alien brought up an interesting topic on this title. The Japan issue has a completely different cut of the movie and also used a cool
filter in transfer process giving it a much different look. I only have the BD of this, so I'm using the LD/DVD comparison at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeaLiJVvy1c for this.
Evil Dead, The (1981) [SF078-5044]

They zoomed in quite a bit for the DVD and the BD appears to follow the DVD with framing.

Comp 1 For the first comparison this is right where he turns around the first time and the camera pans back, notice how the blow up
is greater on the LD is vs. the DVD and BD
LD/DVD


BD


Comp 2: for the second comp this is where he turns around the second time and the camera pans back again.

LD/DVD


BD


I didn't do the LD/DVD comp so I can't guarantee they are completely in sync, however after watching that video a few times it does
appear they are in sync for the most part. For the Japan LD they used more of the 35mm image which isn't seen on any other release.
Quite interesting indeed. Plus the color difference is really unique. You can't beat the BD in detail but I'd wished they'd gone with the LD
framing. It gives you more image instead of focusing on the cast. Some Blu-ray releases they've done that, less blow up on 1.33 movies.


Here's a quick screen capture of the BD version. I captured it at 29.97fps but it's still a little jerky.

i don't have this on LD, and sold my DVD years ago.
but i have noticed some films that are eiter on DVD or instant from nflx that the picture quality
is like what you have posted.

the LD will be brighter and more natural, the DVD or instant will look darker like there was some
filter to give you a fake setting of what is around.

but i've also noticed this in general of newer films, they can't shoot stuff in normal daylight, they have
to give you this darker, muted color scene or filter.

it's fine but don't do it to older films, i noticed it on a Jackie Chan film i have that i have to post pictures of.

It looks open mattered and the colour on laserdisc the sky is horroble evil looking pink. Doubt its the pint its colour hue tinting in the studio fart-a$$ing around rather than lets keep natural looking to the original 35mm. The framing sigh I can't stand it when they p!ss around with it. Why not leave it open un-matted and let us place some cloth up over the sides and tops and bottom.

Wonder how this compares to the Elite Special edition? I have that, and don't believe it has the horrible color issues that that Japanese LD seems to have.

There seems to be more red in the LD in these shots but overall this ld has a blueish tint to it which looks neat. Apparently some prefer it over the DVD. I think there's a lot of difference between all three.

i'm not looking at the colors if they are correct or not, i'm looking at the brightness at the front of the car.
you can see on the LD that it is brighter and more natural than the DVD, almost like they made it darker.

Click here and here for some more info about the subject.

In case of japanese 1st release from Herald I wouldn't talk about color issues, it looks more like being mastered from source with completely different color definitions compared to all the later versions and IMO it really makes difference to the outcome - to be honest I like it more than any of the remastered versions due to colder and creepier feeling. On the other hand I found rather interesting that Nightmare on Elm Street from same distributor have somewhat similar blue-ish tint in it...

Despite the cropped framing, the Blu-ray wins in every catagory -- clarity of detail, color, depth, etc. The LaserDisc is too murky, and the colors are terrible! (What's with that magenta sky!?)

Thanks for those frame grabs, though. How did you capture them to your computer?

Maybe most never saw it in the cinema as it got banned in the UK at the time and only way was though captain jolly ole pyrite VHS copies going around by the boat load. I saw it on VHS pirate a friend brought it over and me and few others watched it but it wasn't my taste at all I didn't like one bit, it was OTT and I can see why it was banned. I can't remember the colour on it but sound was crappy it wobbled fluttered all the time like they all do.

So I guess most who have seen it have only seen it on pyrite VHS in the UK around early 80's and so maybe a little hard to say what the colour was but we all know the sky is blue or often might be white might have some overcast clouds in the background.

What I would do is take a pad and pen and take down a few notes what the 35/70mm looks like or digital copy its not called a digital print in my books its called "a digital copy". anyhow I'd take down rough notes that I can compare later on or unless my mind can hang on to scene and loop it though my mind until it comes out on DVD or bluray.

You can't take pictures in a cinema when its playing unless you want to end up be prosecuted but one quick picture to compare with bluray won't hurt films are out within 5months even the crappy ones that don't do a lot of money.

