Well... i suppose it isn't a proper LDDB X-Mas without some healthy SD v. HD/ANALOG v. DIGITAL VIDEO bickering...

Well you have an LCD etc, my setup is superior for a start because I have the best CRT ever released in the Australian market, the KVHR-M36 made in Japan with Super Fine Pitch comb filter. Playback was on my always solid single sided player, MDP-355GX through DVDO iScan VP50 to setup the aspect ratio.




I can never take good pics of my CRT, it just flares out the camera and I'm not good with my camera settings (Ricoh GR Digital). I think the picture is just too awesome to capture with a digital device.

You know fire reflecting on snow will look yellow right? I don't think the snow actually looks pee stained at all in those caps.

No Wrong. The Blu-Ray is far too warm going overboard with the browns, yellows and oranges.. This is a fact, and it has been rectified with the new remastered scan of Die Hard 2 that was released in theaters for a limited time in 2013. That same remastered scan is now available on iTunes in 4K, and the colours are much, much closer to the DVD with the cooler blues and the whites being allowed to shine. The iTunes 4K remaster is even much better than the DVD due to of course resolution, wider colour gamut, HDR, compression etc.

The old LD is wrong, and hell it's even worse than the old Blu-Ray because of it being in SD.

My DVDo iScan HD+ can setup aspect ratio perfectly as well. Also the Pioneer CLD-D925 is a much superior player (picture quality wise) to the Sony MDP-355GX.




Heres a first, you are sticking up for the Blu-Ray version just because you know that the colours of that old non-AC3 LD of Die Hard 2 looks similar.

The Blu-Ray of most movies 95% of the time will destroy some old LD or DVD, and in this case the old LD is just as bad if not worse than the Blu-Ray, and the DVD is better. However this counts for nothing because the brand new 4K remaster on iTunes smokes all these previous transfers with ease. The 4K on iTunes has similarities with the DVD, but it's much more balanced and neutral.

Here is a picture comparsen. Not the exact same screenshot on the 4K iTunes version, and the 4K iTunes version is just some guy taking a image of his TV screen, so the photo quality isn't great, but it gives you a idea on how much better balanced the iTunes 4K transfer is.


Blu-Ray:




4K iTunes:



Keep in mind the non-AC3 LD release is probably a lower res, even crappier looking version of the BD.

The DVD has flaws (mostly due to the limitations of the format) with blooming contrast and highlights but it has the right idea when it comes to the overall look of the film. The Blu-Ray is wrong on all levels when it comes to colour temp, drenching everything in muddy yellows, browns and oranges sucking the life out of the stunning cinematography.

The 4K iTunes transfer of Die Hard 2 returns back to the correct cooler palette that the DVD has, with skin tones that are more nuanced and dynamic than the DVD let alone the flat looking LD and Blu-Ray. Colours pop much more in the 4K as well and there is more range to the colours, and the sense of depth and dimension is much improved, all that along with the sharpness, much better highlight information, strong contrast and better resolved grain.

The iTunes remaster is by leaps and bounds the best, with the special edition DVD a distant 2nd. This new and improved scan was originally released in 2013 for limited theatrical screening.


Here is a screenshot of the iTunes 4K version. Of course the quality of the image isn't the best since the guy just used his phone to take a picture of his TV, but it gives a idea on how much better the colours are vs the ugly old LD/Blu-Ray

I've still have that DVD and a BD of Die Hard 2. Give me the BD every time.

I have the Alien movies on BD as well, which some people seem to complain about. They look fine. Many of BD's "color problems" are massively overstated in practice.

Sorry but 'Alien' is not a Christmas movie franchise; please keep on topic.

Die Hard may be a christmas movie, but Ghostbusters 2 is a new year's eve movie

No, you cannot take a screenshot of a TV and say that it gives an idea of how much better the master that was used for the version on iTunes is. It's not really that complicated when you think about it.

First off, I know nothing about the guy who took that screenshot. I have no idea what phone he's using or what display he's watching the film on. And, on top of that, we most certainly have no way to tell whether or not the display have been calibrated to the proper standard.

