Individual Entry


DVD image comparison: The Devil’s Rejects (SD vs. HD)


For my first ever DVD to Blu-ray comparison, I’ve decided to go with a tricky title - The Devil’s Rejects. This is an interesting comparison for many reasons, not least because, despite being a recent film, it’s not a slick, clean-looking affair from which perfection can reasonably be expected from an HD release. Shot on 16mm film with a lot of hand-held photography, it was always going to be tough to compress, and to be fair the DVD doesn’t look too bad, although it certainly plays havoc with the grain. For the Blu-ray release, meanwhile, Lions Gate used the aged MPEG2 codec (the same codec used for standard definition DVD) combined with a single layer BD25 disc, and this, unfortunately, results in some pretty severe compression artefacts. Generally, it’s watchable when in motion, but on a few occasions it slips up rather badly, as can be seen in Example 2, which is the final frame of the shot in question. As you can see, the entire frame looks like a ridiculously over-compressed JPEG, and although this is very much a worst case scenario, it does demonstrate the dangers of combining an aged codec, a lack of disc space and and problematic material.

I’m sure a handful of people will take one look at these screen captures and decide that the DVD version actually looks better due to the decreased grain, but make no mistake, the Blu-ray version shows considerably more detail and is a far more faithful to its source materials, regardless of the problems with compression.

Check out the comparison here!

Posted: Friday, October 05, 2007 at 9:24 PM | Comments: 3
Categories: Blu-ray | Cinema | DVD | Technology



Don't forget to change "HD DVD" to "Blu-ray" on your comparison. And yes, the 2nd cap is really really awful

Posted by: aw, October 6, 2007 3:35 AM


One change I'd consider in your comparison format - how about adding a mouse-over functionality to the grabs themselves as well as the text?

Default to SD, mouse-over reveals HD.

This would help out with differing browser display sizes, and make it easier to concentrate on the actual comparisons, without having to 'aim' so precisely each time.

Just a thought.


Posted by: Jeffrey Allen Rydell, October 6, 2007 5:47 AM



Oopsie, thanks for that.


Yeah, you’re the second person to point this out to me, and it’s something I should have looked into by now. I’ll do a little work on the code later today when I get the chance.

Posted by: Whiggles, October 6, 2007 7:32 AM

Comments on this entry and all entries up to and including June 30th 2009 have been closed. The discussion continues on the new Land of Whimsy blog:


Back to...