@@AdaptiveRider laserdiscs are analog. The audio is the only thing digital on lp laser discs. By analog I mean if its a ntsc video signal in your region. That is the signal coming from the disk. So technically pal laser discs are the best video quality picture. Analog vs digital is all about how a waveform isn’t straight lines. It’s literally a wave shaped frequency pattern vs digitals blocky wave forms that only improve with added blocks via sample rate. So brass tax? digital is usually processed giving you a different result than what was intended. It’s the same reason Quentin Tarantino uses 70mm for all of his movies. So his premier looks how he wants you to see it. Not how a mpeg compression filter does.
@@ESP1138 actually i prefer some of the laserdisc versions than their Bluray version. For example Con Air with Dts on LD and Aliens. I think the remix was done better because surround effects are louder and have more bass. But that could be my prefrance.
@@ESP1138 physically being on BR doesn't mean GOOD MILLION OTHER FACTORS.. ITS LIKE SAYING ATMOS IS AUTOMATICALLY BETTER THAN 5.1 IF YOUR SHIT IS SHIT THE FORMAT WONT MAKE IT GOLD
The Blu-ray image gives the impression of a cleaner image but is way too oversaturated on the blue colour range and the contrast is too high with dark areas losing great detail.
I think it's very difficult to determine just from this video, the video here depends on the source, perhaps the playback device, the TV/TV settings, the camera settings, youtube, and finally whatever you're watching it on. Likewise the other 2 look very washed out. From memory the night scenes particularly were fairly heavy on the blue in the original film though, "day for night" shooting perhaps, though it does still look excessive.
Laserdisc looks true to the film which isn’t unexpected. Blue ray looks over processed. Dvd has clouding when a lot of action is on the screen. Probably from compression.
Possibly. I think earlier DVDs was sourced from analog sources such as U-matic, VHS, Betamax or Laserdisc. But in some cases, I like watching movies that were transferred from those sources as it completes the vintage vibes.
Actually, it was absolutely dark in the room when I filmed it, so the lighting conditions were the same. The difference you see comes from the movie itself.
now i know why its called BLUE ray :) Aside the joke, it seems to me that the laser disc capture more detail, while the blue ray has an extreme contrast due to a total lack of light in the blacks.
More than likely its not Blu-ray issue. When they remastered the film they probably touched up the colors, and "digitally restored" the image to make it look more modern.
Laserdisc is an analogue format not digital. There would be some loss in quality in the conversion then it would have to be upscaled to whatever resolution is best however this doesn't work out too well.
For me the laserdisk has the superior quality over the DVD but the bluray has the improved contrasting and colours. The bluray tries to enhance the origional but in some places looks like overkill. Personally i like the laserdisk as its a more accurate look at the high quality transfer
Well, If you're a movie buff then yeah, get one but for quality you're going down a deep hole on that one. You need to know what you're doing. Buying a random disc could end up just giving you a glorified frisbee due to disc rot. Then you have to navigate the labyrinth of releases for that title you want. LDDB is your best bet. Laserdisc is a good format providing you are willing to shell out for all the extras like DTS decoders and Demodulators etc.... which will eat up your income pretty quickly. My personal setup cost me quite a lot but on a lot of discs the sound is worth it. Get one with an Optical output. These players can output the DTS soundtrack. This is by far the most important thing to have. If you've never heard DTS before then you're in for a real treat, you'll never go back. Get a receiver with LFE (Low Frequency Effect) and 5.1 speaker setup. I have the Sony HT-DDW750. You can get one for about $160. It's old but it's still a very affordable and capable system. There's one on ebay right now, brand new in box. There's a good start.
That must have been a pretty bad dvd as my disc's quality is closer to the Blu-Ray although I find this Blu-Ray to be too saturated, It's interesting to see though how the laserdisc and dvd are similar.
