Screenshot Comparisons 4K

[imhh1]

Avengers EndGame UHD BD VS 1080p BD

madVR setting for the HDR to SDR tone mapping:

dynamic tuning 50
dynamic clipping 10
highlight recovery medium
min. target 100
***This is dynamic tone mapping with madVR Beta, so no static nits value like the official madVR. The dynamic tuning affects the brightness curve.


left= UHD BD
right= 1080p BD upscaled to 4k with madVR (NGU)

no major spoiler in these screenshots, promise!

[Show spoiler]

1

[Agent Kay]

The Town is still overlooked for its 4k quality

[Hardback247]

Can someone please add screenshot comparisons for the German 4K Blu-Rays of the Iron Man Trilogy, and the official Disney ones?

[Geoff D]

@ Andreas:

caps 1 and 2 of Waterworld, have you noticed the commonality between them? Those are OG subtitles done optically, so naturally the quality takes a fair old hit and not even the UHD can do anything about that.

[imhh1]

Thor 2011......
live comparison (OLED):
http://www.framecompare.com/image-co...rison/DLWYWNNX
full size:

[Show spoiler]
HDR / SDR

madVR comparison 308nits:

[Show spoiler]
SDR / HDR

Hellboy 2019 ....
Live comparison of Dolby Vision VS HDR (OLED):
http://www.framecompare.com/image-co...rison/DLWY7NNX
full size:

[Show spoiler]
DV / HDR

Iron Man 1 2008......
live comparison, GER VS USA VS 1080p (OLED)
http://www.framecompare.com/image-co...rison/JB01FNNU
full size:

[Show spoiler]
GER / USA /
SDR

GER VS USA madVR comparison:

[Show spoiler]
GER / USA

Spider-Man Homecoming.....

Live comparison (OLED)
HDR vs Dolby Vision vs SDR
http://www.framecompare.com/image-co...rison/JB99CNNU

[birdztudio]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

Prospect

[Show spoiler]I just "had do" post this very quick comparison with this one after taking a very brief look at both discs... I didn't watch the movie yet, so won't look any further for now though.

There's a major difference with the black levels (and therefore colour/contrast) here. I think the UHD got it right, since the BD looks very/too milky to my eyes - I'd pick the UHD at any rate.

Other than that, from what I've seen so far, there's more detail and it actually looks 4Kish to me at times (#3 in particular). HDR wise the disc goes rather bright and adds more detail as well (#4 - mind you that I didn't know where to look for examples yet).

I did include 100 nits caps as well which should be used to compare/judge the black levels, which are the sole reason for posting this.

BD (upscaled) | UHD-BD (madVR/SDR/200 nits)

Disclaimer as to why the UHD-BD images may appear to be too dim and please ignore any off-looking colours:

[Show spoiler]Please note that the UHD-BD shots have been converted from HDR to SDR using special techniques, which drastically compresses the dynamic range of the original image (the colour bit depth has been compressed as well). The UHD-BD shots are therefore not an accurate representation of the original HDR image - dynamic range, colours (tone and intensity) and contrast should be taken with a big pinch of salt and the main focus should be on comparing details. Typically, the image will appear too dark (which is by design when the caps are done at 200 nits; on its own they should be viewed with monitor brightness set to 200 nits), may lack a certain "pop" and may at times also appear "boosted" when compared to the BD shots. The SDR conversion should still give you a good idea of the actual image of the UHD-BD though and one should also be able to at least catch a glimpse of the increased dynamic range. The BD shots have been upscaled for comparison purposes, but other than that should be accurate. You might also want to check out this post of mine (incl. the further link there) where I tried to show/explain this:
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=589

1. (#3 1767 nits, #4 100 nits)

2. (#3 100 nits)

3. (#3 100 nits)

4. (#3 1510 nits, #4 100 nits)

5. (#3 1804 nits, #4 100 nits)

thanks again for your hard works, always appreciated

as low as the budget that Prospect had ($3.9M) it was great, so i suggest you spend time watch it... irony how this low budget film still would be able to pull out more picture bit rate than 2-ish billion gross endgame lol...

*and why this thread hasn't been sticky?

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

@ Andreas:

caps 1 and 2 of Waterworld, have you noticed the commonality between them?

Yes. Both caps coming with titles is not an accident. And I'm also sure you got that right. But I still prefer the look of the Arrow with this scene - somehow looks better to my eyes. I think someone else voiced an according opinion as well and I think some colours just tend to make it look worse. Or maybe it's just me.

Originally Posted by birdztudio

thanks again for your hard works, always appreciated

as low as the budget that Prospect had ($3.9M) it was great, so i suggest you spend time watch it...

Already watched it last weekend : https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...30&postcount=6

And can only support what Sky_Captain added as well: It is rather "hot" indeed at times and it is also very bright (close to 3000 at times). But the brightness also comes with a little more highlight detail. Not that I saw any of it with my setup when watching the movie.

