or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring HDTV vs Blu-ray Comparison
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring HDTV vs Blu-ray Comparison

post #1 of 882
Thread Starter 
Blu-ray (23Mbps VC1) | HDTV (17Mbps MPEG-2)



































Color differences should be ignored. More than likely, the broadcast slightly skewed them.

Broadcast scan
Blu-ray scan

More comparisons by Xylon: http://forums.highdefdigest.com/blu-...x-reviews.html

Edit: This thread has seemed to give the whole trilogy a bad rap. Two Towers is decent for the most part, although it suffers from occasional DNR like Fellowship, and Return of the King looks great throughout.
post #2 of 882
I can't believe they postponed this title. I thought for the better. The trailers shown last year from some Warner release is accurate after all.

F-
post #3 of 882
well.... we only have to wait 2 years for the EE editions ... edge enhancement edition
post #4 of 882
Wow. Is Warner actually paying someone money for their encodes?
If anyone from Warner is reading this: I could probably beat their price, just send me the master on a hard drive, I'll download x264, hit the 'blu-ray' preset, and let my computer chug away for a couple days and probably get something not easily confused (or make that "impossible to distinguish") with HDTV
post #5 of 882
that gandalf face shot looks really scary (because of DNR of course)
post #6 of 882
You can't go wrong with those face shots. Some of those are much like the Gladiator syndrome.

Well, hold on to those broadcast versions of your LOTR. They are better.

For now I hope. I predict the Extended Edition will rectify the PQ issues
post #7 of 882
only if we complain loud enough.
post #8 of 882
so what, now nobody will buy this crap. dammit, screwed up one of the few major releases people are looking forward on BD.
post #9 of 882
Glad I was only planning on renting this version

Hope the EEs get treated better.
post #10 of 882
What am I missing, because I think the bd edition of those shots look better then the hdtv ones. Not much, but a little.
post #11 of 882
I think it would be educational, if someone had the time, to use pointy arrows and circles to show exactly where the problems are and to label them by name (DNR, haloing, etc.).

To these non-expert eyes (using 24" iMac), LOTR is already so processed looking that I'm having a hard time distinguishing what's attributable to that and what constitutes a Blu-ray process atrocity.

But only if someone is so inclined.
post #12 of 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by elmalloc View Post

so what, now nobody will buy this crap. dammit, screwed up one of the few major releases people are looking forward on BD.

They will still buy but they will complain later on why there is no free exchange program when the better version comes out.

They have been warned early for some of the atrocious PQ transfers here at AVS. They deserve that piece of crap that they buy in the first place.
post #13 of 882
So not only did they take the exact same transfer seen for years on cable they made it worse with detail smearing DNR. We're supposed to buy this?

Fortunately The Two Towers and ROTK appear to be mostly excellent but there's no reason they couldn't have spent some money on getting FOTR up to snuff.
post #14 of 882
So what's the most likely explanation?

Did they use the older HD transfers instead of going back to the masters and making brand new ones?

Then again, didn't Jackson talk about the "new HD transfers" like several years ago?

Also, question for eric.exe, were those broadcasts 1080i or p?
post #15 of 882
Those screen-captures are shockingly bad for a major title. WB really went all out on the transfer. Thank goodness I have little interest in this particular trilogy...
post #16 of 882
Well that proves at least that whatever is the originating source there has been additional filtering applied to the BD. Wax Editions.

First Gandolf shot entering Bilbo's home is truly damning.
Fine texture in his robes are now waxy along with his face and the archway. -Forgot to mention his beard is also nerfed.

Thanks Eric.

Best Regards
KvE
post #17 of 882
Thread Starter 
Flicking through ROTK I don't see any DNR'd scenes, looks pretty good for the most part.

TTT on the other hand, has DNR sporadically throughout like here, it's more often, maybe 20% of the total movie. If you are a big fan, I don't think those few DNR'd scenes are gonna ruin it for you.

TTT example:
next frame->

DNR or vasoline?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang Zei View Post

Also, question for eric.exe, were those broadcasts 1080i or p?

It was a progressive broadcast from Dish PPV many years ago.
post #18 of 882
Nice job WB
post #19 of 882
Seems to be a mixed bag at best. I was hoping for a stellar result, but i'm not sure if it's realistic to expect one.
post #20 of 882
Some of these shots are an absolute monstrosity. Just look at the artifacting at Bag End...