The thing is, the color grading is different for no reason whatsoever. This really changes the cinematography of the shots. The yellow tinge represents hope, prosperity, good memories. The slightly blue tinge represents despair, the future, the machines, bad memories. The oversaturated blue takes away this metallic look from the original material, resulting in poorer visual quality and removes some of the significance of the tinge in the first place. Deja Vu is another movie that played with color grading at the beginning and throughout the movie. Its use of color grading shows important symbolic representations for a foreshadowing effect. It gives you a feeling of what to expect when we think about someone of something and when those feelings are reversed, creates a greater sense of suspense. It's a crucial part of film writing, and changing the grading without staying true to these symbolisms or having the guidance of the original writers may change its status. The status of the movie is not directly connected to the original movie if alterations have been made. The choice to use new CGI effects, sharper image quality, different color grading, and newer sound technologies like Atmos can effect the status of a movie. In some cases, you can raise the status of the blu-ray version over the status of the the DVD, VHS, and Laserdisc. However, if the movie is widely regarded as a masterpiece, you are unlikely to improve upon the original unless you know what you're doing. Even the original writers may not know what they're doing, as shown by George Lucas's obsession with putting bad CGI in the original Star Wars movies. That's not to say that the idea wasn't bad, just the execution of it was and then George Lucas wouldn't budge when people told him it was bad. I do like the pre-trilogy with Anikan Skywalker, and the CGI has some bad moments but it's overall okay. The digital image he shot though was much more impressive. With the color grading he got, he was able to have way more control over the final image because everything was digital and the image could be looked at before they shot anything. Essentially, very nice shots could be made that were easier to color grade and change exposure in post processing. This made the image more balanced and still very vibrant, something that filmmakers at the time weren't able to do. Film still had this dreamy look to it. Like the difference from 24 FPS to 60 FPS, the celluloid films had an almost magical look to it. You could feel the film in a way that digital just can't reproduce. Yes, the technology may be better, but that dreaminess that captivated audiences just isn't in modern films. I think that a newer film would benefit from a combination during production, and the end of the result of this process being a digital conversion of the film along with digital camera shots on a blu-ray. Star Trek TNG was shot on film, but they converted it to digital every week. This made the image beautiful and is part of the reason why we can rescan the image in a higher resolution and make remasters. There's definitely some drawbacks to this approach, like having a much higher budget than digital cameras, but to this day I always liked the way Star Trek looked during TNG era for it's very vibrant yet excellent color range. A serious problem with digital color grading is any time there's a dark scene, color banding is very noticeable. Film powers through it in spectacular fashion. It makes digital look like dog compared to a wolf. If we had pushed the boundaries of celluloid film with newer emulsion layers, we might have been able to produce much better looking images. That's why using both, in my opinion, is recommended. A dialog shot looks so much better on 24 FPS film, but an action shot looks really good on 120 FPS digital. Playing around with this helps convey a message, just like color grading. Oversaturation can lead to interesting symbolic representation, or can make the audience want to murder you. The wisdom of what to use where is part of how an artist is able to produce a masterpiece. You should use all the tools you have at your disposal. If your movie doesn't use all the tools, then the movie isn't written for your production. There are cases where you are making a newer version of a classic, but you should still be able to use all the tools you have. Really it boils down to what perspective you go with and not the dialog itself. Use the advantages of each tool to craft unique perspectives that couldn't be done with any other tool. It's not about following the classic beat for beat, it's about using tools for effect. The more put of the element you are, the more likelihood it will be better. This may sound reversed, but mastering the different perspectives puts you on edge, makes you try harder, and ends with something no one else can replicate for a while. Every great artist does this in some way, view it as a learning experience and a chance to really get into this world you are crafting. Make the writing tangible, not just another word on a page.
I completely agree with you: combining old with new te h can do interesting things. Tend to play bluray rips via my xbox 360 and put em on the screen of a 100hz widescreen crt via an rgb cable. The image is super sharp, yet soft at the same time, and the contrast is out of this world…
very interesting and telling comparison...what surprises me the most is that the LD retains the original dynamic range (between lights and darks) as the original and it might look more bright or washed out but in fact you get so much more detail in the dark areas ...so for those wanting as much overall detail (rather than pure sharpness) the LD is clearly the more original experience ...i'm sure a Star Wars comparison would yield the same...im also tempted now to get a LD player
It would be much better if you made this comparison on a CRT or a plasma TV. These two types of technology scale low-resolution images much better than LCDs or OLEDs. However, thanks for the interesting experiment.
so that's why they call it BLURAY is so blue. I like the LD version and I believe all copies of the dvds blus and 4ks especially OLD movies where extracted from LASERDISC FORMAT and tweaked it to different formats.
Not really. It's called blu ray because of the laser range of frequency (above 700000 ghz) AKA blue color. And the blueish color shown here must be because of the tv set and camera. That wouldn't happen if recorded with proper video capture hardware. In this movie, the master format is IMAX 70 MM which is HUGE analog and holds detail enough to remaster to actual 2K or even above. NO way LD can hold enough info to be used as a remaster for blu ray.
if your bluray is playing at the original film 24fps while the LD and dvd are running at PAL video of 25 fps, that would explain the bluray being slower. At least I assume your German CAV edition of T2 is PAL. You should add that in the description. And also, look into getting a proper capture card so you can show the video signal directly instead of having a camera record a tv.
yes, that would explain the difference. Will a capture card work with a copyprotected Bluray? I have tried a capture card with VHS and LAserdisc, and it looked terrible. For me it was more important to compare what is visible on the TV screen, but thanks for your advise!
