[msgohan]

I was curious?

Matched to the existing Blu-ray shots posted by benes (7th image inexact as the frame is too still to properly match).


2000 Dimension DVD (MPEG-2 5.48Mbps) vs 2007 BVHE Blu-ray (AVC 20.02Mbps)


Mouseover links:
http://horn.hdtvtotal.com/hdtvtotal/.../scary1dvd.png
http://horn.hdtvtotal.com/hdtvtotal/.../scary2dvd.png
http://horn.hdtvtotal.com/hdtvtotal/.../scary3dvd.png
http://horn.hdtvtotal.com/hdtvtotal/.../scary4dvd.png
http://horn.hdtvtotal.com/hdtvtotal/.../scary5dvd.png
http://horn.hdtvtotal.com/hdtvtotal/.../scary6dvd.png
http://horn.hdtvtotal.com/hdtvtotal/.../scary7dvd.png
http://horn.hdtvtotal.com/hdtvtotal/.../scary8dvd.png
http://horn.hdtvtotal.com/hdtvtotal/.../scary9dvd.png
http://horn.hdtvtotal.com/hdtvtotal/...scary10dvd.png

 

[AmishFury]

wow... i'm glad i didn't listen to the reviews and buy it... almost no increase in detail

 

[FoxyMulder]

Ok working.....Had to let second image load...Can i save everyone the time of posting by saying Wow it looks better than DVD ( as in big deal the BD still looks like DNRed garbage )


This might be someone's favorite movie and they let that person down. ( I think he lives in Australia )

 

[msgohan]

Not identical. I've had issues with mouseovers before and it seemed to work if I left the mouse over the image as that seems to force the second one to load sometimes.


If all else fails it's also possible to copy the second image link out of the larger link.

 

[AmishFury]

the DVD is worse... but it's more from compression artifacts than anything else


you gotta give the mouseover a moment to load the second image

 

[FoxyMulder]

The edge enhancement on the DVD is at the same positions on the Blu Ray if you look for example at pic 4....I think that means they used the same old transfer that they used for the DVD edition.


I'm guessing some here will love this clean look and there is no denying it looks "better than DVD" but it doesn't look like film - It's lacking any fine detail in much the same way as The Longest Day lacks it.

 

[Patsfan123]

Well I guess this proves that even DNRed that there still is somewhat of an upgrade. Not to mention the sound.. The color looks a bit different too. Also you can see that the DNR is on the master and they didn't do it for the BD release. This is probably the same as Gangs of NY. Blame whoever DNRed it back in the day.

 

[lgans316]

The title of this thread should be "Scary PIX"

 

[tbonetommygun]

Edge enhancement makes this movie a whole lot scarier, and a lot less funny

 

[msgohan]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Patsfan123 /forum/post/14162639


Also you can see that the DNR is on the master and they didn't do it for the BD release. This is probably the same as Gangs of NY. Blame whoever DNRed it back in the day.

Actually no, all those specks on the DVD appear to be grain + low res + compression. If you just encode the BD as a DVD you'll get mosquito noise and whatnot, but not the kind of graininess present (which can be seen in motion).


The EE does weird things to the out of focus backgrounds. Pic 6: The text in the background is sharper on the BD, and I don't think it would be normally... The painted texture look of the foreground continues into the background, making soft echos of objects into hard slabs of abstract imagery. Or something.

 

[Patsfan123]

You sure its not just compression artifacts? I have the original DVD and I always thought it looked awful.

 

[msgohan]

Well I'm not sure of any way to prove it per se, but it looks grainy, and right from the opening with the still Dimension logo and the stationary establishing shot of Carmen Electra's house there's grain in the otherwise static images. If the source was truly grain-free the only real "artifact" visible should be from I-frames dropping to predicted.


At least in my experience.

 

[Phantom Stranger]

The DNR used on Scary Movie is the equivalent of a nuclear bomb compared to the DNR machine gun used on Patton. Absolutely no skin features remain visible and the edge enhancement is some of the worst I've seen of any Blu-ray. I don't know what the studio was going for but they ruined a movie that would have easily been a Tier 0 title if they had struck a new master. It still looks much better than the dvd as color fidelity is vastly improved.

 

[JoeBel]

..sorry, what was the thread about, I forgot after I loaded up the second pic

 

[salbah3ng_bata]

The first picture looks waxy as hell, I mean it looks better than the dvd, but it does have that waxy loook.

 

[gremmy]

The third pic is so strange looking on the BRD. I actually think she looks more like a human in the DVD and very much like a wax statue in th BRD. It's just wierd looking... She has no texture at all...

 

[loregnum]

wow, those blu-ray caps look gross. I'd want them to give me money to own this.

 

[FoxyMulder]

When you look closely there seems to be absolutely no extra detail present in some of those shots ( pic 3 is an example ) Take away the compression artifacts on the DVD and color correct it to match the BD and i dare say pic 3 would look identical.

 

[Dave Mack]

Who keeps saying Disney/Buena does such great transfers?!?!?

 

[Chuck12]



Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxyMulder /forum/post/14162490


I'm guessing some here will love this clean look and there is no denying it looks "better than DVD" but it doesn't look like film - It's lacking any fine detail in much the same way as The Longest Day lacks it.

+1


It does indeed lack the fine detail. Overall, in my eyes, the Blu looks really nice vs the DVD.