This has to be one of the worst applications of filtering I've seen yet, at least Gladiator was consistently waxy.

I also wouldn't discredit the colours on the HDTV version, New Line has a tendency to boost contrast and reds(?) on their abortio... uhm.... releases.
post #21 of 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya View Post

Well that proves at least that whatever is the originating source there has been additional filtering applied to the BD. Wax Editions.

First Gandolf shot entering Bilbo's home is truly damning.
Fine texture in his robes are now waxy along with his face and the archway.

Thanks Eric.

Best Regards
KvE

Look at his beard in that shot, the BD version has oblitereated the strands of hair into a plastic digital blobby mess.

Please tell me this is a joke, or that the HDTV/BD comparisons got mislabled
post #22 of 882
Oh, well. This just gives me a better reason to rent the theatricals and save the money for the EEs which hopefully will look better.
post #23 of 882
Seriously, I just cancellled.

These are three of my favorite films of all time, but this is just silly. Not paying for this.
post #24 of 882
Guys,

After looking closely at these comparisons (thank you for posting them!!!) it seems to my eyes that the slightly greater 'detail' of the HDTV version is due to the richer black level which causes the details to pop a bit more. It doesn't look, at least on my LCD monitor, that the very slightly softer detail of the BD capture is HF roll off so much as just less "pop" from a less punchy contrast level.

Anybody else see it like that?
post #25 of 882
I'll have to wait for a heavy discount. All I have are old full-screen versions (!!) of the three films I receive as gifts; I've held off for a long time hoping the blu-ray would be worth it, but I don't like to support shoddy work, even if any version would trump the one I currently own.
post #26 of 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet View Post

Guys,

After looking closely at these comparisons (thank you for posting them!!!) it seems to my eyes that the slightly greater 'detail' of the HDTV version is due to the richer black level which causes the details to pop a bit more. It doesn't look, at least on my LCD monitor, that the very slightly softer detail of the BD capture is HF roll off so much as just less "pop" from a less punchy contrast level.

Anybody else see it like that?

Not sure, but this shot of the BD shows slightly more detail than the TV version. You can see stuble marks on his cheek more closely on the BD version. However, I think the biggest issue is this is probably an older transfer. I can tell this by the film grain - it has the look from an older telecine. Maybe they will do a brand new transfer for the EE.
post #27 of 882
When is this HD broadcast from? Is it the last several years or way back when it was hitting dvd?
post #28 of 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

Not sure, but this shot of the BD shows slightly more detail than the TV version. You can see stuble marks on his cheek more closely on the BD version. However, I think the biggest issue is this is probably an older transfer. I can tell this by the film grain - it has the look from an older telecine. Maybe they will do a brand new transfer for the EE.

The BD loses detail everywhere in that shot. Eyebrows, lips, pores, hair, wrinkles. The BD is just boosted, extra detail is nowhere to be seen.

Not to mention the horrendous blocking and smudging.
post #29 of 882
Quote:
Originally Posted by BsRoz View Post

The BD loses detail everywhere in that shot. Eyebrows, lips, pores, hair, wrinkles. The BD is just boosted, extra detail is nowhere to be seen.

Not to mention the horrendous blocking and smudging.

Not sure though. On that shot, there are specific stuble marks on his cheek that are totally gone on the broadcast, but there are the BD and defined. Just zoom both images and have them overlayed and you'll see it. Doesn't seem like detail because of contrast boosting - although it does have more contrast. I do see some bad blocking and smudging though to the right of him. Uggh.
post #30 of 882
Major props to eric.exe for the grabs. \\m/

I'll get torched for this, but there are instances where dare I say it, too much grain can hinder details. Agreeing with DavidHir in some ways I reckon. The grabs of Frodo looking back over his right shoulder for example, beneath his right eye you can clearly see his perspiration on the BD. On the tv shot, its completely masked by the grain. Not making excuses for DNR, NOBODY likes it, just observing as positively as I can, lol. I hate to settle for these, but crikey, neither are perfect, just two versions of heh.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring HDTV vs Blu-ray Comparison