Well, as I said I don't have the LD or DVD so I got those from that YouTube link which is a pretty good comparison. Using Snapz Pro I grabbed full screen images from there. The BD I played from my BD to Plex folder and also used Snapz Pro to capture still and full motion comparisons. Full motion comparison isn't quite what's on the disc, I captured at 29.97 fps, of course the BD is 24 but it's completely different capturing it this way so I went with 29.97 which looked the best. It's a little hard to get the same quality as the BD unless you're dealing with the source file which I wasn't, but creating a new one with Snapz capture or running it through my HD PVR which takes more time to set up.

I actually haven't seen this movie since getting the BD, so I need to watch it through. I remember seeing this one, after Army of Darkness and the 2nd one mid 90's. The thing I remember most was the creepy camera pursuits. It's campy, but well done. I also think the Blu-ray is the best, despite it not using more of the open frame, though I notice it does use a tad more than the DVD.

The youtube link is okay nothing wrong with thou I know some would be be saying "its low grade its youtube" just as long as we can see roughly the framing and colour does it matter?

This screen capture I took a few years ago shows STAR TREK IV one scene from the end credits and the colour was over-boasted for the special edition too much gamma likely and contrast level. This is the same on the bluray as Paramount was too tight to do it right, they'd rather rush it!


I just took this one from the first DVD pressing and note the water, water is transparent its only the blue atmosphere that makes it appear blue. Note the sun shining though from millions of miles away note how it appears white a blind white if one looked at it directly.

Its still a little hot on the levels as the whites beaming though are a bit rough and its kinder of enlarged to bright white like slightly tinted but its no worse than the SE DVD and bluray. The 70mm print was natural looking pure film with pure few kw of light projecting it up onto a large screen.

I think the first pressing is about close as you can get with it. Now take a common flash light and get blue fitter find anything around the house a blue plastic box anything that is blue. Shine the light behind and your eye should only see blue with hint of white you shouldn't see any artificial effects other than the light might be dimmer with blue filter.

Now take a common digital camera and turn it ON and face it towards the flash light with the blue. You should see green casting all around the whites! Well it might some cameras maybe better than others but I have done the test many times and often a white light with blue filter or coloured blue gel on x-mas light would cast green all around the white light, that is not what my eye is seeing when looking at it directly.

A good SLR camera might do a good job and I'd guess 35mm would do a really good job, well maybe depends until you get it back from the lab?

So when you see a film that has ether a tint of blue and the worse one is T2 just about every VHS Laserdisc PAL then sold it bought the THX SE then the DVD R2 then first pressing of T2 ntsc and then bluray sigh who the f%()k did that transfer? Needs to be shot. I can't watch when scene with Sarah Connor running though the hallway and the floor that should have clear white spots is looking green cyan and makes me want to throw up.

I don't have a whole lot to add to this discussion in terms of color or framing differences. I did want to mention that the Blu-Ray for this movie is one of the best lookings discs I've seen. I'm still amazed at how good they made this movie look. Watching the BD for the first time is a revelation.

The second pic of STIV almost looks like a black and white film.

i personally prefer evil dead II.
but i would rather have the Japanese LD due to the correct colors of the blue makeup on the
demon woman, it makes it look like it was, a low budget film

i would rather have a not as clear LD that is correct than the DVD, now if the BD is the correct
color then it's not an issue.

but i do miss those quick low buge makeup and effects that are now changed with CGI or other gizmos.

like the Star Trek original series, same issue with the CGI ships, that's the only version on instant watch with nflx.

Check out STAR TREK IV the opening with planet exploding the white flash and towards the end where Enterprise goes into the light of the sun and it grows white and brighter only one looks normal I'll have to get ST IV out and double check as I haven't looked at it while. I have it as you know on LD and blu-movies disc.

I gave away my original DVD collection, just have the SE here and LD, BD. The original cut of STII is better without the added scenes on the SE.

Well all I can is it wasn't worth the Risk Well you can re-buy them cheaper now of eBay than what you paid for in the first place, maybe?

Might have to bust out my copy of evil dead bluray. I picked it up for 3 bucks at best buy a while ago, lol.

Great pics for comparison and very interesting to see.
The only thing I would add though is that the Blu-ray pics in each case seem to be 1.5 times larger than the other two so it is not quite a fair comparison.