Obviously in terms of sheer picture quality, blu ray reigns supreme, but are there any instances where you actually preferred the dvd? probably not the best way to compare but pic related is the dvd and blu ray versions of a still from Satyricon and the top just seems so much more aesthetically pleasing, to me at least.
>>62737396
There are some Blurays that fucked the original movies, but adding digital effects or coloring.
Commando and Gangs of New York are just the ones I remember, but I'm sure there are much more.
Well they fucked up with the colors.
![inland-empire-13-e1415493020831[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/fZVJJdi.jpg "inland-empire-13-e1415493020831[1].png")
>>62737396
Inland Empire was actually recorded in Standard Definition as opposed to High Definition so the Blu Ray version looks awkwardly expanded, you see the same thing when you try to watch some HD movies in 4k resolution
>>62737509
>>62737509
>There are some Blurays that fucked the original movies, but adding digital effects or coloring.
LOTR fellowship of the ring theatrical had a blue tint that messed it up. still better than the dvd i think
>>62737396
pretty sure the source was still 1080p.
regardless, the master sources will have plenty of enough detail to warrant a full on remaster for blu ray.
also this thread is fucking retarded. dvd vs bluray? like seriously?
the literal only difference would be some major changes on color timing, and maybe some really poorly done transfers that were done on blu. and the only instances I know of where the SD version trumps HD are some old laserdisc releases, which may have used a better master then whatever shit the studio did to fuck up a blu ray transfer (and trust me, to fuck up a blu ray transfer so bad that the laserdisc/dvd looks 'better' is almost impossible)
the fact is, higher bitrates that the larger format that blu ray offers just makes for better looking images. thats a fact. 99.99% of all blu rays are a huge improvement over the dvd.
try and name me some cases otherwise, i'd love to hear.
>>62737752
>laserdisc
that's how you hit a nostalgia vein. what's the most recent mainstream film to be released on laserdisc? and doesn't china/hong kong still produce them by the dozen or is that era long gone
![JWbMvkP7Q-8MnwEzjb04mdeqIeA_QANL-ZAuGsKVJhMrKuU7Rj8JaURKkC-DUAi2CW0=w300[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/RTZf0lw.png "JWbMvkP7Q-8MnwEzjb04mdeqIeA_QANL-ZAuGsKVJhMrKuU7Rj8JaURKkC-DUAi2CW0=w300[1].png")
>>62737596
>had a blue tint that messed it up
THAT FUCKING BLUE TINT RUINED HUNDREDS OF OTHERWISE GOOD MOVIES FROM 2005 ONWARDS, I CAN'T WAIT UNTIL 4K REMASTERING BECOMES THE NORM AND STARTS FIXING THIS SHIT
YES I MAD
Yeah, Predator. >removing the grain and digitally smoothing everything out. Jesus Christ.
>>62737396
The Goodfellas DVD and Blu are pretty much the same thing.
Seriously, the bitrate's almost exactly the same.
>>62737872
never have i seen anyone so terribly misinformed as to how movies are mastered.
read a fucking book, please
i always get the 1080p remux from my private tracker of choice. anything else pleb tier
>>62739963
Thank God I never owned a Blu-Ray player. I learned my lesson when HDDVD went down.
>>62737396
only when the best cut was only released on dvd like with The Warriors or they fucked up hardcore with the mastering.
