Screenshot Comparisons 4K

[fkid]

The comparison below is meant to be viewed in HDR mode on an HDR display.

FLOW - 2024 - PQ - CG ITA UHD BLU-RAY (HDR) vs. CURZON GBR UHD BLU-RAY (SDR) [25]

[aladdin123]

Originally Posted by TbeRw01

Screenshots are lossless, of course. I have years of experience in capture and encoding, and I wrote all the scripts that most people are using in this thread. Do not worry about that.

Please, could you capture screenshots from Sunset Boulevard's 4K Dolby Vision stream on ITunes and compare it with the BD?

[KMFDMvsEnya]

So is the ST09 KS encode substantially better than the standard 4K encode?

[TbeRw01]

Originally Posted by aladdin123

Please, could you capture screenshots from Sunset Boulevard's 4K Dolby Vision stream on ITunes and compare it with the BD?

I don't have this movie, sorry...
Will do your Lawrence Arabia request soon(ish)

Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya

So is the ST09 KS encode substantially better than the standard 4K encode?

Yes, night and day difference.

[TbeRw01]

Catch Me if You Can 2002

KSCAPE vs iTunes vs 1080pBD
https://slow.pics/c/IGadyeJp

* HDR images: must be viewed on Chrome, Edge or Opera...

[Kolkusz]

John Wick SDR vs HDR comparison

HDR screenshots, in order to view them correctly on Windows, you must use a Chromium browser with Windows HDR enabled, and the brightness slider set to the value of 31.

[jpilla415]

Clueless (1995)

UHD (Base Layer) vs UHD (Base Layer + FEL)

https://slow.pics/c/8n5jMUOs

Tone mapped to SDR @ 125 nits. Colors and luminance are not representative.

[fkid]

The comparison below is meant to be viewed in HDR mode on an HDR display.

THE 400 BLOWS - 1959 - PQ+FEL - CRITERION USA UHD BLU-RAY vs. CARLOTTA FRA UHD BLU-RAY (25)

[Kolkusz]

John Wick Chapter 2 SDR vs HDR comparison

HDR screenshots, in order to view them correctly on Windows, you must use a Chromium browser with Windows HDR enabled, and the brightness slider set to the value of 31.

[PRO-630HD]

Originally Posted by jpilla415

Forgot to post these two here:

Thunderball (1965)

WB UHD vs MGM BD

https://slow.pics/c/qiTv7lSm

-------------------------------------------------------------------

You Only Live Twice (1967)

WB UHD vs MGM BD

https://slow.pics/c/B9ytBOFI

It is a shame MGM/Warner dropped the ball with the video bitrate on Thunderball to 51.5 Mbps when all the other titles are significantly higher. The first three Bonds averaging 77 Mbps. The other scope titles YOLT and DAF are both just a hair under 70 Mbps for video. Yet Thunderball even when error correction is used to lower the 100 GB disc to 96.8 has 27 actual GB of unused space. It seems like that unused space could have easily increased that low bitrate for video and at least bought it in line with the scope titles.

[jpilla415]

Small Soldiers (1998)

UHD (Base Layer) vs UHD (Base Layer + FEL)

https://slow.pics/c/5heFW82s

Tone mapped to SDR @ 125 nits. Colors and luminance are not representative.

[asacmurr]

Enter the Void (2009) - Arrow BD vs IFC BD
Director's Cut
Theatrical Cut

[PonyoBellanote]

Does anyone have a tutorial on how to make comparison/screenshots with a tool? Doing it manually is annoying and not to mention getting the exact same frame is a chore.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by PRO-630HD

It is a shame MGM/Warner dropped the ball with the video bitrate on Thunderball to 51.5 Mbps when all the other titles are significantly higher. The first three Bonds averaging 77 Mbps. The other scope titles YOLT and DAF are both just a hair under 70 Mbps for video. Yet Thunderball even when error correction is used to lower the 100 GB disc to 96.8 has 27 actual GB of unused space. It seems like that unused space could have easily increased that low bitrate for video and at least bought it in line with the scope titles.

