Maybe a new feature on Blu-ray? (this is for blu-ray fanatics)

[Q?]

I read the reviews for Hellboy II: The Golden Army.
Impressed by the review I bought this title, as it was given the best
score in terms of VQ.
I bought the UK version and popped it in, I soon realised that
this wasn't refence quality, I wasn't at all impressed!
although it's stated here that this is fantastic!
After a little investigation I found out that the UK version got a VC-1
treatment
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.php?id=1945

and the U.S. got a MPEG-4 AVC treatment
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...38&show=review

I was shocked! why isn't the UK version reference quality like the
U.S. version?
I would have definately bought the U.S. blu-ray with the superior video treatment than the almost dull UK treatment!

Maybe a new feature could be added here on blu-ray.com
that compares at least the U.S. and the UK releases that have different video
codecs? or other version's.
How else can you be absolutely sure you've got the best blu-ray disc in terms of technical quality? I know it's too much to ask when your considering
that this is not an official site.
P.S. I really appreciate blu-ray.com and the reviewers for their outstanding work! but at least discuss this problem (in my opinion).

[ClaytonMG]

I voted it's impossible to compare them.

Look at Zodiac. There's a VC-1 and an AVC. The VC-1 has a low bitrate version that I believe was made for HD DVD and obviously doesn't fill a BD-50 and doesn't use Blu-ray's bitrates. Paramount just released an AVC version that does use Blu-ray's specs, and uses a BD-50. People are saying the Paramount version looks flawless while the VC-1 version doesn't look that great. This doesn't prove that VC-1 is inferior in anyway, just that it's encoded poorly.

[Q?]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

I voted it's impossible to compare them.

Look at Zodiac. There's a VC-1 and an AVC. The VC-1 has a low bitrate version that I believe was made for HD DVD and obviously doesn't fill a BD-50 and doesn't use Blu-ray's bitrates. Paramount just released an AVC version that does use Blu-ray's specs, and uses a BD-50. People are saying the Paramount version looks flawless while the VC-1 version doesn't look that great. This doesn't prove that VC-1 is inferior in anyway, just that it's encoded poorly.

Hmm. maybe I should refrase the question, I meant comparing the different
releases with different "treatments".
Regardless what the encode's are, just the diffrences of the releases
and which one of them is inferior.

[Q?]

I just thought it would be a good idea to have an easier
access, too find out which one, of a certain blu-ray release has better VQ.
You know, same movie, different encodment.
So you could choose for yourself which one you wanna buy.
Obviously you want the best version.
Maybe... just, maybe it would force whoever releases them too
consider giving all the movies the best video treatment.
english is not my first language, is this understandable?

[AikonEnt]

I'd be interested to see what the comparisons are if the same film has had 2 different encodes done using different codecs. Most people would buy from their own country (convenience), but if a film you want was available from a different country with a better encode it would be worth knowing.

[Q?]

Originally Posted by AikonEnt

I'd be interested to see what the comparisons are if the same film has had 2 different encodes done using different codecs. Most people would buy from their own country (convenience), but if a film you want was available from a different country with a better encode it would be worth knowing.

Right on!
Maybe there's somewhere else you can find out?
I really want all my blu-ray's to be top-notch!

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by QQQQ!

I just thought it would be a good idea to have an easier
access, too find out which one, of a certain blu-ray release has better VQ.
You know, same movie, different encodment.
So you could choose for yourself which one you wanna buy.
Obviously you want the best version.
Maybe... just, maybe it would force whoever releases them too
consider giving all the movies the best video treatment.
english is not my first language, is this understandable?

I think it might be hard though. PQ is basically subjective. Unless a reviewer had his hands on both versions and was able to compare them side by side (which is possible using screen shots), I am not sure how this would work. Right now I believe there's reviewers in different countries on this site. While someone in the UK may say that their version is crap, one person in the US might see the same thing and think it looks amazing. Like in the POTC 3 thread, people in there complain about the PQ while I think it's pretty much flawless.

[Sonny]

VC-1 just seems to be less consistent than AVC encoded movies. Sure VC-1 can look perfect, but it only does 70% of the time. Whereas AVC looks perfect 95% of the time. Just my opinion...

