AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Mummy Returns comparison *PIX*
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Mummy Returns comparison *PIX*

post #1 of 116
7/28/08 at 6:01am
Thread Starter 
If there is a gun pointed at my head and asked to choose which one is Bu-ray or HD DVD, there is a . . . . . .

100% chance that I will survive

This time the difference is much more discernible and with AVS users using large viewing sets (calibrated of course) one can say this is easier to differentiate. The Blu-ray version this time has much more DNR applied losing some of the details that is visible only from the HD DVD. The added bitrate is nice because this Blu-ray has less artifacts but pretty much negated that advantage because of the added DNR.

Missed opportunities ***********'s!

The transfer itself looks much better than the original movie. When this was released on HD DVD years ago, its one of the best looking PQ at that time. Universal got a lot of praise with how their catalog titles look in the early days of the format war.

If both versions were released at the same time, I will choose HD DVD.

Blu-ray File size: 29.10 GB

Bitrate: 23.00 mbps


HD DVD File size: 18.50 GB

Bitrate: 21.00 mbps

Code:
                                                                                                                Total   Video                                             
Title                                                           Codec   Length  Movie Size      Disc Size       Bitrate Bitrate Main Audio Track                          Secondary Audio Track
-----                                                           ------  ------- --------------  --------------  ------- ------- ------------------                        ---------------------
The Mummy Returns                                               VC-1    2:09:38 31,311,243,264  36,030,655,043  32.20   23.07   DTS-HD Master 5.1 4553Kbps (48kHz/24-bit) DTS-HD Hi-Res 2.0 192Kbps


DISC INFO:

Disc Size:      36,030,655,043 bytes
Protection:     AACS
BD-Java:        Yes

PLAYLIST REPORT:

Name:           00010.mpls
Size:           31,311,243,264 bytes
Length:         2:09:38 (h:m:s)
Total Bitrate:  32.20 Mbps
Description:    

FILES:

Name            Size            Length          Time In         Time Out        
----            ----            ------          -------         --------        
00050.M2TS      31,311,243,264  2:09:38.395     0:00:00.000     2:09:38.395     

VIDEO:

Codec               Bitrate         Description     
-----               -------         -----------     
VC-1 Video          23073 kbps      1080p / 23.976fps / 16:9 / Advanced Profile 3
VC-1 Video          744 kbps        480p / 23.976fps / 4:3 / Advanced Profile 2

AUDIO:

Codec                           Language        Bitrate         Description     
-----                           --------        -------         -----------     
DTS-HD Master Audio             English         4553 kbps       5.1 / 48kHz / 24-bit / 4553kbps (DTS Core: 5.1 / 48kHz / 24-bit / 1536kbps)
DTS Audio                       French          768 kbps        5.1 / 48kHz / 24-bit / 768kbps
DTS Audio                       Spanish         768 kbps        5.1 / 48kHz / 24-bit / 768kbps
Dolby Digital Audio             English         192 kbps        2.0 / 48kHz / 192kbps
DTS-HD Audio                    English         192 kbps        2.0 / 48kHz / 192kbps
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #2 of 116
7/28/08 at 6:01am
Thread Starter 
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 116
7/28/08 at 6:02am
Thread Starter 
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 116
7/28/08 at 6:03am
Thread Starter 
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 116
7/28/08 at 6:03am
Thread Starter 
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 116
7/28/08 at 6:04am
Thread Starter 
BTW Blu-ray having the lossless audio will have the advantage. Discernible or not. Got to encourage studios to use lossless for the next generation format. Then again if you are still using your TV speakers or HTIB's hooked up from your PS3 using optical output then this is not a concern to you
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 116
7/28/08 at 8:57am
hopefully this one turns out better

-Gary
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 116
7/28/08 at 9:03am
I bet it's still going to be soft. A few shots are really sharp though.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 116
7/28/08 at 9:44am
I thought it was noticeably sharper than the original, though we'll see how the shots turn out.