@@gerhardzimmermann8329 you dont need a capture card for bluray or dvd, you just need software that will go around copy protection to rip the discs. The upside to laserdisc needing a capture card is that it does not have any copy protection at all.
I think this is the original DVD version, which looks almost the same as the LaserDisc. The Remastered DVD version looks almost as good as the Blu-Ray, except for being Standart Definition and not HD
I remember when it came first on TV, it was April 1994 on RTL, I was thrilling if weather will be good so it will not be any problems with picture. Of course it was dubbed in German and as I remember nothing was cut like for other movies. This movie never enough.
A lot of that has nothing to do with th emedia they were recorded on but who did the editing. like who ever made the b-rays could have upped the brightness a bit, they botched it I would say.
bei der DVD hast du aber auch die denkbar schlechteste Version genommen denn der DVD Release basierte noch auf dem Laserdisc Master wodurch man gegenüber der Laserdisc kaum unterschiede im Bild hat ^^
The movie was remastered in 4k for a 3D release in 2017 or something. They would have done a new color grade at the time and it has really heavy DNR because I guess film grain isn't good for 3D.
Laser disc was better than VHS, and DVD. Image quality. The only issue is that you had to flip laser discs, and they were not formated for widescreen tv's. Earlier DVD's were also not formated for widescreen tvs. When they did the looked pretty good. Problem is DVD had compression where Laser discs did not. What made DVD supposedly "BETTER" was the fact that you didn't have to flip it. It came with additional material and languages, and were originally suppose to be double sided in order to have PAN and SCAN on one side, and Wide Screen on the other. Compression on DVD had issues when it came to natural gradients in films. For example in the beginning of the Excorsist, you could see the levels of gradient in the opening shot of the SUN. Where as on laser disc the sun was natual and smooth. If you understand what I am trying to say. Because of the size and options and making it a user friendly option for home video. DVD came out on top. But Blurays killed them all, and in the process, people who are responsible for transfering film to Bluray became colour blind. Unbelievable. It actually started to really happen around the time they brought Star Wars out on DVD for the first time, and added a blue tint over the whole movie. Why? Unbelievable. I love movies. And I really loved laser and all the special features that were available years before DVD. Let's hope and so far from the LOOKS of it. New 4K transfers are being handled better. Thanks for your comparison video. I am a sucker for any comparion video. Now go for the VHS - CED - LASER - DVD - BLURAY - 4K comparison. I think it can be done with Back To The Future. Meaning I'm sure it has been released on all those formats as of now. - Toronto, Canada.
But what about VHS. This year I’m buying physical media from the past such as VHS, BETAMAX and laser disc before it does become obsolete of my favourite films and music for a keep sake. I have a few laser discs now but not a player.. but one day I’ll get one.
I have just purchased a Pioneer 925 laser player to try out my last remaining discs. Although the sound was far more expansive (as I remember) the picture quality was nowhere near as good as blu ray. FACT. I was so surprised that I used to watch laserdisc with my son thinking the future had arrived. Maybe it had, but now it's gone. Blu ray and 4K are far superior. The expansive sound does live on though on laserdisc.
DVHS is around.. I heard that dvhs is the best version. It’s not filtered like the dvd version. It’s a identical film match. At least that is what I was told. Can we ask if you are able.. to do a comparison?
This is a good LD T2 release. Not the best but good, CAV helps it. I don't know if there was ever a MUSE release but I imagine that would be the one to have. The commercial DVD transfer of T2 is actually pretty good. The BR is garbage. Don't waste your money or time. Get a good DVD or LD.
Blu-ray is definitely sharper. No argument there. The DVD and LD have a washed out look. The BD is saturated. Please do a comparison on sound. THX LDs with AC-3 claim to have superior sound. How do they compare with Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD Master Audio?
Of the three options, I'm with Laserdisc, DVD it's ok 👍 kinda losses in the battle scenes, but okidokie 👍. Now, Blu-Ray, HORRIBLE, I mean, was it necessary to put a weird blue filter? Laserdisc: 10/10 DVD: 8/10 Blu-Ray: 0/10
Try MakeMKV, it lets you rip the DVD or Blu ray without the ads or menus. Not sure about the DVD but on the 4K Ultra version (comes with 4K disc and the 1080p disc version with extra content) from Studio Canal, if you rip the 1080p Blu ray it has 3 versions one is the standard cut, one is the extended cut, and the other one is the extended cut with the alternate ending. It's always the largest file on the disc that is the actual movie, except in this case for the latest release. The Studio Canal version isn't perfect, it has a weird teal tint but many of the mistakes of the crew getting caught in some shots were fixed and Arnold's face was digitally put over his stunt double.
