVC
MPEG-2 = Great for DVD and that's about it.
webdev511 is offline  
post #115 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 10:54 AM
Member
 
DJ Mike TJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

I looked and peered no obvious DNR side effects. Its just different grain pattern.

I'm glad people are actually coming to the sensible conclusion here - two different passes of the a compression algorithm are producing different sets of compression "errors" (or rather, loss of information) - I saw equal numbers of frames that looked better in the HD-DVD as I did the Blu-Ray. And bits within the same frame that looked better on one and other bits that looked better on the other!

Theoretically the Blu-Ray should win out, but who knows, since we don't know that what encoding settings they used for the HD-DVD's VC-1 pass, versus those for the Blu-Ray's. Heck, they could have used different versions of the encoder, period!

They look equally good, theoretically the Blu-Ray a bit better but not comparably so - enough said!
DJ Mike TJG is offline  
post #116 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 11:23 AM
Advanced Member
 
surap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by webdev511 View Post

First, thanks to Xylon for the grabs. Excellent work as always.

My first reaction was that the BD had very slight DNR, but after looking at the shots, you can clearly tell that while the video frames are spot on, the film grain indicates otherwise.


+1

Why are studios still leaving space on their BD50 releases? Can't they figure out how much room the extras & sound tracks are going to take and then use the remaining space for a nice high bit rate encode? Is there some technical or quality problem that we don't know about that's making the studios hold back?

Either way I'll rent this so I can be the judge on how it looks and sounds on my own setup.

Sometimes it seems like their minds already are set. Where are their lust for adventure? I want the studios to explore the wast spaces. To boldly go where.....well you know...
surap is offline  
post #117 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 12:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lordcloud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 2,308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo_Reloaded View Post

"Good as it can be" is not a definable state, considering we are talking about lossy, constrained digital replications of originally analog material. I don't mean to say that "best it can ever be" exists, and you just shouldn't expect it - I mean what you expect, in the terms you defined it, simply does not exist.

I do not in any way use this as an excuse for accepting unsatisfactory material, so please do not twist it that way. But a certain amount of realistic expectation and understanding is necessary to ever enjoy things of this nature.

You are absolutely correct, good as it can be is not something that is defined as it pertains to putting a movie on a disc. However, I do believe that it only serves to hurt us as discerning consumers when we in any way accept what is given to us simply because it is better than what we've had previously.

What I expect is that studios put movies out on Blu Ray in the most faithful way to the master or director's intent as possible by utilizing technology to the fullest extent possible. Nothing more, nothing less. I have no need for DNR, EE, or anything else that would in any way take away from the A/V experience the disc is capable of putting out.

Not that this disc is the victim of such tampering, I mean in general.

I LOVE MOVIES!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

lordcloud is offline  
post #118 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 12:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BIG ED's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: California Wine Country
Posts: 3,290
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBlacklow View Post



Awesome. General consensus for this title is DNR either doesn't exist or is so small as to be undetectable in movement, and now we already have the usual suspects claiming it belongs to a "Hall of Shame" and that anyone who disagrees is a troll.


Ha, ha! Way too just post anything you want under my quote.
Did you not see my posts title???
"Off Topic"
Did you not see my post 1st sentence???
"no pics yet"
How in the world did you think I was speaking off the PQ or amount of DNR on these titles when there had been no pics yet & the title was off topic???

Well, if we just get too make up stuff about what someone did or didn't post...
here's what I'm posting about you:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBlacklow View Post

How's "Zulu" look again?



Awesome. You think "Patton" looks GREAT!!!

"I wonder if any of the releases had slipcovers though."
"Are these comfirmed to have slipcovers?"
"They look nice in those slips."
"This slipcover looks too good to pass up."
BIG ED is offline  
post #119 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 01:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BIG ED's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: California Wine Country
Posts: 3,290
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

Click the link in my signature and you will see we already have a excessive DNR list which is building up.

I doubt Kong would qualify.

That's a great thread!
Wish it was a sticky in all the HD software forums.
Was just asking him if he'd be willing too do one as well.
Maybe from worst too least DNR. Although I like your alphabetical listing as well.

"I wonder if any of the releases had slipcovers though."
"Are these comfirmed to have slipcovers?"
"They look nice in those slips."
"This slipcover looks too good to pass up."
BIG ED is offline  
post #120 of 390 Old 01-14-2009, 01:48 PM
Senior Member
 
fiddlesticks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks for the captures Xylon - sticking with my HD DVD.
fiddlesticks is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off