Edit: To clarify, I'm saying that it was noticeably sharper than the original movie, I'm not comparing it to the HD-DVD. I expect the images to be largely the same in that respect.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 116
7/28/08 at 12:35pm
can't wait!
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 116
7/28/08 at 10:48pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Murrell View Post

hopefully this one turns out better

-Gary

Not exactly
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 116
7/28/08 at 10:51pm
Glad I kept my HD-DVD!
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 116
7/28/08 at 11:05pm
Thread Starter 
They better not turn the dial on King Kong.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 116
7/28/08 at 11:11pm
I don't think they will. As you know King Kong, Hot Fuzz, Riddick, Children of Men, Inside Man, The Pianist, Dawn of the Dead, Smokin Aces, Bourne Trilogy and Atonement are the best looking titles from Universal on HD DVD.

Glad I don't have both Mummy and Mummy Returns 'coz I was never a fan of the ho hum video transfers Universal threw upon us from their putrid masters. I spent 13 GBP importing Mummy Returns (HD DVD Uncut version) from the U.K having high hopes but ended up in huge disappointment. I think Tremors, 40 YOV, The Game, Eternal Sunshine, Lost in translation, Big Lebowski and other high profile titles will follow suit. It's good that some titles with good transfers like Knocked Up, The Thing & Dawn of the Dead (D.C) have been announced for Blu release.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 116
7/28/08 at 11:11pm
Thread Starter 
All Universal needs to do is increase the bitrate and add lossless audio and I will recommend the Blu-ray everytime. Better transfer? A nice bonus.

Crank up the DNR and EE and we got ourselves a turd. The Blu-ray versions has to be better with its bigger space and bitrate. Not worse.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 116
7/28/08 at 11:14pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgans316 View Post

I don't think they will. As you know King Kong, Hot Fuzz, Riddick, Children of Men, Inside Man, The Pianist, Dawn of the Dead, Smokin Aces, Bourne Trilogy and Atonement are the best looking titles from Universal on HD DVD.

They add more DNR on those titles and we got ourselves a big problem. A big f****** problem.

And its probably panic time.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 116
7/28/08 at 11:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

They add more DNR on those titles and we got ourselves a big problem. A big f****** problem.

And its probably panic time.

That's worrying to hear but due to the unwanted application of DNR on Mummy 1 & 2 it would be better if UNI does HD DVD port of their best looking titles and do DTS-HD MA mix for the Blu-ray separately. A known devil is better than an unknown angel.

But wait a minute, I thought Doomsday was reported to look excellent.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 116
7/28/08 at 11:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

They better not turn the dial on King Kong.

I think Peter Jackson's baby will be just fine.

The original and the original remake on the other hand, well you would probably be better pouring pepper on your screen and telling yourself detail was missing the entire time.

Why did you guys bring up CoM. Oh man, that with MA is going to be so freaking phenomenal. Too bad it has grain.

Uni was cranking out titles way too fast. I think that's Warner's problem too now, there's no time to go over them with the fine toothed comb. I'm pretty sure Uni will fall back into their 'flood mode' by Oct.

Actually I'm hoping for that. Damn all you catalogs that suffer, I want my CoM with MA audio.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgans316 View Post

But wait a minute, I thought Doomsday was reported to look excellent.

Who said it didn't?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

The lesser of two evils? Why not? And some of those HD DVD titles will knock the walls of your house with lossless sound (with proper equipment to match of course).

Yeah they will. But if good enough, was good enough HD-DVD would still be around. If Uni would have added TrueHD I would have bought more. BD has enough space where you don't need compromise. If the extras aren't HD just throw them to the side on a DVD(Warner got that part right).
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 116
7/28/08 at 11:24pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lgans316 View Post

That's worrying to hear but due to the unwanted application of DNR on Mummy 1 & 2 it would be better if UNI does HD DVD port of their best looking titles and do DTS-HD MA mix for the Blu-ray separately. A known devil is better than an unknown angel.

The lesser of two evils? Why not? And some of those HD DVD titles will knock the walls of your house with lossless sound (with proper equipment to match of course).
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 116
7/28/08 at 11:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

The lesser of two evils? Why not? And some of those HD DVD titles will knock the walls of your house with lossless sound (with proper equipment to match of course).