DVD is basically a smaller laserdisc with the ability to have all programming on ONE SIDE and extra programming on the other if desired. BluRay is something completely different, its often oversharpened, oversaturated and colorgraded in a manner that is not reflective of what we actually saw in the theaters, which color is more like the DVD and laserdisc versions. Not all blue and black looking.
Unica vantagem lazer disc nao ter compressao digital, nao existe aliasing!!! algo ve leitor dvd baratos mal processamento descompressao pixels , blueray foi convertido digitalizado cores , para adaptar era Lcd /oleds tvs, tente ver bluray crt tv, cor saturado!!!
Blue ray is the best deeper sharper color and the blacks laserdisc is right behind having better blacks and contrast the dvd is has less artifacts than the laserdisc but too bright no blacks
I Liked The Color More On The Laserdisc Version The Blue Ray Looks Blueish
how ironic
Hence the name
It’s because its analog.
@@Astinsan what do you mean by analog?
@@AdaptiveRider laserdiscs are analog. The audio is the only thing digital on lp laser discs. By analog I mean if its a ntsc video signal in your region. That is the signal coming from the disk. So technically pal laser discs are the best video quality picture.
Analog vs digital is all about how a waveform isn’t straight lines. It’s literally a wave shaped frequency pattern vs digitals blocky wave forms that only improve with added blocks via sample rate.
So brass tax? digital is usually processed giving you a different result than what was intended. It’s the same reason Quentin Tarantino uses 70mm for all of his movies. So his premier looks how he wants you to see it. Not how a mpeg compression filter does.
So basically, laser-disc was incredible compared to VHS, but not that different from dvd.
Most laserdiscs with AC-3 or DTS sounded better that their DVD version.
@@norbkowa But do they sound better than a BD?
@@ESP1138 actually i prefer some of the laserdisc versions than their Bluray version. For example Con Air with Dts on LD and Aliens. I think the remix was done better because surround effects are louder and have more bass. But that could be my prefrance.
@@norbkowa u
@@ESP1138 physically being on BR doesn't mean GOOD MILLION OTHER FACTORS.. ITS LIKE SAYING ATMOS IS AUTOMATICALLY BETTER THAN 5.1 IF YOUR SHIT IS SHIT THE FORMAT WONT MAKE IT GOLD
The Blu-ray image gives the impression of a cleaner image but is way too oversaturated on the blue colour range and the contrast is too high with dark areas losing great detail.
I think it's very difficult to determine just from this video, the video here depends on the source, perhaps the playback device, the TV/TV settings, the camera settings, youtube, and finally whatever you're watching it on.
Likewise the other 2 look very washed out. From memory the night scenes particularly were fairly heavy on the blue in the original film though, "day for night" shooting perhaps, though it does still look excessive.
That's not what it looks like, this video was recorded from a screen.
@@jushtan-vb4pv it isn't it's because this video was recorded while playing them on another screen so the color is fucked
@@JaceDanielFilms And, the color grades was changed to look "modern"
Winner: LaserDisc!
Laserdisc looks true to the film which isn’t unexpected. Blue ray looks over processed. Dvd has clouding when a lot of action is on the screen. Probably from compression.
the earliest dvds probably were transfers of the laserdisc
But with more compression.
Possibly. I think earlier DVDs was sourced from analog sources such as U-matic, VHS, Betamax or Laserdisc. But in some cases, I like watching movies that were transferred from those sources as it completes the vintage vibes.
@@ClayMationNation actually is the other way around
It’s very difficult to compare with three frames and all of them in different lighting conditions.
Actually, it was absolutely dark in the room when I filmed it, so the lighting conditions were the same. The difference you see comes from the movie itself.
@@gerhardzimmermann8329 Hello, if you will do new comparison of T2, choose BD 2015 please.
Oh God, that's only 9 years away.
5 years
Clay ...Bill Clay
It’s 2024 right now. 😅
now i know why its called BLUE ray :) Aside the joke, it seems to me that the laser disc capture more detail, while the blue ray has an extreme contrast due to a total lack of light in the blacks.
More than likely its not Blu-ray issue. When they remastered the film they probably touched up the colors, and "digitally restored" the image to make it look more modern.
it's called blu ray because the laser was blue, but dvd's laser was red so it doesn't make much sense
Yeah! 3:30 for example, and that Blu-ray truck is literally a shadow with no details!
Terrible remaster!
