Here you go - JP BD and JP UHD-BD. Same madVR settings, BD upscaled via gimp 2.8.
HK and JP appear to be not identical, but having said that, even with the same settings, I'd still be careful - there are just so many variables with this stuff. Colour wise the slight difference remains no matter what I do though, so I guess the difference is real. The JP BD isn't very good compression wise btw. - noticed some pixelation when I watched it back then.
1. BD upscaled | UHD 100 nits | 200 nits | 422 nits
2. BD upscaled | UHD 200 nits (said 222 nits, so one is good enough)
Here are the original 2 1080p BD caps just for demonstration purposes:
I mainly use gimp for the upscaling because I want the original BD caps btw. Re. it being a tad too soft: Maybe it is, don't know, but I considered it good enough for my purposes at any rate, since I really can't see a difference when I compare the re-downscaled cap with the original one.
EDIT: Noticed only now that you included the JP BD as well and even there's some minor colour difference. Having said that, I for one really don't care about such.
Last edited by andreasy969; 05-21-2020 at 01:12 PM.
HK and JP appear to be not identical, but having said that, even with the same settings, I'd still be careful - there are just so many variables with this stuff. Colour wise the slight difference remains no matter what I do though, so I guess the difference is real.
I just remembered that someone on a Taiwanese forum made a comparison of HK UHD and JP UHD back in January 2018. It shows a similar difference in color, so the difference is probably real.
HK 4K UHD:
JP 4K UHD:
Quote:
I mainly use gimp for the upscaling because I want the original BD caps btw. Re. it being a tad too soft: Maybe it is, don't know, but I considered it good enough for my purposes at any rate, since I really can't see a difference when I compare the re-downscaled cap with the original one.
Fair enough. For the record, I don't mind cubic upscaling. All the upscaling options have pros/cons, so there isn't really a right or wrong here (unless the picture is too overly changed).
EDIT: the upscaled BD screenshots look similar to the Jinc upscaled screenshots, so probably upscaled with NoHalo/LoHalo and not with cubic?
Last edited by NLScavenger; 05-21-2020 at 01:47 PM.
Fair enough. For the record, I don't mind cubic upscaling. All the upscaling options have pros/cons, so there isn't really a right or wrong here (unless the picture is too overly changed).
No worries, didn't perceive it that way. And I'm also not a "my caps are right" guy (unless sth is obvioulsy way wrong). In case of my "JP BD EDIT", if anything I wonder if sth maybe is wrong here. But as I stated, I really don't care about such minor stuff - it's more plain interest then.
EDIT: the upscaled BD screenshots look similar to the Jinc upscaled screenshots, so probably upscaled with NoHalo/LoHalo and not with cubic?
It's cubic (according to gimp). The batch has no option for the method and it uses the scaling settings of gimp, which are set to cubic (I'm also getting the exact same result when doing it manually in gimp with cubic - just confirmed it again with the first one).
Weird. In Gimp 2.10.10 (current stable version is 2.10.18), cubic is noticeably softer than your upscaled screenshot. NoHalo looks pretty much the same as the upscaled screenshot.
Weird. In Gimp 2.10.10 (current stable version is 2.10.18), cubic is noticeably softer than your upscaled screenshot. NoHalo looks pretty much the same as the upscaled screenshot.
Cubic
NoHalo
If you seach this thread for gimp you'll find why I went back to 2.8. I had switched to 2.10 on my PC. Used it for 3 (?) comparisons, noticed that the upscales (same settings) are WAY too soft now only after the 3rd one, switched back to 2.8 and fixed all the according BD caps ("Blade Runner" was one of those).
And I didn't touch the running system again since.
If you seach this thread for gimp you'll find why I went back to 2.8. I had switched to 2.10 on my PC. Used it for 3 (?) comparisons, noticed that the upscales (same settings) are WAY too soft now only after the 3rd one, switched back to 2.8 and fixed all the according BD caps ("Blade Runner" was one of those).
And I didn't touch the running system again since.
That explains a lot, thanks!
I resized the screenshot again with the cubic resizer in VirtualDub2 and that was much sharper than 2.10. Gimp really got gimped.
Well, I did try telling y'all that Rise has some rad HDR but you know what people are like, they don't believe you without picatures
Oh, I always believe you (except for maybe your take on how bad the DNR is), but with Rise I actually thought you were slightly backtracking in regard to your review with your "excited" comment - I was looking for a push and you did the opposite (that's how I perceived it that is).
Rise really is a must from what I've seen, Dawn is not worse than the BD (and your review also spot on), but I don't like gaps. (unless crap)
My comment was in reference to it being a single photo comparison (and not a very good one anyway, Rise was a bastard to get snaps of) so it wasn't the kind of wide-ranging comparison you like to do, i.e. there's not enough to get excited aboot from just one photo.
Still, Rise was one of the first occasions when I really thought "wow the reviews and forums feedback are nonsense" compared to what I was seeing on the ZD9, and not much has changed since (present company excepted). So I'm glad to find out that I wasn't imagining it!
A totel sleeper (from my POV that is), pure real-HDR™ goodness and I felt like removing any last doubts whether this one is worth an upgrade. Also because there were so many meh comments. Main focus being on the HDR (with therefore plenty of #3s) and one doesn't have to look for it here AT.ALL.
It's also not only blown out backgrounds or short flashes - it's everywhere, in-your-face, throughout (other than the obvious ones, take #6, #10, #11, #17 or #25 for ex). I took very few non-HDR-related caps, only a few times (when I felt like it) and without actually paying much attention to detail.
I also love how filmic the CGI ape looks btw. and agree that the CGI aged pretty damn well.
Glad I listened to Geoff (despite his mixed signals ) and thanks to zavvi for the great price on the individual release(s). Didn't watch the whole movie yet, so don't know if there are any issues lurking to spoil the party.
PS: The images are downloading rather slow for me right now - don't know if it's just me, but might work better another time...
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
I cannot See the Rise of the Planet of the Apes pics... *scratches head*
EDIT: Works with the regular desktop Firefox. Firefox Preview (Fenix) doesn't show them. Strange, but obviously a problem on my side
EDIT2: Thanks a lot to Andreas. I requested pics for that movie for some time already because I was on the fence if I should upgrade or not. And I am glad that I did
One of the reasons to get the 4K disc late were two "professional" reviews that suggested that the VFX would become more obvious with the HDR grade. I cannot say that the pictures support this view. In my eyes they make the apes appear less "cartoony" (if all). In my personal comparison with the discs themselves I went back and forth with the Blu Ray but couldn't decide if one ape looked more fake than the other.
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
(unless crap)
Linear Mode
