Screenshot Comparisons 4K

[andreasy969]

I wasn't referring to you/Dredd btw.

After second thought, I also think I'll actually do it every time, because I won't have to explain myself for the nth time then and and it's actually a rather swift copy/paste job. (which is also why the whining is getting on my nerves though )

[Geoff D]

I didn't think you meant me, although I can't see where all this "whining" is though?

[pawel86ck]

andreasy969 - Your BD screenshots always looks very good. Are you using some particular madVR settings to make BD picture so good ?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them

#3 1000 nits, #4 4000 nits

LOVE these various nit level comparisons BTW. For what this is worth, on the 4000-nit mode I've got set up on my ZD9 I can see all the highlight detail in the 4000-nit cap above and yet the overall picture brightness is FAR brighter and nothing like the darkness of that cap, it's on a par with the 200-nit SDR shot. Wunderbar! He said, with great relish.

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I didn't think you meant me, although I can't see where all this "whining" is though?

It was somewhere else.

Originally Posted by pawel86ck

andreasy969 - Your BD screenshots always looks very good. Are you using some particular madVR settings to make BD picture so good ?

Not really.

I use MPC-BE, LAV Filters, madVR 0.92.14 and DXVA via my GTX1070.

This are my madVR HDR=>SDR settings with the current version (they/he (?) changed the settings again with .14).



I disabled "restore details in compressed highlights" a looong time a ago, because I didn't see any benefit, but noticed extremely minor tinkering once (which I guess might have been a result of the two (optional) filters coming with it).

Other than that, I just disabled all "tinkering" and I think I set "chroma upscaling" to Jinc manually.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

It was somewhere else.

You mean...this isn't your only hang-out?

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

LOVE these various nit level comparisons BTW. For what this is worth, on the 4000-nit mode I've got set up on my ZD9 I can see all the highlight detail in the 4000-nit cap above and yet the overall picture brightness is FAR brighter and nothing like the darkness of that cap, it's on a par with the 200-nit SDR shot. Wunderbar! He said, with great relish.

Thanks. Confirms what I can only assume (by changing the nits setting) what the image will look like on a proper display.

[Geoff D]

dude, I didn't call it "Fantastic HDR and Where to Find It" for nothing.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...4#post13626444

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

You mean...this isn't your only hang-out?

Look who's talking.


Does "Get Out" have this slight pinkish tone at times in HDR as well btw? Reminds me very much of "Kingsman" (which I think I was getting with the Panasonic as well, but I do find it very hard to compare such color differences without having a direct comparison).

Originally Posted by Geoff D

dude, I didn't call it "Fantastic HDR and Where to Find It" for nothing.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...4#post13626444

Fakastic HDR.

[pawel86ck]

Thanks Andreasy969 , it looks like I was using old madvr. Now I have downloaded the latest codec pack and I have also setup madvr with your suggestions (before I wasnt even using DXVA) and movies arnt as pixelated as before (and red color looks more vibrant).

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

Look who's talking.

Hah! This place is the only one for me now, I used to go on AVS quite a bit back in the day and HTF before it became a cult of personality, but nowadays I very rarely peek at either of them. Still check in on AVF semi-regularly but I can't be arsed even with that lately.

Does "Get Out" have this slight pinkish tone at times in HDR as well btw? Reminds me very much of "Kingsman" (which I think I was getting with the Panasonic as well, but I do find it very hard to compare such color differences without having a direct comparison).

Will have to check.

Fakastic HDR.

As in, fake? I'm confused, does the UHD show more highlight detail than the SDR or doesn't it? Because it certainly looks like the former in your 4000-nit caps. It's not my fault most people can't view the 4000-nit version without totally wrecking the APL. Activating smug mode.

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by pawel86ck

Thanks Andreasy969 , it looks like I was using old madvr. Now I have downloaded the latest codec pack and I have also setup madvr with your suggestions (before I wasnt even using DXVA) and movies arnt as pixelated as before (and red color looks more vibrant).

You're welcome. Maybe one more hint though:

Under "rendering->screenshots" I had to disable "use high quality scaling algos" some time ago, since it caused macro blocking in some caps.

I hadn't bothered with this setting before, because I have "encoded video size" seleted on the same page and thought said setting wouldn't do anything with the screenshots to begin with because of that ...

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Hah! This place is the only one for me now, I used to go on AVS quite a bit back in the day and HTF before it became a cult of personality, but nowadays I very rarely peek at either of them. Still check in on AVF semi-regularly but I can't be arsed even with that lately.