Really great comparison, also one of my favorite movies.
i've got to get into Laserdiscs...
1.04 would be difference between pal and ntsc for 24 fps
I wish some manufacturer would make a modern LD player with HDMI output
Laserdisc is an analogue format not digital. There would be some loss in quality in the conversion then it would have to be upscaled to whatever resolution is best however this doesn't work out too well.
SERIA SENSACIONAL UN REPRODUCTOR DE DISCO LASER..CON SALIDA *** H D M I ***
For me the laserdisk has the superior quality over the DVD but the bluray has the improved contrasting and colours. The bluray tries to enhance the origional but in some places looks like overkill. Personally i like the laserdisk as its a more accurate look at the high quality transfer
DVD is not bad it it made for hdtv or CRT
Nah, looks like VHS and pixelated. Dvd is much better.
Thanks for the video. im thinking of buying a laser disc player just because
Thank you for your kind comment.
Well, If you're a movie buff then yeah, get one but for quality you're going down a deep hole on that one. You need to know what you're doing. Buying a random disc could end up just giving you a glorified frisbee due to disc rot. Then you have to navigate the labyrinth of releases for that title you want. LDDB is your best bet. Laserdisc is a good format providing you are willing to shell out for all the extras like DTS decoders and Demodulators etc.... which will eat up your income pretty quickly. My personal setup cost me quite a lot but on a lot of discs the sound is worth it. Get one with an Optical output. These players can output the DTS soundtrack. This is by far the most important thing to have. If you've never heard DTS before then you're in for a real treat, you'll never go back. Get a receiver with LFE (Low Frequency Effect) and 5.1 speaker setup. I have the Sony HT-DDW750. You can get one for about $160. It's old but it's still a very affordable and capable system. There's one on ebay right now, brand new in box. There's a good start.
Blu-ray looks better but its picture is more blue so I would go with Lazer disc
May Hi-Vision Laserdisc version available, we can see DVD/HD, HiVision and BluRay compared
I bet Hi-Vision T2 goes for mega money online
well put together comparison, but I don't think this movie made it very fair due to the blu-ray version being remastered
That must have been a pretty bad dvd as my disc's quality is closer to the Blu-Ray although I find this Blu-Ray to be too saturated, It's interesting to see though how the laserdisc and dvd are similar.
I have to ask, what model of Laser Disc player are you using? it looks amazing.
Hi, and thanks a lot. I am using a Denon LA-2700.
The thing is, the color grading is different for no reason whatsoever. This really changes the cinematography of the shots. The yellow tinge represents hope, prosperity, good memories. The slightly blue tinge represents despair, the future, the machines, bad memories. The oversaturated blue takes away this metallic look from the original material, resulting in poorer visual quality and removes some of the significance of the tinge in the first place. Deja Vu is another movie that played with color grading at the beginning and throughout the movie. Its use of color grading shows important symbolic representations for a foreshadowing effect. It gives you a feeling of what to expect when we think about someone of something and when those feelings are reversed, creates a greater sense of suspense. It's a crucial part of film writing, and changing the grading without staying true to these symbolisms or having the guidance of the original writers may change its status. The status of the movie is not directly connected to the original movie if alterations have been made. The choice to use new CGI effects, sharper image quality, different color grading, and newer sound technologies like Atmos can effect the status of a movie. In some cases, you can raise the status of the blu-ray version over the status of the the DVD, VHS, and Laserdisc. However, if the movie is widely regarded as a masterpiece, you are unlikely to improve upon the original unless you know what you're doing. Even the original writers may not know what they're doing, as shown by George Lucas's obsession with putting bad CGI in the original Star Wars movies. That's not to say that the idea wasn't bad, just the execution of it was and then George Lucas wouldn't budge when people told him it was bad. I do like the pre-trilogy with Anikan Skywalker, and the CGI has some bad moments but it's overall okay. The digital image he shot though was much more impressive. With the color grading he got, he was able to have way more control over the final image because everything was digital and the image could be looked at before they shot anything. Essentially, very nice shots could be made that were easier to color grade and change exposure in post processing. This made the image more balanced and still very vibrant, something that filmmakers at the time weren't able to do. Film still had this dreamy look to it. Like the difference from 24 FPS to 60 FPS, the celluloid films had an almost magical look to it. You could feel the film in a way that digital just can't reproduce. Yes, the technology may be better, but that dreaminess that captivated audiences just isn't in modern films. I think that a newer film would benefit from a combination during production, and the end of the result of this process being a digital conversion of the film along with digital camera shots on a blu-ray. Star Trek TNG was shot on film, but they converted it to digital every week. This made the image beautiful and is part of the reason why we can rescan the image in a higher resolution and make remasters. There's definitely some drawbacks to this approach, like