(2017-08-10, 05:21 PM)spoRv Wrote: Still love diff.pics ...

Now that looks interesting. The sparse design needs work, though. Large pictures would need a mouse grab-&-scroll (or horizontal / vertical sliders) to move the picture around. An independent control frame at the top would be needed for the click (or mouse-over) buttons to switch pictures regardless of picture position. Also, a preview option (or back-to-edit) (or scrap-&-re-do) to test it before creation would help to save site resources.

But how long would it last? 'Cause we have unlimited 's to throw around.  

I watched the 1st minutes of the ("Judgment" branded) GITS HDTV capture and it looks like it is only worthwhile as a possible color reference. With any movement, there is awful "de/re-interlacing" burned into the picture. I've seen this sort of thing before. Automatic PAL/NTSC 24fps/25fps/30fps "compensation", in a multiple de/re-interlaced broadcast, makes a mess of it. Usually there is no easy way to get rid of it without making invasive changes to the source (like with logo-removal, et al) ... if it can be fixed at all.



Here's the full-sized comparison with spoRv's favored screenshot-comparison replacement: https://diff.pics/BHpiHY71hSmh/1

(2017-08-11, 07:12 PM)BronzeTitan Wrote: I watched the 1st minutes of the ("Judgment" branded) GITS HDTV capture and it looks like it is only worthwhile as a possible color reference. With any movement, there is awful "de/re-interlacing" burned into the picture. I've seen this sort of thing before. Automatic PAL/NTSC 24fps/25fps/30fps "compensation", in a multiple de/re-interlaced broadcast, makes a mess of it. Usually there is no easy way to get rid of it without making invasive changes to the source (like with logo-removal, et al) ... if it can be fixed at all.

Edit:
Those frames look identical in 720p which was IVTC'd by someone else. Of course that's from a frame rate change or an intentional motion blur.
Do we know those frames don't look like that on the Bu-ray?

While I'm at it, I'm going to recant here. The 1080p has more artifacts (ESPECIALLY interlacing) than the 720p from PSNR...
BUT, the 720p has some dropped frames, more noise reduction, which removes most of the grain with the artifacts, and edge enhancement.
As a result, the 720p seems cleaner, sharper and higher resolution than the 1080, but the 1080 is superior overall.

Screenshots show the strengths and weaknesses of each release. The 720p source is 1280x720. It is simple resized to 1920x1040 for comparison.

The first set shows how fine detail holds up. I'm still not convinced GitS has 1080p worth of detail period.
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparis.../picture:0

The second set shows the higher amount of artifacts, especially combing, in the 1080p version.
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparis.../picture:1

It seems that the 720 is just the 1080 processed; *maybe* someone could filter it better.

(2017-08-12, 06:08 AM)Doctor M Wrote: Do we know those frames don't look like that on the Bu-ray?

From the Blu-ray.com user-reviews section of Ghost In The Shell 2.0 :

Blu-ray.com Wrote:"The worst part of this release is the "bonus" [1080i - see main review] copy of the original theatrical version included as an extra. It looks like garbage. Seriously, my old DVD looks better than this. The picture is lousy and clearly interlaced, almost as though they threw it on there as an afterthought. I can't even watch it, it's so insulting."

. . whereas the main review of Ghost In The Shell 25th Anniv. Ed. states :

Blu-ray.com Wrote:"This isn't the first time this cut of Ghost in the Shell has been released to Blu-ray in this format. It was previously included on the older release, but with a 1080i video presentation. This version enjoys a beefier 1080p encode that's not perfect but that does suit the material well. ... the general image looks strong and healthy. Details are frequently crisp and nicely defined; the 1080p transfer pulls every background nuance out of city architecture, signs, and even more flat backgrounds. Characters look nicely detailed, too, full and satisfying across the board in terms of clothes, guns, and other personal details."

This indicates the HDTV capture was from the (defective?) 1080i and was probably made worse for broadcast.

If memory serves me right, the 1080i Blu-ray never looked better than the HDTV version, but it should if it was from the same master.
The 1080p BD release is over scrubbed of grain and detail with the messed up colors. Crisp is a lie.

I don't think the 720p is a re-encode of the 1080p encoding. The frames don't match. The 720 version occasionally will drop a frame or duplicate one, whereas the 1080 version shows some combing artifacts that are missing in the 720.

So even if you decombed the 1080 version when converting to 720, you wouldn't have any reason to change mess with the frames.
I'm fairly confident both came from the same 1080i source, but re-encoded separately.

So, carefully combining 720 and 1080 HDTV would lead to the best version available, right?

Any volunteer? (DO NOT count on me... )

The 1080i 'bonus' feature on GITS 2.0 is almost certainly an upscale, furthermore there are chroma rainbows indicating it came from a composite video source, possibly laserdisc. It has PCM 2.0 Japanese and English.

Some interesting info and screenshots that may help figure out what's going on:

reddit - [ANIME] Ghost in the Shell (1995)[HDTV][x264][1080p][4.59GB]

.. which points to here:

main page -- http://comp.judging.it/index.php
versions comparisons 1 -- http://comp.judging.it/index.php?seriesi...id=1080p-1
versions comparisons 2 -- http://comp.judging.it/index.php?seriesid=Koukaku%20Kidoutai&comparisonid=1080p-2

A quick look through and I didn't see any of the interlace-damage (even on shots that appear to be moving). Of course the way to know for sure in to get them to see the demonstrated problem areas.

As Alice would say, "Curiouser and curiouser."

So, "our" 1080 version is the "Judgment" one?