And yes, the movie was solid as well IMO. By no means the rotten tomatos 90% percent IMHO, but solid (I don't write movie reviews, but I gave it 7/10 elsewhere).

[chip75]

Justice League and the Fatal Five Blu-ray to UHD @100 nits comparisons

[imhh1]

Iron Man 2 UHD BD vs 1080p BD

Live Pictures:

[Show spoiler]

*OLED, Black Room, Same Player, Tripod pictures.

madVR comparison

[Show spoiler]

Iron Man 3 UHD BD vs 1080p BD

Live Pictures:

[Show spoiler]

*OLED, Black Room, Same Player, Tripod pictures.

madVR comparison

[Show spoiler]

Ocean 8 Dolby Vision vs HDR10

Live Pictures:

[Show spoiler]

*OLED, Black Room, Same Player, Tripod pictures.




1

[PeterTHX]

"Ocean 8 Dolby Vision vs HDR"

Dolby Vision *is* HDR.

[chip75]

Bumblebee Blu-ray (top) to UHD Blu-ray @100nits (bottom) comparisons

[andreasy969]

Iron Man (quickie)

IMO the disc is a DNR mess throughout (as opposed to Winter Soldier) and no HDR in the world can save this mess, but YMMV (but the fact that people prefer this over the BD actually has me worried tbh). If you can't stand DNR: Stay away and save your money. It's also not only waxy faces, there's a ugly lack of texture with everything now (except for brief moments where the DNR "fails").

And just for the record: It basically looks like this the whole time.

BD is the initial US Paramount release. With #2 the title isn't missing, it just fades out earlier on the UHD.

BD (upscaled) | UHD-BD (madVR/SDR/200 nits)

Disclaimer as to why the UHD-BD images may appear to be too dim and please ignore any off-looking colours:

[Show spoiler]Please note that the UHD-BD shots have been converted from HDR to SDR using special techniques, which drastically compresses the dynamic range of the original image (the colour bit depth has been compressed as well). The UHD-BD shots are therefore not an accurate representation of the original HDR image - dynamic range, colours (tone and intensity) and contrast should be taken with a big pinch of salt and the main focus should be on comparing details. Typically, the image will appear too dark (which is by design when the caps are done at 200 nits; on its own they should be viewed with monitor brightness set to 200 nits), may lack a certain "pop" and may at times also appear "boosted" when compared to the BD shots. The SDR conversion should still give you a good idea of the actual image of the UHD-BD though and one should also be able to at least catch a glimpse of the increased dynamic range. The BD shots have been upscaled for comparison purposes, but other than that should be accurate. You might also want to check out this post of mine (incl. the further link there) where I tried to show/explain this:
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=589

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

[Agent Kay]

Agree totally.
The cap set was too much then I saw this in motion.
Glad I didn't jump in with a preorder for it.

[imhh1]

GodZilla 2019 UHD BD vs 1080p BD

Live Pictures:

[Show spoiler]
HDR / SDR

*OLED, Black Room, Same Player, Tripod pictures.

madVR comparison UHD bluray VS 1080p Bluray

[Show spoiler]
HDR / SDR

BrightBurn 2019 UHD BD vs 1080p BD

Live Pictures:

[Show spoiler]
HDR / SDR

*OLED, Black Room, Same Player, Tripod pictures.

madVR comparison UHD bluray VS 1080p Bluray

[Show spoiler]
HDR / SDR

madVR comparison UHD bluray VS WEB (Movies Anywhere)

[Show spoiler]
Disc / WEB

Alita 2019 Dolby Vision vs HDR10

Live Pictures:

[Show spoiler]
DV/HDR

*OLED, Black Room, Same Player, Tripod pictures.


Despicable me Dolby Vision vs HDR10

Live Pictures:

[Show spoiler]
DV/HDR

*OLED, Black Room, Same Player, Tripod pictures.





**** madvr setting for the dynamic hdr to sdr tone mapping:
dynamic tuning 50
dynamic clipping 10
highlight recovery low
min. target 100

[TheSweetieMan]

'Iron Man' and 'Iron Man 2' are both **** ugly in regard to the DNR. But I don't think they're a disaster on the level of T2. But yeah, Disney should have found a way to do better for those films. It's unacceptable for a studio of their stature.

Iron Man 3 thankfully turned out pretty solid.

[chip75]

Ralph Breaks the Internet Blu-ray to Ralph Breaks the Internet (Wifi Ralph) UHD @100nits comparisons

[avs commenter]

by those screenshots, I like the Ralph HD version better

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

Iron Man (quickie)

IMO the disc is a DNR mess throughout (as opposed to Winter Soldier) and no HDR in the world can save this mess, but YMMV (but the fact that people prefer this over the BD actually has me worried tbh). If you can't stand DNR: Stay away and save your money. It's also not only waxy faces, there's a ugly lack of texture with everything now (except for brief moments where the DNR "fails").

