Blu-Ray DVD Comparison

[waheed]

After a lengthy Google search without success, can any point out where I can download a short video clip (about 5 minutes) that illustrates the comparison between Blu-Ray and DVD.

Basically, what I'm looking for is a side by side comparison (split screen mode) where one half of the video is playing is Blu-Ray and other half in standard DVD.

The video clip can be anything, a movie clip, trailer etc...

Thanks.

[gadgetguy]

The problem with that is that the two sources are different resolutions, so in order to splt screen them either one or the other has to be resized or the SD side has to be framed to HD resolution. I've only ever seen comparison footage in the stores hawking HDTV or Blu-Ray and both sides looked like the same size so one of them was resized, most likely SD enlarged to make it look even worse compared to HD. IMO this voids the comparison.

[jagabo]

Seeing them the same size doesn't void the comparison. When you watch on TV they will be displayed the same size.

[ricoman]

You will also need a video card and monitor capable of viewing HD content.
And really, the difference might not be that obvious on a 19"-22" monitor, you should really be seeing it on a 40" or bigger screen which would also require a BD player. Go to your local electronics store with a standard dvd and ask the salesman to play it. Most stores like BB have a BD player hooked up to a display and if you act like you're interested in buying a player, they'll be happy to demo it. But for a real comparison, you will need to have the same movie in standard and Bluray, because all bluray discs are not created equally. I have seen some that looked spectacular and others that did not look any better than an upconverted standard DVD.

[jagabo]

This size thing depends on how far away you sit from the display. At two feet away from a 24" 1920x1200 monitor the difference between DVD and Blu-ray will be obvious. At 10 feet it you may not be able to see much difference. At 1 mile you won't even be able to tell if the monitor is off or on.

A rough guide of distance vs size vs resolution:
http://www.carltonbale.com/2006/11/1080p-does-matter/
http://www.besthdtvscreen.com/guides/hdtv-screen-size-viewing-distance

[ricoman]

At 1 mile you won't even be able to tell if the monitor is off or on.

That's being a little ridiculous, isn't it? I didn't say you couldn't tell the difference, I said: "the difference might not be that obvious on a 19"-22" monitor." Of course, distance makes a difference. I was giving the OP practical options to really see the difference. But, I guess some people just like to turn everything into an argument.

[gadgetguy]

OK you missed my point, but I did a poor job of explaining it. I'll try again.
What I'm saying is that all of the split screen comparisons I've seen were meant to sell HD. Because of their motives, I don't believe they do the upconversion to make the SD look as good as it can. This voids the comparison. If you have to make your "competition" look worse so that you can look better, it's not a valid comparison.

[videopoo]

Here's a good comparison:

http://vodpod.com/watch/910078-blu-ray-vs-standard-dvd

[ricoman]

I agree with you gadgetguy. I've never seen a split screen comparison, so I don't know how you would even do that.
Videopoo: pretty good!

[Megahurts]

I have a split screen clip. Its 45MB.

Where is the best place to upload it?

[guns1inger]

A straight split-screen comparison has to be done one of two ways. You either downsize the Bluray footage, in which case you lose whatever benefits Bluray has, or your upscale the DVD footage, in which case the quality is dependent on the upscaling method used. Either way it is meaningless. If you do a simple bicubic upsize you will get a lower quality than if you use super resolution techniques to upscale.

And all of this is meaningless because the end viewer's experience is also determined by the quality of the hardware upscaler being used in either the TV or the player, depending.

The only valid comparison is to put two televisions of the same make and model, configured and calibrated to the same quality, connected to the same players, and to playback the Bluray version of a movie side by side with the DVD version of the same movie. Then you get apples and apples.

Anything else is a wank and a waste of time.

Every comparison video I have seen has been done as a propoganda piece for Bluray vendors, and the DVD footage always looks like it came off youtube. The irony is that it makes people look at the TV and ask why they would want a TV that makes their DVD collection look so bad. It is also patently dishonest because I know from experience that even mid-range TVs upscale DVDs better than a simple split-screen comparison demonstrates.

[ricoman]

Just my observation for what it's worth: I have a Toshiba HD player and an LG dual (HD/BD) player as well as an OPPO upconverter. I also have a 50" Sony HDTV & a 32" Olevia 720p HDTV, so I have pretty good experience to judge from though I don't claim to be an expert.
Bluray discs vary in PQ, often dramatically. A poor one is no better than a good upconverted standard dvd. A very good bluray disc is way better than the best upconverted dvd, no comparison. Sadly, there are quite a few lousy BD discs out there, in particular, older movies that have been "remastered for bluray." IMHO, if you can afford a BD player, go for it, you won't be disappointed. Watching Planet Earth in bluray on a 50" display is awesome (I mean that in the traditional sense of that overused word - fills me with awe, not as in "awesome dude").
If you can't afford it, don't sweat it, wait 'til you can. Most movies I watch are upconverted dvd's and they look pretty good too. I seldom even think about the difference when I'm into a good movie.
I agree with gunslinger, you're not really going to get a valid comparison on a split screen. That's why I said to take a dvd to the electronics store.