having a much higher budget than digital cameras, but to this day I always liked the way Star Trek looked during TNG era for it's very vibrant yet excellent color range. A serious problem with digital color grading is any time there's a dark scene, color banding is very noticeable. Film powers through it in spectacular fashion. It makes digital look like dog compared to a wolf. If we had pushed the boundaries of celluloid film with newer emulsion layers, we might have been able to produce much better looking images. That's why using both, in my opinion, is recommended. A dialog shot looks so much better on 24 FPS film, but an action shot looks really good on 120 FPS digital. Playing around with this helps convey a message, just like color grading. Oversaturation can lead to interesting symbolic representation, or can make the audience want to murder you. The wisdom of what to use where is part of how an artist is able to produce a masterpiece. You should use all the tools you have at your disposal. If your movie doesn't use all the tools, then the movie isn't written for your production. There are cases where you are making a newer version of a classic, but you should still be able to use all the tools you have. Really it boils down to what perspective you go with and not the dialog itself. Use the advantages of each tool to craft unique perspectives that couldn't be done with any other tool. It's not about following the classic beat for beat, it's about using tools for effect. The more put of the element you are, the more likelihood it will be better. This may sound reversed, but mastering the different perspectives puts you on edge, makes you try harder, and ends with something no one else can replicate for a while. Every great artist does this in some way, view it as a learning experience and a chance to really get into this world you are crafting. Make the writing tangible, not just another word on a page.
I completely agree with you: combining old with new te h can do interesting things. Tend to play bluray rips via my xbox 360 and put em on the screen of a 100hz widescreen crt via an rgb cable. The image is super sharp, yet soft at the same time, and the contrast is out of this world…
Something between LD and BD are what this movie looks like theatrically. LD is too light, BD is too dark.
Clearly the LaserDisc is the best
very interesting and telling comparison...what surprises me the most is that the LD retains the original dynamic range (between lights and darks) as the original and it might look more bright or washed out but in fact you get so much more detail in the dark areas ...so for those wanting as much overall detail (rather than pure sharpness) the LD is clearly the more original experience ...i'm sure a Star Wars comparison would yield the same...im also tempted now to get a LD player
Laserdisc wins here, at least from what I'm seeing. The bluray is sharper but way oversaturated. The DVD is washed out.
Bluray was the real game changer for video and audio. It's a crazy shame that it was/is so overlooked, it's almost like people never cared much
So, the Bluray version has been electronically enhanced to improve the contrast, but other than that there's no improvement but the resolution?
@TheRealJohnHooper Basically yes, that's why I'm asking :)
It would be much better if you made this comparison on a CRT or a plasma TV. These two types of technology scale low-resolution images much better than LCDs or OLEDs.
However, thanks for the interesting experiment.
Thanks for your comment. I did another comparison on a Plasma TV. Not that big of a difference to me. Check my other videos please.
so that's why they call it BLURAY is so blue. I like the LD version and I believe all copies of the dvds blus and 4ks especially OLD movies where extracted from LASERDISC FORMAT and tweaked it to different formats.
Not really. It's called blu ray because of the laser range of frequency (above 700000 ghz) AKA blue color. And the blueish color shown here must be because of the tv set and camera. That wouldn't happen if recorded with proper video capture hardware.
In this movie, the master format is IMAX 70 MM which is HUGE analog and holds detail enough to remaster to actual 2K or even above. NO way LD can hold enough info to be used as a remaster for blu ray.
They often use the original reel to reel film (like camera film) for the 4k version.
What format is more similar to original 35 mm?
Laserdisc
if your bluray is playing at the original film 24fps while the LD and dvd are running at PAL video of 25 fps, that would explain the bluray being slower.
At least I assume your German CAV edition of T2 is PAL. You should add that in the description.
And also, look into getting a proper capture card so you can show the video signal directly instead of having a camera record a tv.
yes, that would explain the difference. Will a capture card work with a copyprotected Bluray? I have tried a capture card with VHS and LAserdisc, and it looked terrible. For me it was more important to compare what is visible on the TV screen, but thanks for your advise!
@@gerhardzimmermann8329 you dont need a capture card for bluray or dvd, you just need software that will go around copy protection to rip the discs.
The upside to laserdisc needing a capture card is that it does not have any copy protection at all.
Laserdisc for the win
I think this is the original DVD version, which looks almost the same as the LaserDisc. The Remastered DVD version looks almost as good as the Blu-Ray, except for being Standart Definition and not HD
I remember when it came first on TV, it was April 1994 on RTL, I was thrilling if weather will be good so it will not be any problems with picture. Of course it was dubbed in German and as I remember nothing was cut like for other movies. This movie never enough.