And just for the record: It basically looks like this the whole time.

BD is the initial US Paramount release. With #2 the title isn't missing, it just fades out earlier on the UHD.

BD (upscaled) | UHD-BD (madVR/SDR/200 nits)

Disclaimer as to why the UHD-BD images may appear to be too dim and please ignore any off-looking colours:

[Show spoiler]Please note that the UHD-BD shots have been converted from HDR to SDR using special techniques, which drastically compresses the dynamic range of the original image (the colour bit depth has been compressed as well). The UHD-BD shots are therefore not an accurate representation of the original HDR image - dynamic range, colours (tone and intensity) and contrast should be taken with a big pinch of salt and the main focus should be on comparing details. Typically, the image will appear too dark (which is by design when the caps are done at 200 nits; on its own they should be viewed with monitor brightness set to 200 nits), may lack a certain "pop" and may at times also appear "boosted" when compared to the BD shots. The SDR conversion should still give you a good idea of the actual image of the UHD-BD though and one should also be able to at least catch a glimpse of the increased dynamic range. The BD shots have been upscaled for comparison purposes, but other than that should be accurate. You might also want to check out this post of mine (incl. the further link there) where I tried to show/explain this:
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=589

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Thanks for those Andreas. I'm still not seeing this total wax face look (the last Rhodey shot is a fraction misleading because he's moving, so the temporal resolution is fubar anyway) and there *is* still a vague semblance of texture there, aided by a definite increase in the finest details (look at Obadiah's tie and suit). I'm not saying (and will never say) that I'd want all movies shot on film to be treated like this but, as far as these IM UHDs go, I can live with it.

Take away the HDR and would I be so sanguine about it? Oh hell no, I'd be hopping mad, but the perceptual (i.e. it's all in our heads) increase in sharpness that HDR brings to the table helps to tip the balance back in favour of them being quite watchable. YMMV

[andreasy969]

Yes, he's moving with #5, but the BD still looks much better IMO and unfortunately it's also still very representative. I only picked that one because it came in handy, because it's the next one/first frame after the previous shot - you'll find that quite often with my caps. It was reallly just a quickie to show the DNR.

And I really could've picked much more. Didn't include any of the cave scenes for ex, which look fubar IMO as well for ex.

Re. picking the UHD over the BD: People can prefer whatever they want and that includes you of course. And usually I really couldn't care less about what other people prefer- as long as we have the facts straight (which we have: a little more detail, nice HDR, (IMO terribad) DNR). But I guess I kinda do care about you preferring this one, because people tend to follow your opinion the most and IMO the disc deserves all the shame it can get.

I do hope it's just a Marvel and not a Disney thing, i.e. I really hope that Maleficent will be fine. I care more about that one.

EDIT: I'll also upload some more Iron Man caps later today - I have more time now...

[andreasy969]

Iron Man

BD is the initial US Paramount again, the compression of the new Disney BD may actually be better though. True story: I accidently put in the Disney BD first today (thinking it was the UHD) and thought "Wait what, that doesn't look as bad as I remembered. WTH?", but I instantly realized my mistake, swapped the disc and everything was back to normal again.

You'll sometines find that the BD looks slightly smooth already, but the UHD just crosses a certain line with me now and does so throughout. The fact that the upscaled BD caps are sometimes larger than the UHD caps is quite telling as well btw.

Except for the HDR (which wasn't my focus here, but you'll find some examples anyway), I really can't say anything nice about this disc - be that re. the DNR or the colours (I know they aren't accurate). And even when the HDR brings back some detail (#6), it's completely ruined by the DNR anyway IMO and I hate the look of it. YMMV.

BD (upscaled) | UHD-BD (madVR/SDR/200 nits)

Disclaimer as to why the UHD-BD images may appear to be too dim and please ignore any off-looking colours:

[Show spoiler]Please note that the UHD-BD shots have been converted from HDR to SDR using special techniques, which drastically compresses the dynamic range of the original image (the colour bit depth has been compressed as well). The UHD-BD shots are therefore not an accurate representation of the original HDR image - dynamic range, colours (tone and intensity) and contrast should be taken with a big pinch of salt and the main focus should be on comparing details. Typically, the image will appear too dark (which is by design when the caps are done at 200 nits; on its own they should be viewed with monitor brightness set to 200 nits), may lack a certain "pop" and may at times also appear "boosted" when compared to the BD shots. The SDR conversion should still give you a good idea of the actual image of the UHD-BD though and one should also be able to at least catch a glimpse of the increased dynamic range. The BD shots have been upscaled for comparison purposes, but other than that should be accurate. You might also want to check out this post of mine (incl. the further link there) where I tried to show/explain this:
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=589

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.