[Megahurts]

The 2 clips were made from a 1920x1080 bluray file. The right side was cropped to 960x1080 to fit the screeen.
The left side was resized from 1920x1080 to 720x480 and resized backed to 1920x1080 and then cropped.
Reencoded to DivxHD so there might be a slight loss.

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=82aa5b0046f34afc5a3d773badf21430e04e75f6e8ebb871

[guns1inger]

The 2 clips were made from a 1920x1080 bluray file. The right side was cropped to 960x1080 to fit the screeen.
The left side was resized from 1920x1080 to 720x480 and resized backed to 1920x1080 and then cropped.
Reencoded to DivxHD so there might be a slight loss.

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=82aa5b0046f34afc5a3d773badf21430e04e75f6e8ebb871

Which proves what, exactly ?

All this compares is how good your resizing is or isn't.

[lordsmurf]

Anything else is a wank and a waste of time.

There's something so charming about British/Aussie slang.
Brilliant summation of the comparisons!

[jagabo]

If you do a simple bicubic upsize you will get a lower quality than if you use super resolution techniques to upscale.

I'm not aware of any DVD player or HDTV that uses super resolution techniques.

[guns1inger]

When talking about upscaling DVD footage on a PC to create a split-screen comparison, Super Resolution is an available method.

It also needs to be understood that there are many different upscalers available on the market today, from cheap and nasty to very good quality, either built into the TV or the player, and the difference the quality of upscaler makes is not to be underestimated either. Which again renders a simple split screen video clip comparison worthless.

If you want to create a valid clip, put a HD camera on a tripod in front of an HD TV with a Bluray player. PLay the Bluray and record with the camera. Repeat with the DVD version of the same film. Now you can do a split screen comparison with the recorded footage because you have a valid basis to compare the sources.

[jagabo]

There is no way you could get 1:1 registration of the 1920x1080 image on the display to the 1920x1080 pixels in the camera CCD. So that would not work as a comparison.

The videos that Megahurts posted appear to have used a bilinear resize filter so are fuzzier than can be achieved with sharper filters. Still, upscaled DVD is never going to look as good as decent HD on a 1080p display. And the sample clips give some indication of the differences you will see.

[vhelp]

From a non-professional point of view..

All the split screen demos I've seen (at BB) are at best, general, and do not really give a true comparison. Also, they all (SD dvd) seem too blury or fuzzy:

1. you can't really give a true and accurate SD DVD -~- Blu-ray "comparison" because of the resolution size difference.
i.e., how can you are compare a [HD 1920x1080 to a SD 720x480] and on the same size tv screen ? Not exactly easy.

2. then, you have to factor in the size of the intended display device.

3. and to factor in the upsampling and upsizing algorithms in the tv set, and quite possible player device, too.

4. also, how do you display the video SD vs. BR, and what resolution for each..do you BR:1920x1080 and SD:720x480, or do you BR:1920x1080 and SD:upscale_720x480->1920x1080 for instance.

5. the source content, SD DVD vs. BR. That is, the original processed to finished bluray media vs. (the same for) SD dvd. Same movie title, but different processing: plant rules and regulations and processing profiles etc., to finished mpeg-2 video. Some contents are manufactured in other countries and then sent to other countries, etc. For example, in one of my Star Trek TNG discs, it was processed in Mexico. So, you have different rules and well as encoding profiles and techniques, etc..all this effect finished quality. So, while some titles may look good comming from Mexico, the same (comming from USA) may look horible. That's just a crude example, but true in all parts of the (video processing) world.

6. if you are going to compare SD to BR, and downscaling to SD is used, and vise-versa, then that voids the comparion because you are trying to compare the two *AT* there suposed original format: 720x480 vs. 1920x1080

7. you also have to consider each player/tv set's image processor. They will undoutbly sway each format as they taint the video's charactoristics during play.

8. comparing home-video-made content, then that, too is void because you are comparing (potentially) consumer level format to commercial standardized specs. And where the two do differ, is in the craftmenship/technique of the level of control of the video equipment, etc: amature consumer vs. hollywood skilled people, etc. Besides, the whole point of the comparison was with "commercial" content.

But, even when you're finished digesting all the above, and then some, you may still want to consider the comparison anyways. And with that in mind:

9. how about this, play both, at their native resolution, then capture (rip) their contents, edit a small x,y grid section from each (showing the same scene, etc) and then (in some timeline) overlay the two image in a side-by-side in the center (w/ a Vertical line in the middle) [SD] | [BR] as both left/right pans are playing (obviously the SD is upscaled) but then you would have a near close-match comparison, inside a PiP (picture in picture) presentation. I could see {9} being do-able to some degree but with a little bias. The one on the left, SD, we encode at the highest bitrate allowable for SD format, usually 9kbts, and the one on the right, BR, at HD specs, (I think) at 20kbts. I've never actaully measured a bluray title's bitrate, so I don't know its "rate" nor if VBR or CBR encoded, etc.

-vhelp 5076