Thunderballs is the longest movie in the set plus it's got four lossless English tracks rather than two, that's all eating into the video bitrate. But does it make a difference in motion? Does it bollocks. Thunderballs looks terrific, compression included.

[PRO-630HD]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Thunderballs is the longest movie in the set plus it's got four lossless English tracks rather than two, that's all eating into the video bitrate. But does it make a difference in motion? Does it bollocks. Thunderballs looks terrific, compression included.

They all look fantastic and the level of fine detail from the 4K scans in no way looks like a 2K upscale. I heavily questioned that opinion upon hearing reports they showed no improvement in detail over the 2008 to 2012 Blu-rays. There are a ton of extras, but those mostly are in SD. Valid point with the 4 English tracks taking up a just a hair over 10 Mbps.

https://caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&...2=6317&i=0&l=0

Length: 2:10:28.529 (h:m:s.ms)
Size: 69,872,486,784 bytes
Total Bitrate: 71.40 Mbps

If we have a BD-100 using error correction we are at 96,882,130,944 bytes. With that math I still have a legit 27 GB of empty space. Seems to me more than ample room to increase that video bitrate to at least the level of the other scope titles YOLT and DAF being just a hair under 70 Mbps. If I missed something feel free to correct me.

[Geoff D]

The extras are not in SD because UHD does not support that resolution, some of it was actually rebuilt in HD for the first wave of Bond BDs but the remaining SD stuff had to be upscaled anyway, so the UHDs each contain a good couple hours of AVC encoded HD extras. In fact Thunderballs has over three hours of extras while Diamonds, say, has about two hours, it's all got to be squeezed on somewhere.

(This is why I dislike the trend of UHD-only releases, some of these studios can't compress for toffee as it is, never mind when having to put hours of HD extras on there as well and refusing to encode them in space-saving HEVC. In the hands of a master compressionist it's never been a problem mind you, but for the listless button-pushers who are there to crank out studio product it's another obstacle to getting good encodes. That said, all the Connery Bond UHDs have been encoded verr competently indeed.)

As such, if you look at the rest of them none of the main movie encodes get nowhere near filling up the discs. Diamonds is 75GB, YOLT 73GB and so on. I certainly think they could've been slightly less conservative with Thunderballs' encode but even so, it's nothing to get hung up on as there's no appreciable deficit in motion.

[PonyoBellanote]

Originally Posted by PonyoBellanote

Does anyone have a tutorial on how to make comparison/screenshots with a tool? Doing it manually is annoying and not to mention getting the exact same frame is a chore.

Feels like nobody wants to bother, although people screenshotting and comparing is always a good thing..

[TbeRw01]

Originally Posted by PonyoBellanote

Does anyone have a tutorial on how to make comparison/screenshots with a tool? Doing it manually is annoying and not to mention getting the exact same frame is a chore.

My scripts have an automated workflow for that, but you have to calculate the frame difference between the releases.

https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=185317

Screenshot comparison tutorial (a bit old)

can be found here

[PonyoBellanote]

Originally Posted by TbeRw01

My scripts have an automated workflow for that, but you have to calculate the frame difference between the releases.

https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=185317

Screenshot comparison tutorial (a bit old) can be found here

Thank you very much, I appreciate it strongly. Does it work as well for non DV comparisons? Like just plain Blu-ray vs Blu ray or UHD, or example. Or is it only for HDR comparisons?

By frame difference, you mean like, ms delay with logos and such, syncing? I also realize this is meant to work with ''backups'' and not with on the fly decryption, like I do..

[TbeRw01]

Yes, input can be SDR, HDR10, or DV.
Output can be tonemapped to SDR or in an HDR container or both.

Also work with many many inputs (like 20+)