I like laser disc and Blu-ray
A lot of that has nothing to do with th emedia they were recorded on but who did the editing. like who ever made the b-rays could have upped the brightness a bit, they botched it I would say.
laserdisc is the best
bei der DVD hast du aber auch die denkbar schlechteste Version genommen denn der DVD Release basierte noch auf dem Laserdisc Master wodurch man gegenüber der Laserdisc kaum unterschiede im Bild hat ^^
Ja, das ist eine meiner ersten DVD´s. Ich besorg mir mal eine aktuelle.
Is the DVD at 480i or 480P ? This makes all the difference
Most likely 480p
Bluray doesn't mean the video itself has to be blue. That looks sickly, wrong.
Why is the blu ray colour so different? They altered it? Very saturated blue
And it has a much stronger contrast. Black is real black on the screen but for sure they did a lot of editing on the Bluray.
The movie was remastered in 4k for a 3D release in 2017 or something. They would have done a new color grade at the time and it has really heavy DNR because I guess film grain isn't good for 3D.
Now play the 4K, one of the worst releases ever
thanks for you share。
Can you make a 4K uhd comparison？
The laser disc looks great but since I don't have one I will get this on Blu-Ray.
The laser disc just dominates dvd.
Laserdisc is better than the DVD
why does the bluray look linterlaced?
LD GANG!
Lazerdisc are true colour. From this comparison
Aspect ratio seems off on the Blu-ray
I love the look of the blu ray version even though it looked worse in 4K
Laser disc was better than VHS, and DVD. Image quality. The only issue is that you had to flip laser discs, and they were not formated for widescreen tv's. Earlier DVD's were also not formated for widescreen tvs. When they did the looked pretty good. Problem is DVD had compression where Laser discs did not. What made DVD supposedly "BETTER" was the fact that you didn't have to flip it. It came with additional material and languages, and were originally suppose to be double sided in order to have PAN and SCAN on one side, and Wide Screen on the other. Compression on DVD had issues when it came to natural gradients in films. For example in the beginning of the Excorsist, you could see the levels of gradient in the opening shot of the SUN. Where as on laser disc the sun was natual and smooth. If you understand what I am trying to say. Because of the size and options and making it a user friendly option for home video. DVD came out on top. But Blurays killed them all, and in the process, people who are responsible for transfering film to Bluray became colour blind. Unbelievable. It actually started to really happen around the time they brought Star Wars out on DVD for the first time, and added a blue tint over the whole movie. Why? Unbelievable. I love movies. And I really loved laser and all the special features that were available years before DVD. Let's hope and so far from the LOOKS of it. New 4K transfers are being handled better. Thanks for your comparison video. I am a sucker for any comparion video. Now go for the VHS - CED - LASER - DVD - BLURAY - 4K comparison. I think it can be done with Back To The Future. Meaning I'm sure it has been released on all those formats as of now. - Toronto, Canada.
Thanks for making this comparison I guess Tom Cruise was right about Laserdisc it’s absolutely stunning ❤ blue ray sucks only for dogs!
But what about VHS. This year I’m buying physical media from the past such as VHS, BETAMAX and laser disc before it does become obsolete of my favourite films and music for a keep sake. I have a few laser discs now but not a player.. but one day I’ll get one.
I do own the VHS Version. I will do a comparison against the 4K BluRay
@@gerhardzimmermann8329 is the VHS widescreen ?
@@Earthtime3978 yes it is. Please See my new Video.
He must’ve used a basic DVD and Bluray instead of the snapper case, special edition, extreme edition or the 2015 Bluray
Yes you are right, the DVD was the first release on DVD.
The BLU-RAY looks too dark with detail lost. I think I'd prefer the LD.
Take the contrast of the blu ray with the color timing of the dvd it would have been a great image imo
Interesting that the LD looks better than the DVD.
But does blu-ray have director's cut? :)
Now I understand why Blu-ray is blu
I have just purchased a Pioneer 925 laser player to try out my last remaining discs. Although the sound was far more expansive (as I remember) the picture quality was nowhere near as good as blu ray. FACT. I was so surprised that I used to watch laserdisc with my son thinking the future had arrived. Maybe it had, but now it's gone. Blu ray and 4K are far superior. The expansive sound does live on though on laserdisc.
Should of added the VHS on there
I am working on it!
DVHS is around.. I heard that dvhs is the best version. It’s not filtered like the dvd version. It’s a identical film match. At least that is what I was told. Can we ask if you are able.. to do a comparison?
