Fellowship of the Ring - HD vs DVD

Joined
11 Mar 2004
Messages
3,454
http://www.cornbread.org/FOTRCompare/index.html (Cursur over the images to see the diffrence.)

Sorry i cant link the images so your gona have to go to the site. Really kinda cool.
Being amazed at how fantastic the HD transfer of Fellowship of the Ring looked, I decided to compare it to the transfer on the DVD. Now, the DVD transfer is among the best you can find on DVD, so this really is comparing the respective creams of the crops.

I used WinDVD 6 to capture files from the DVD, and Elecard Mpeg2 player to capture from the HD stream. Both were captured directly to BMP files and converted to JPG at very high quality so there should be almost no artifacting introduced (sorry, the BMP files were too large to use).

I used Photoshop to bicubically resample the DVD source images from 852x480 to match the 1920x1080 of the HD images. This page features the HD image sampled down to the DVD's resolution of 852x480. Surprisingly, even at DVD-resolution the HD source features more detail.

Mouseover any of the images here to see the HD downsample. You can see the full-size comparisons by clicking on the images on this page. The difference is pretty amazing.

I tried to capture identical frames on both sources, but I missed by a frame or two on some of these.
 
It really brings out the minute details such as hair. Although the HD images seem darker.

In the end only the hardcore fans will really care.
 
HD pictures are slightly clearer but way too dull and dark,I'd have to stick with the originals
 
the HD ones look sooo much better, dunno where this dull and dark comes from. Look great
 
The Balrog looks pretty stunning though..
 
The picture is a different hue/shade/brightness BUT better detail.

The colors actually look nicer to me in some shots, not quite as over-bright.

However the shots are slightly off in sequence for quite a few of them, so keep that in mind.

All-in-all, I wouldn't mind something like this. All I would need is a gigantic tele to watch it on.
 
I'm just happy to have a tv,the little telly in here is a cute black and white one :D
 
That is simply amazing picture. Although I'm not overly surprised, as I have a HDTV on my desk at work and get to watch anything sports related in Hi Def all the time. Watching the NCAAB tournament lately has been a real treat :)

I want one really bad for home, just have to stay focused and save for the things that matter atm, like wedding and house.

I also noticed some of the HD pics were a bit darker and out of sequence. They started off better but seemed to get worse towards the end.
 
Wow nice job on the duplicity of these technologies.

DVD vs HD
Although technically a different field of application, the science of Film based Photography plays a roll here, although the differences can be linked to limitations in each ones respective technologies.

A more complete picture takes into account saturation.
The images used on these pages are the result of technically limited saturation processes.. The image on top is more fully saturated, and the one on the bottom is less saturated.
More saturated colors are also considered more bold and tied to emotions, while unsaturated ones are softer and less striking.
Saturation, is the amount of gray in a particular color.

A color with more gray is considered less saturated, while a bright color, one with very little gray in it, is considered highly saturated. The amount of saturation does not affect the basic hue of a color and it also is unrelated to the value (amount of light or darkness in a color.) For example, if we take away the colors in an image, the tonal values will remain. However, taking away the colors themselves will make the image completely unsaturated. A more saturated color is also called a more 'pure' color because it is undisturbed by gray.

Any way that’s my take on the issue
 
Last edited:
It looks nice...when you look at the DVD version, it seems like an out-of-focus version of the HD :D
 
no offence to the guy who did the comparison, but he doesn't know very much. i dont recall dvd res going any higher than 720x576, where'd he get a 852x480? im thinking its an mpeg4 encode he's comparing it to. its also stupid to capture frames with different software which use different decoders which means different colour-brightness-saturation levels, not to mention deinterlacing. png wouldve been better than jpg, especially as he was contemplating using bmp. also i'm not so sure he took into account that its the I frames that must be compared.

I tried to capture identical frames on both sources, but I missed by a frame or two on some of these
lol :D

not trying to be mean though, just tellin it like it is. for some real sd vs hdtv comparisons, search forums like http://dtvforum.info :)
 
Just remember no matter how good the quality of the picture,no matter how much you pay for a tv the majority of programmes are still crap childish rubbish :laugh:
 
Evil Marge said:
Just remember no matter how good the quality of the picture,no matter how much you pay for a tv the majority of programmes are still crap childish rubbish :laugh:
Very true :D
 
HD is awesome, wonder what this would look like on HD DVD or Blu-ray when available.... hmmmm
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest profile posts

Also Hi EP and people. I found this place again while looking through a oooollllllldddd backup. I have filled over 10TB and was looking at my collection of antiques. Any bids on the 500Mhz Win 95 fix?
Any of the SP crew still out there?
Xie wrote on Electronic Punk's profile.
Impressed you have kept this alive this long EP! So many sites have come and gone. :(

Just did some crude math and I apparently joined almost 18yrs ago, how is that possible???
hello peeps... is been some time since i last came here.
Electronic Punk wrote on Sazar's profile.
Rest in peace my friend, been trying to find you and finally did in the worst way imaginable.

Forum statistics

Threads
62,015
Messages
673,494
Members
5,621
Latest member
naeemsafi
Back