Hercules and Hunchback
- thelittleursula
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1235
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:15 am
- Location: Europe
Could you post these in 2 separate pictures, without resizing them or anything?Sicoe6256 wrote:A friend of mine downloaded an HD version of The Hunchback from iTunes, and it features a new digital restoration. Here is a comparison between that version (on the right) and the DVD version from 2002 (on the left).
![]()
Not bad...not bad at all
The Hunchback will be released on Blu-ray in Germany and other parts of Europe on March 7, 2013.
http://www.amazon.de/Gl%C3%B6ckner-Notr ... 553&sr=1-4
- The_Iceflash
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1809
- Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 7:56 am
- Location: USA
I don't think the current iTunes transfer is going to be what ends up on the Blu-ray for a couple of reasons:
1) The new transfer for the BD's would not be available on iTunes this soon before release.
2) No Disney Blu-ray has worse resolution than the DVD. The resolution on the iTunes screenshot is by far worse than the DVD. That tells me either iTunes is using a questionable source or that their claims of a video being HD is false. That DVD screenshot looks like it came from an HD transfer when put side by side next to that one. Disney's Blu-rays may not always be as great as we want them to be but none of them look worse than the DVD that came before it. I would go as far as to say that all of them look better to varying degrees.
1) The new transfer for the BD's would not be available on iTunes this soon before release.
2) No Disney Blu-ray has worse resolution than the DVD. The resolution on the iTunes screenshot is by far worse than the DVD. That tells me either iTunes is using a questionable source or that their claims of a video being HD is false. That DVD screenshot looks like it came from an HD transfer when put side by side next to that one. Disney's Blu-rays may not always be as great as we want them to be but none of them look worse than the DVD that came before it. I would go as far as to say that all of them look better to varying degrees.
The Rescuers Down Under BR still beats the previous DVD though. This iTunes transfer doesn't do that in regards to the DVD. That's why this is questionable.DC Fan wrote:Ouch!
Doesn´t look that much different than the Rescuers Down Under BR transfer.
Hope Disney DOES restore this one.
The second screenshot does not have worse resolution than the first. The problem is that whoever created the comparison shrank the HD version to put it on the same level as the SD version. Huge mistake that has completely messed up the lines and produced an effect similar to aliasing (it's not, but it looks similar).The_Iceflash wrote:I don't think the current iTunes transfer is going to be what ends up on the Blu-ray for a couple of reasons:
1) The new transfer for the BD's would not be available on iTunes this soon before release.
2) No Disney Blu-ray has worse resolution than the DVD. The resolution on the iTunes screenshot is by far worse than the DVD. That tells me either iTunes is using a questionable source or that their claims of a video being HD is false. That DVD screenshot looks like it came from an HD transfer when put side by side next to that one. Disney's Blu-rays may not always be as great as we want them to be but none of them look worse than the DVD that came before it. I would go as far as to say that all of them look better to varying degrees.
That's why I asked for the 1:1 pixel image some posts above.
- The_Iceflash
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1809
- Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 7:56 am
- Location: USA
Yes, indeed. I realized this when I enlarged the linked photo. It really does give the wrong impression about its restoration and makes it hard to compare them accurately.Lnds500 wrote:The second screenshot does not have worse resolution than the first. The problem is that whoever created the comparison shrank the HD version to put it on the same level as the SD version. Huge mistake that has completely messed up the lines and produced an effect similar to aliasing (it's not, but it looks similar).The_Iceflash wrote:I don't think the current iTunes transfer is going to be what ends up on the Blu-ray for a couple of reasons:
1) The new transfer for the BD's would not be available on iTunes this soon before release.
2) No Disney Blu-ray has worse resolution than the DVD. The resolution on the iTunes screenshot is by far worse than the DVD. That tells me either iTunes is using a questionable source or that their claims of a video being HD is false. That DVD screenshot looks like it came from an HD transfer when put side by side next to that one. Disney's Blu-rays may not always be as great as we want them to be but none of them look worse than the DVD that came before it. I would go as far as to say that all of them look better to varying degrees.
That's why I asked for the 1:1 pixel image some posts above.
-
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 138
- Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 7:56 pm
- Location: Torrance , Ca USA
Since the topic is void of the info you are discussing, it would be nice to inform us what the hell you are talking aboutMarce82 wrote:I can't believe no one started a new thread or commented on this one already today.... GIVEN THE ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT HUNCHBACK!!!
Tho I smell an edition lacking in bonus features...
And who added the stupid (and badly drawn) gargoyles to the cover?!?!?!?

EDIT
first page



While I do of course wish they would have left the gargoyles off, it is still one of the nicer covers that Disney has come out with recently.
My question is... why is the title only named once, when all the other 2 movie collections have put both titles on there? I wish this was the way they'd do it normally - all these two movie collections would look so much nicer if they didn't put both titles on there.
My question is... why is the title only named once, when all the other 2 movie collections have put both titles on there? I wish this was the way they'd do it normally - all these two movie collections would look so much nicer if they didn't put both titles on there.
- DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3737
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
- Gender: Male
- Cordy_Biddle
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1597
- Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 2:02 am
- Location: the balcony of the Bijou...
- Sotiris
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 21073
- Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Fantasyland
You just said exactly what I was about to say.SWillie! wrote:While I do of course wish they would have left the gargoyles off, it is still one of the nicer covers that Disney has come out with recently.
My question is... why is the title only named once, when all the other 2 movie collections have put both titles on there? I wish this was the way they'd do it normally - all these two movie collections would look so much nicer if they didn't put both titles on there.

- jpanimation
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1841
- Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:00 am
The other movies also clip art characters from the second movie over the original cover art. Brother Bear's is just the DVD cover art with some added clip art for the sequel. It's obnoxious.SWillie! wrote:My question is... why is the title only named once, when all the other 2 movie collections have put both titles on there? I wish this was the way they'd do it normally - all these two movie collections would look so much nicer if they didn't put both titles on there.
