How can you tell the difference between true HD and upscaling?
The HD scenes are really sharp and detailed, while the upscaled scenes only look slightly better than the DVD, and the image is kind of "soft" compared to the actual HD video, and they don't have that higher amount of detail.
Also, the hairs of the characters are slightly pixelated in the upscaled scenes.
In comparison, the old AC scenes will still look better on BD, since the DVD
1. didn't have the best image quality anyway, and
2. there's less compression on BD.
The old AC scenes on Blu-ray definitely look better since they are sharper compared to the DVD and have more color saturation, but they don't reach that super-detailed HD level.
I just spoke to a friend who knows a lot about this kind of thing and he recons the entire movie has actually been re-rendered
Even if the whole movie was true HD, it wouldn't have to be re-rendered for that. CGI is always rendered at high resolutions. They should have had an HD master of the movie there already which is why I'm surprised they only used upscaled video footage from the original AC. Unless they only kept the SD video and deleted the HD source models which I can't imagine though, otherwise they would have had to re-do a shitload of 3D models to get an HD master just for the new scenes and there were slight changes in some of the SD scenes too, so hm....mysterious imo.
Take The Spirits Within for example. It's in HD, no upscaling. There was no re-rendering done, they just had to take the source material and make a digital transfer to BD in 1080p resolution.
Why couldn't it be done for AC, I wonder?
Also, the pic you posted:
It looks way different there because they completely changed the lighting in that scene.
But it still seems to be just upscaled SD video material.