Writings > DVD Image Comparisons > Hannibal

Hannibal

R2 2-disc edition (UK) - Columbia Tristar
vs. Region 2 Superbit (UK) - Columbia Tristar

Details

Bit Rate

Original

Superbit

Introduction

Due to the nitty-gritty nature of this comparison, I thought I'd do something a little different this time round and take you through each image step by step, commenting specifically on its attributes.

Superbit titles, in Columbia Tristar's own words, taken from their web site,

utilize a high bit rate digital transfer process which optimizes video quality while offering a choice of both DTS and 5.1 Dolby Digital audio. Superbit™ DVDs are encoded at about double their normal bit rate while maintaining full compatibility with the DVD-Video format. The result is picture quality that provides outstanding detail and is the closest to the original master available on DVD to date. Superbit™ DVDs play on current players and needs no additional DVD equipment.

For a long time, I avoided the Superbit line, considering it to be nothing more than a gimmick designed to charge customers premium prices for bare-bones discs. I did end up picking up two titles carrying the Superbit logo, Panic Room (R1 USA) and Léon: The Professional (R1 USA Deluxe Edition), neither of which could be considered "true" Superbit releases. The former was merely a disc featuring only a teaser trailer as a bonus features, with the Superbit logo slapped on to it when the extras that were in production were not completed in time for its release, while the Léon Deluxe Edition features a transfer so riddled with edge enhancement, filtering, noise reduction and interference that the Superbit tag becomes a moot point anyway.

Recently, however, I decided to find out for myself whether or not there was any truth in Columbia's claims of offering "the ultimate in home entertainment". To that end, I picked up a copy of Hannibal, a title I originally owned in its "standard" 2-disc edition variant. Hannibal, like a number of Universal titles, was distributed in certain territories by Columbia as part of a deal they held with Universal in the early 2000s, and thus is not available as a Superbit title in North America. Given that the only extra on the first disc of the original release was a measly audio commentary, this title already had a lot of space available to it, and already featured an excellent transfer marred only by some edge enhancement, so I was curious to see what improvements, if any, could be squeezed out of it for the Superbit release.

(As it happens, the implication that only the movie is included on a Superbit disc, maximising the available space, is slightly bogus. In addition to the film, the following can be found: the Columbia Tristar animated logo, the Superbit animated logo, a copyright warning, a Dolby Digital animated logo, a DTS animated logo.)

Now, on to disc capacity. The Superbit release uses 7.36 GB of the 9 GB dual layer disc. Given that 8 GB is generally considered to be the safe operational limit for DVDs, Columbia cannot claim to be using the disc to its full capacity. The average bit rate is 7.87 Mbit/sec, which includes a Dolby Digital 5.1 track at 448 Kbit/sec and a DTS 5.1 track at 768 Kbit/sec. The average bit rate of the image, therefore, can be calculated as 6.68 Mbit/sec.

Now, on to the original release. Disc 1 uses 7.16 GB of the 9 GB dual layer disc - 0.2 GB less than the Superbit. The average bit rate is 7.55 Mbit/sec, which includes a Dolby Digital 5.1 track at 384 Kbit/sec, a DTS 5.1 track at 768 Kbit/sec and a Dolby Surround 2.0 audio commentary track at 192 Kbit/sec. The average bit rate of the image, therefore, is 6.24 Mbps.

This means that the Superbit has a 6.68% increase in bit rate alotted to the transfer compared with its "normal" variant. "Superbit™ DVDs are encoded at about double their normal bit rate," says Columbia. Really?

Screen Captures

Example 1

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: The difference here is mostly in the distribution of the compression blocks. The difference is noticeable at this level of enlargement, but I'm not convinced that it would constitute a big deal at normal viewing distance. Due to the somewhat random nature of the texture applied to the text, it's hard to determine which one is the more accurate of the two, but I'd hazard a guess that it's the Superbit, which seems to have slightly more detail.

Example 2

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: There is a clear reduction in the level of horizontal edge enhancement on the Superbit in this shot. Both versions do exhibit ringing to some extent, but it is much more pronounced in the original release, and the letters seem to be better defined overall on the Superbit. Ironically, the Superbit actually exhibits more compression artefacts - see the two Ns especially.

Example 3

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: Once again, clearly less edge enhancement on the Superbit. Notice also how the tree on the far left is better defined.

Example 4

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: The difference here is quite subtle, but look at the M on the drink can nearest the camera, and the watch strap (top right).

Example 5

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: Notice the lessening of the halo on the far right where Julianne Moore's face connects with the background. Look also at the overall grain texture, which is better defined on the Superbit.

Example 6

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: Notice the generally "tighter" appearance of the hair, particularly the parting in the middle of his head.

Example 7

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: There is a definite difference here, particularly in the pigeons, which are much more tightly defined on the Superbit. The difference in detail in this shot seems more pronounced than in many of the others, so I suspect that, on the regular release, it was filtered more than normal due to the level of fine detail present in it.

Example 8

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: Another example of the Superbit reducing edge enhancement levels but at the same time introducing more compression artefacts. Look at the mosquito noise around the handwriting on the Superbit.

Example 9

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: The differences here are minor, but once again notice the reduction in horizontal edge enhancement, particularly to the left of the statue.

Example 10

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: On the original, this is probably the shot that suffers from the worst edge enhancement in the entire film. This has been reduced somewhat for the Superbit, but it's still above my threshold of acceptability. Also notice the increased level of blocking in the window frames on the Superbit.

Example 11

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: Again, a generally tighter appearance to the image, particularly on the grille in front of Anthony Hopkins' mouth and his (actually our) right eye.

Example 12

Mouse over to switch between versions (300% enlargement):
Original | Superbit

Above: This final shot has had its brightness and contrast levels increased by 30% as a means of demonstrating the improvement to the fine grain structure on the Superbit DVD. Notice that it's generally more uniform and that the individual particles are more clearly defined.

Conclusion

So, the the big question is: is it worth it? Ultimately, it depends entirely on the quality and size of your display, and how picky you are. The differences are largely miniscule, and creating 300% magnifications of the image was the only way for me to make the comparisons meaningful. In that regard, it should be clear that the Superbit release of Hannibal does not constitute the remarkable improvement in image quality that Columbia's press materials would have you believe exists.

Part of the issue, I suppose, is that, as I mentioned before, the standard edition of Hannibal was already a very nice-looking DVD. A considerable number of the other Superbits were titles that had previously received less than stellar releases, in which case the improvements would probably be more distinctive. (That, however, does not automatically mean that the Superbits are especially good, just that the standard releases were especially bad.) What Hannibal shows, though, is that Superbits do not rely on some sort of magical process to make the image quality look better than that of any other DVD - no, they are simply normal standard definition DVDs with a reasonable bit rate and generally low levels of filtering and edge enhancement. I suspect that most home theatre enthusiasts would know this already, but I have spoken to many people who are under the impression that Superbits are actually a special type of DVD that has more lines of resolution than the regular kind!

What does annoy me, though, is that this transfer could easily have been used for the normal release, while still keeping the disc capacity within reasonable functioning limits. The removal of the audio commentary (and animated menus, if you're deranged enough to like that sort of thing!) was simply not necessary in order to gain this minimal increase in quality.

Is Superbit, therefore, a scam? In this case, I'd say it looks pretty damn like it. Columbia have effectively created a false division that has no actual reason to exist. The way they tell it, optimal picture quality and extras cannot coexist. This is no reason for this. None at all.

Summary