Me being German, I do consider myself more of a long time guest here - post count and registration date actually says it all.

Will have to check.

That would be great.

As in, fake? I'm confused, does the UHD show more highlight detail than the SDR or doesn't it? Because it certainly looks like the former in your 4000-nit caps. It's not my fault most people can't view the 4000-nit version without totally wrecking the APL. Activating smug mode.

Yeah, you're right, the 4000-nit version does indeed. But I think it's still more "fake" than Gatsby for ex.

[Pyoko]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

I did include a "not-future-proof" version this time, because people were getting on my nerves again, but I won't be doing this always.

Do you mean the screenshot comparison site? I could never quite figure that site out, most of the time when I've tried it the page would seemingly just stall after completing the upload, swallowing all the images and sending them straight into the abyss without returning a results page. I figure opening the images in tabs and switching between is almost as good (unless you want to zoom).

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

Do you mean the screenshot comparison site? I could never quite figure that site out, most of the time when I've tried it the page would seemingly just stall after completing the upload, swallowing all the images and sending them straight into the abyss without returning a results page. I figure opening the images in tabs and switching between is almost as good (unless you want to zoom).

Yes, that's what I meant. I never succeeded in uploading my pngs there (no error msg, but I guess there's a size limit), but it works for me with uploading the urls of my previously (elsewhere) uploaded pngs.

I still don't like the page though, because it will lose all comparisons sooner or later. They regularly flush the database or sth ...

Many people very much prefer mouse-over though, so I oblige. Switching tabs works pretty well for me as well though, but I have to admit that mouse-over works way better once you have to scroll twice otherwise (which is slightly annoying).

[Pyoko]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

Yes, that's what I meant. I never succeeded in uploading my pngs there (no error msg, but I guess there's a size limit), but it works for me with uploading the urls of my previously (elsewhere) uploaded pngs.

Oh yeah, now that you mention it that does sound vaguely familiar, thanks. Still a bit bothersome that you can't batch upload/add stuff, only copy-pasting links one by one.

[andreasy969]

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

I love this movie which results in plenty of caps - the rest of the Potters won't be that extensive. (I also spent too much time on this today, so there will be a break)

If you find any mistake with screenshotcomparison.com you can keep it.

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/114081

Attention: Please note that starting with Azkaban BD comes first now! (works better in case of additional UHD caps and I also prefer mouse-over (== second) to be the UHD).

BD (upscaled) left, UHD-BD (madVR/SDR/200 nits) right

Disclaimer as to why the UHD-BD images may appear to be too dim:

[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 color bit depth has been compressed as well). The UHD-BD shots are therefore not an accurate representation of the original HDR image - dynamic range, colors (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, 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:
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=589

odd mastering error imo - looks as if a filter has been applied only to the left part of the image which affects the whole duration of this Harry shot (I noticed it before looking at the caps):
































#3 1000 nits


#3 1000 nits
















#3 1000 nits


#3 1000 nits, #4 2000 nits

[andreasy969]

Originally Posted by Pyoko

Still a bit bothersome that you can't batch upload/add stuff, only copy-pasting links one by one.

Tell me about it. But I can be rather determined.

[Geoff D]

I loved how Azkaban's HDR pass alleviates the black crush of the Blu-ray, mentioned it previously: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...3#post14533633

(Sorry guys, I know you must be getting annoyed with me chiming in and saying "look how right I was, here's a link!" when x movie's caps appear, but I just can't help it.)

[Jim Collins]

Originally Posted by andreasy969

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

[Show spoiler]
I love this movie which results in plenty of caps - the rest of the Potters won't be that extensive. (I also spent too much time on this today, so there will be a break)

If you find any mistake with screenshotcomparison.com you can keep it.

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/114081

Attention: Please note that starting with Azkaban BD comes first now! (works better in case of additional UHD caps and I also prefer mouse-over (== second) to be the UHD).

BD (upscaled) left, UHD-BD (madVR/SDR/200 nits) right

Disclaimer as to why the UHD-BD images may appear to be too dim:

[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 color bit depth has been compressed as well). The UHD-BD shots are therefore not an accurate representation of the original HDR image - dynamic range, colors (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, 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:
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=589

odd mastering error imo - looks as if a filter has been applied only to the left part of the image which affects the whole duration of this Harry shot (I noticed it before looking at the caps):
































#3 1000 nits


#3 1000 nits
















#3 1000 nits


#3 1000 nits, #4 2000 nits

Thank You!
It's definitely an upgrade over the BD, but doesn't it look too dark?