Second, when taking a photo you must select a certain color temperature for the final viewing. This can be done in post if you shoot in RAW, but I belive nearly all smart phones (never use them myself) export directly to JPEG which mean the color temperature must be set on the phone itself. If it's off, which it most likely will be, it can end up pretty much however it pleases. I'm going to demonstrate it for you right away with one example from my Sony BVM-A24. All of these four pictures are created using the exact same exposure with the help of Lightroom. The DSLR used is a Nikon D700 in combination with a Nikkor 85mm f/1.8.

First is a straight conversion from .NEF to .JPEG, no changes made whatsoever.


The next three pictures have the exact samt adjustments made to exposure, contrast, highglights, blackness, noise reduction etc. What differs is the color temperature and tone.

This one is set to 4230° Kelvin with +23 in tone (towards magenta).


This one is set to 5400° Kelvin with +4 in tone (towards magenta)


And the final is set to 6504° Kelvin with +8 in tone (towards magenta)


My monitor have been calibrated to BT.709/D65 with less than 0,5dE u'v for the entire greyscale and a maximum of 2,4dE2000 in CalMAN Color Checker analysis. It looks wonderful in person, yet these pictures differ so much that you cannot make any kind of conclusions whatsoever about what the monitor is capable of or what Howl's Moving Castle actually looks like on Blu-Ray. If that's the case here, how do you believe you can make any conclusions about the iTunes version of Die Hard 2 when judging from a screenshot taken by an unknown guy with an unknown TV with unknown settings and with the help of an unknown phone?

oh damn I plain forgot that but thanks for the tip; but now there's only limited time for me to see GBI & GBII before it's all too late!!

That picture nissling posted is clearly the correct one.

Well to be honest I have seen a D925 in action and it was okay. I doubt you've seen 355GX work. I was surprised at the PQ, it's better than the other Sony I have. It beats most of the Pioneers I've had, except for my broken down LD-S9 which was just sublime in PQ (yet crappy in SQ).



I've had this argument with you before but resolution isn't everything. A good analogue picture from an LD can easily look far better than a maxed out resolution BD of the same movie.

You're a sucker for anything new. Sometimes things are already perfect and we just keep on upgrading for no reason. Except me, I don't.

What the hell....

I'll take that on advisement. I never said it was a true reflection of the image presented on the iTunes 4K, I presumed it gave a idea on how certain aspects look but I'm no expert when it comes to this field. All I know is that it comes from a trusted source because the guy who took the shot is very much a videophile and has been for a number of years. With that said ignore the screenshot, or don't.

What I can see and have already stated is that the iTunes 4K transfer is amazing and is objectively better than any other previous HD or SD transfer of Die Hard 2, and if you took the time to read my mini review you would see that. If you watched it for yourself on your setup and if you have the critical eye for picture quality, (which you clearly do) there is no way you will be defending that outdated, poor transfer on the BD.

No but I have heard enough reviews and comments that Sony LD players (including that model) are not known for their PQ, and they often break down. The only exceptions being the Sony MUSE players, but that's Hi-Vision.

A analogue picture from an LD with the same ugly warm colours but with less detail, more noise, and even more restricted colour definition is worse than a already poor BD.

In fact as poor as the BD is of DH2, in general it just goes to show that even when a BD is poorly mastered most of the time it still beats the LD whether you like it or not.

Die Hard 2 is the only Blu-Ray with colour problems that I've seen. Every other Blu-Ray I have seen, (including the Alien franchise), features much better colours than their LD/DVD counterparts.

Yes, anybody can clearly see that out of the 4 pictures the one is the correct one.

I always see blue snow, I'm looking out my window right now and see powder blue snow in the daylight even.

The new remastered iTunes 4K transfer looks nothing like the Blu-Ray, the Blu-Ray is incorrect.

LOTR, particularly Fellowship has a green tint to it. However it's very superior to to the DVD and VHS (obviously) in every other way.

The Matrix is one that was truly awful. I believe it was fixed somewhat recently.

There are definitely bad BDs out there, but I didn't feel Die Hard 2 was one of them. It's not great either though. It's average I'd say.

Back on topic for a moment - my daughter and I watched the original Die Hard on Christmas Eve. This thread made me realize I don't have Die Hard 2 on LD. I have the Die Hard and Die Hard 3 on LD, but not the second one. Guess I'll have to pick that up...