Especially the non-stop climax shoot out scene in Hot Fuzz and the T-REX vs King Kong fight scene.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 116
7/28/08 at 11:41pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowrage View Post

I think Peter Jackson's baby will be just fine.

The original and the original remake on the other hand, well you would probably be better pouring pepper on your screen and telling yourself detail was missing the entire time.

Why did you guys bring up CoM. Oh man, that with MA is going to be so freaking phenomenal. Too bad it has grain.

Uni was cranking out titles way too fast. I think that's Warner's problem too now, there's no time to go over them with the fine toothed comb. I'm pretty sure Uni will fall back into their 'flood mode' by Oct.

Actually I'm hoping for that. Damn all you catalogs that suffer, I want my CoM with MA audio.

Who said it didn't?

Yeah they will. But if good enough, was good enough HD-DVD would still be around. If Uni would have added TrueHD I would have bought more. BD has enough space where you don't need compromise. If the extras aren't HD just throw them to the side on a DVD(Warner got that part right).

Good enough is no good

The new releases lately is making it worse. File size and higher bitrates are moot if the f****** studios are dumbing it down. Removing HF details on a high definition format? WTF!
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 116
7/28/08 at 11:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

The new releases lately is making it worse. File size and higher bitrates are moot if the f****** studios are dumbing it down. Removing HF details on a high definition format? WTF!

Sweet irony.

There's more physical space for more picture information. So they get rid of details. I want to go back to when I didn't know what DNR was doing, and just smile at the bright colors. Back when I didn't know I was being cheated a little.

I blame you the most Xylon; for proving it.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 116
7/29/08 at 12:25am
Thanks for keeping these off my 'buy list.' Hopefully, this is only due to the "remastering" of these titles. So far, the only port-over title that hasn't been "remastered" is The Scorpion King. I'm curious, but I wouldn't buy that turd with someone else's money.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 116
7/29/08 at 12:45am
hehe, feel sorry for you guys that don't have HTPCs.

HD DVD video + Blu-ray audio + eac3to = best version
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 116
7/29/08 at 1:27am
You know DNR must be harder to spot than i thought because i considered the image quality on The Mummy Returns to be very good.

I'm left scratching my head and wondering if i should resist coming here anymore not because i don't like to find things out and be educated on all this but because if i'm saying i thought it was very good and everyone else says no you are wrong and they show screenshots that it's bad and DNRed to hell then i end up looking like an idiot by recommending it to people ( and no one wants that ) Gee i just thought it looked good and i was viewing on a 106inch projection screen so the size of the monitor was no excuse for me......I guess someone else needs to take over that film grain thread i started because i must be losing the ability to determine good and bad transfers.

See the other thing is i would still recommend both these films to people.....Maybe i'm not affected by DNR as much as i thought i was ( After all i thought The Golden Compass was watchable because of it's fantasy setting and well the screenshots show it's been heavily DNRed )

Gee maybe i'll be buying Patton next and praising it ( turning to the dark side )

I hate coming onto a thread like this and having a difference of opinion when clearly screenshots show i'm wrong but the fact is my brain told me it was a nice image and i enjoyed watching it.....Can't explain it any more.

Excessive DNR is bad and obviously robs a film of detail but i still thought this film had lots of detail so i gotta stick with my instincts and say i thought it good despite any evidence saying otherwise.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 116
7/29/08 at 2:02am
the DNR on the BD is easy to spot, the first pic and it's zoom shows it best

I think it's safe to say that Universal might be headed down the DNR road, their first two releases indicate this for sure

-Gary
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 116
7/29/08 at 2:16am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

You know DNR must be harder to spot than i thought because i considered the image quality on The Mummy Returns to be very good.

I'm left scratching my head and wondering if i should resist coming here anymore not because i don't like to find things out and be educated on all this but because if i'm saying i thought it was very good and everyone else says no you are wrong and they show screenshots that it's bad and DNRed to hell then i end up looking like an idiot by recommending it to people ( and no one wants that ) Gee i just thought it looked good and i was viewing on a 106inch projection screen so the size of the monitor was no excuse for me......I guess someone else needs to take over that film grain thread i started because i must be losing the ability to determine good and bad transfers.