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by Sonny

VC-1 just seems to be less consistent than AVC encoded movies. Sure VC-1 can look perfect, but it only does 70% of the time. Whereas AVC looks perfect 95% of the time. Just my opinion...

Again, not the codec but the studio. VC-1 is used by WB, and they alter their images by adding DNR and EE (though they're getting better). They also used HD DVD's encodes which used lower bitrates. Also the source makes a difference and there hasn't been anyway to truly compare VC-1 to AVC. From this, you cannot say VC-1 is inferior.

[Q?]

Just which one's got the better VQ, regardless of which encodment.

[Q?]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

I think it might be hard though. PQ is basically subjective. Unless a reviewer had his hands on both versions and was able to compare them side by side (which is possible using screen shots), I am not sure how this would work. Right now I believe there's reviewers in different countries on this site. While someone in the UK may say that their version is crap, one person in the US might see the same thing and think it looks amazing. Like in the POTC 3 thread, people in there complain about the PQ while I think it's pretty much flawless.

Don't you think it's because they have different "transfers" or "treatments",
the UK and U.S. versions?

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by QQQQ!

Don't you think it's because they have different "transfers" or "treatments",
the UK and U.S. versions?

I'd imagine both were made from the same source. It's odd that one was VC-1 though... Not sure why they'd do 2 seperate encodes. They may have to compress it more just slightly due to the extra audio tracks, but I am not sure.

[vamsilak]

what codec gives higher bitrate
AVC OR VC-1 OR MPEG2
does highe bitrateis more quality

[Q?]

I hope I can get a response from the blu-ray.com staff.
Or have I already?
It'd be nice with "Quality Control".
Everybody deserves the best quality!
It kind of defeats the purpose of blu-ray if there are different
VQ of the same movie, just because it's from a different country.
I mean it's high def! let all the movies be truly HIGH DEF!

[iceman]

The problem in this case is that we were most likely not sent a UK screener, so the UK version of Hellboy 2 was never reviewed. I (and probably most others) was not aware of this specific issue, but please feel welcome to post your own user review of Hellboy 2 UK and mention this issue. And also please don't rate the video a 1 (unless it truly deserves that), try to give it a fair rating despite your disappointment.

[Q?]

Originally Posted by iceman

The problem in this case is that we were most likely not sent a UK screener, so the UK version of Hellboy 2 was never reviewed. I (and probably most others) was not aware of this specific issue, but please feel welcome to post your own user review of Hellboy 2 UK and mention this issue. And also please don't rate the video a 1 (unless it truly deserves that), try to give it a fair rating despite your disappointment.

Thank you, I just believe it's important for everybody to know
that certain blu-ray releases have different VQ of the same movie, depending
on which country it's from. How can we be more aware of which one is the best? Blu-ray is high def! not compromise of quality!
I will try to write my own review later, and a fair one!

[wafi]

Originally Posted by QQQQ!

Thank you, I just believe it's important for everybody to know
that certain blu-ray releases have different VQ of the same movie, depending
on which country it's from. How can we be more aware of which one is the best? Blu-ray is high def! not compromise of quality!
I will try to write my own review later, and a fair one!

Wouldn't that mean the reviewer would have to go out and "procure" all the diff region versions of said movie? That seems to me like a lot of work.

[Q?]

Originally Posted by wafi

Wouldn't that mean the reviewer would have to go out and "procure" all the diff region versions of said movie? That seems to me like a lot of work.

One reviewer doesn't have to review all the version's.
Just two reviewers could with two different releases if they differ
in terms of codec or something like that.
And I know it's too much to ask when the review's already are free and
I don't wanna sound ungrateful, I really do appreciate everything thing about
blu-ray.com!
But a review almost becomes obsolete if they only review one
like hellboy II for example.
The UK residents would actually be "fooled" because the UK version
is inferior to the U.S. version.
Then a review can only benefit the U.S. residents because it's not true
for the UK residents, as it's encoded differently.
And some UK releases are better than U.S. releases.
Imagine if everybody could have a chance to buy the better version,
as a direct result of blu-ray.com's recommendation.
Now that could almost be revolutionary, because it would benefit us as consumers!
It's a win win situation for everybody.
I don't know how the system works and how the blu-ray staff get their
copy's.
Is it just a problematic situation with no solution?