*should have
@@Amber57499 there is always one
your "laserdisc" picture clearly shows MPEG compression artifacts 🤣😁
the compression artifacts sit in front of your monitor.
1:43 WHY DOES BLURAY HAVE TO BE SO FREAKING BLUE!!! WOW! and I HAD NO IDEA THAT I WOULD PREFER LASER-DISC OVER DVD
Please check out my latest video with the new remastered DVD.
the three of them seems to be VHS.
Hm, the Bluray version is the worst version.
Ich hatte früher die Blechbüchsen-Fassung von dem Film gehabt. T2 habe ich so oft gesehen das ich mir den Film heute nicht mehr geben kann. :-)
Wow I need to get this on bluray
Whoever wins we lose
I dont know why old laserdisc much cinematic look than newer one
It’s crazy that anyone watched anything at those lower quality’s
Blu Ray said let me show you why we're called blue.
This is a good LD T2 release. Not the best but good, CAV helps it. I don't know if there was ever a MUSE release but I imagine that would be the one to have. The commercial DVD transfer of T2 is actually pretty good. The BR is garbage. Don't waste your money or time. Get a good DVD or LD.
I still have the 4K collection.
Blu-ray is definitely sharper. No argument there. The DVD and LD have a washed out look. The BD is saturated.
Please do a comparison on sound. THX LDs with AC-3 claim to have superior sound. How do they compare with Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD Master Audio?
Nice screen door effect on the blu-ray.
Did you use composite or s video with the laserdisc player?
I have used the SCART connector for the Laserdisc. The SCART contains the rgb signal. It provides the better picture than the s- video.
@@gerhardzimmermann8329 ah, unfortunately I'm American
@@clumpyschlipz7571 The difference is not big.
@@gerhardzimmermann8329 It is considering America uses NTSC and we use PAL. It's a big difference.
Wow they took the blue in bluray literally
Difficult to compare this way
Thank you
In your video laser disc its like dvd but the dvd it s m7ch better
Should include D-VHS.
dvd is the best picture for a crt or dvd portable player
It's unfortunate they do stupid stuff on some blu rays and 4k blu rays like ADDING fake digital film grain
Of the three options, I'm with Laserdisc, DVD it's ok 👍 kinda losses in the battle scenes, but okidokie 👍. Now, Blu-Ray, HORRIBLE, I mean, was it necessary to put a weird blue filter? Laserdisc: 10/10
DVD: 8/10 Blu-Ray: 0/10
1:04 NIGHTMARE FUEL.
Too much blue with the blu-ray one
Laserdisc you stick and go. DVD and Blu Ray = Shit menus and unskippable ads. If I want a nice digital format it is streaming or downloaded content.
Try MakeMKV, it lets you rip the DVD or Blu ray without the ads or menus. Not sure about the DVD but on the 4K Ultra version (comes with 4K disc and the 1080p disc version with extra content) from Studio Canal, if you rip the 1080p Blu ray it has 3 versions one is the standard cut, one is the extended cut, and the other one is the extended cut with the alternate ending. It's always the largest file on the disc that is the actual movie, except in this case for the latest release. The Studio Canal version isn't perfect, it has a weird teal tint but many of the mistakes of the crew getting caught in some shots were fixed and Arnold's face was digitally put over his stunt double.
I'm still tripping off the fact that the laserdisc and DVD image are better than blu ray.
i don't see a difference from dvd and laserdisc
yes, there is almost no difference, but the DVD is quite old...
My dvd looks better due to upscale of JVC 4K projector with Panasonic 820 player.
Holy shit the laserdisc 😂
DVD is basically a smaller laserdisc with the ability to have all programming on ONE SIDE and extra programming on the other if desired.
BluRay is something completely different, its often oversharpened, oversaturated and colorgraded in a manner that is not reflective of what we actually saw in the theaters, which color is more like the DVD and laserdisc versions. Not all blue and black looking.
The Blu-ray is just horrible
Imposible láserdisc mejor que el BLU Ray 1080 p HD , láser disco RCA * DVD auroconector y RCA , 🤦
Unica vantagem lazer disc nao ter compressao digital, nao existe aliasing!!! algo ve leitor dvd baratos mal processamento descompressao pixels , blueray foi convertido digitalizado cores , para adaptar era Lcd /oleds tvs, tente ver bluray crt tv, cor saturado!!!
The Blu-ray looks like a neon mess.
1 bl
2 ld
3 dvd
Blue ray is the best deeper sharper color and the blacks laserdisc is right behind having better blacks and contrast the dvd is has less artifacts than the laserdisc but too bright no blacks
Why is dvd so bad
DVD are not bad