See the other thing is i would still recommend both these films to people.....Maybe i'm not affected by DNR as much as i thought i was ( After all i thought The Golden Compass was watchable because of it's fantasy setting and well the screenshots show it's been heavily DNRed )

Gee maybe i'll be buying Patton next and praising it ( turning to the dark side )

I hate coming onto a thread like this and having a difference of opinion when clearly screenshots show i'm wrong but the fact is my brain told me it was a nice image and i enjoyed watching it.....Can't explain it any more.

Excessive DNR is bad and obviously robs a film of detail but i still thought this film had lots of detail so i gotta stick with my instincts and say i thought it good despite any evidence saying otherwise.

Whoa! Back up there FoxyMulder!

My assertion is compared to HD DVD the Blu-ray version lost the extra fine details. The Blu-ray is in itself is fine. No Patton style DNR. Its just worse in comparison.

Don't forget your viewing set has its own video processing to make the PQ "better". Even mine LOL!
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 116
7/29/08 at 2:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylon View Post

Whoa! Back up there FoxyMulder!

My assertion is compared to HD DVD the Blu-ray version lost the extra fine details. The Blu-ray is in itself is fine. No Patton style DNR. Its just worse in comparison.

Don't forget your viewing set has its own video processing to make the PQ "better". Even mine LOL!

You are doing a great job with these threads....I am just saying that i guess i wasn't bothered by the DNR on these two films as much as some might be because i actually enjoyed what i saw and the image looked very good to me and that worries me ( I should be bothered as detail is important in HD media ) Maybe i just need a break to recharge the batteries. I had never seen the HD DVD version just the original and special edition DVD's.

I would love to see a screenshot from the DVD edition of The Mummy comparing the Egyptian writing against the HD DVD and Blu Ray screenshots just to see if the DVD loses something ( other than resolution )
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 116
7/29/08 at 2:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder View Post

You know DNR must be harder to spot than i thought because i considered the image quality on The Mummy Returns to be very good.

I'm left scratching my head and wondering if i should resist coming here anymore not because i don't like to find things out and be educated on all this but because if i'm saying i thought it was very good and everyone else says no you are wrong and they show screenshots that it's bad and DNRed to hell then i end up looking like an idiot by recommending it to people ( and no one wants that ) Gee i just thought it looked good and i was viewing on a 106inch projection screen so the size of the monitor was no excuse for me......I guess someone else needs to take over that film grain thread i started because i must be losing the ability to determine good and bad transfers.

See the other thing is i would still recommend both these films to people.....Maybe i'm not affected by DNR as much as i thought i was ( After all i thought The Golden Compass was watchable because of it's fantasy setting and well the screenshots show it's been heavily DNRed )

Gee maybe i'll be buying Patton next and praising it ( turning to the dark side )

I hate coming onto a thread like this and having a difference of opinion when clearly screenshots show i'm wrong but the fact is my brain told me it was a nice image and i enjoyed watching it.....Can't explain it any more.

Excessive DNR is bad and obviously robs a film of detail but i still thought this film had lots of detail so i gotta stick with my instincts and say i thought it good despite any evidence saying otherwise.

Well. These things happen. I raved about the PQ of Patton on the PQ Tier Thread after viewing the Hong Kong version that I received few days before the U.S release date. May be I was so engaged by the movie or may be I viewed from a long distance that blindfolded me from DNR. Once the travesty news broke out I felt embarrassed and requested the members at the PQ tier thread to disregard my assessment. The strange part is I was able to immediately discern DNR just 10~20 minutes into Twister, Face/Off, First Blood, Tremors, Pan's Labyrinth etc.

Aforementioned these things happen. It's human instinct. At least we were man enough to openly admit our stance.
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 116
7/29/08 at 3:59am
The extra processing sucks. I can even detect a faint layer of EE. Is this going to be a pattern for BRD releases? Universal, again, you boneheads.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Mummy Returns comparison *PIX*