pittrek said:

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

I too believe that the AVCHD is the most important release, because it is by far the HD format that most people can handle.   

That's funny. I know NOBODY who uses (or even KNOWS) the AVCHD format :-) Honestly, EVERYBODY who watches HD movies watches them in mkv format, or from BluRays - that includes my colleagues, friends, "collectors of unreleased videos", people on various  forums ... People here at originaltrilogy.com are the only individuals which I know that use the AVCHD format :-)

Don't take me wrong, but I just believe that the full Bluray should be the "product" done with the most care, because other people can always create "smaller"/alternate formats from it.

 

Sorry for the offtopic :-(

I really think MKV should be considered due to it being such a high-quality format.

Blu-Ray

pros:

Highest quality; multiple audio tracks; chapter support; menus and extras; high compatibility with blu-ray players;

cons:

requires burning on a blu-ray disc; requires a blu-ray player for playback (or else playable as-is by some media players - my Micca can play blu-ray ISO files and folders as-is), or on a pc with a good video card and software; very large download

MKV

pros:

very high quality - approaches blu-ray quality; multiple audio tracks; chapter support; only a single file needed for playback; playable in a large amount of home media players (my Samsung LED tv, my Panasonic blu-ray player, and both my WDTV Live and Micca media players all support mkv playback); playable on any modern PC with a descent video card, and supported by tons of free media player software

cons:

needs to be "delivered" on a usb stick or other means, can't just be given away to friends on a disc; not playable on older equipment; unknown format by many non-techies; large download, but much smaller than blu-ray

AVCHD

pros:

high quality; multiple audio tracks; chapter support; easy to burn; playable on most? blu-ray players; easy to give away to friends when burned on a DVD-9; reasonable-sized download

cons:

requires burning on a DVD-9; requires a blu-ray player for playback (or else playable as-is by some media players - my Micca can play AVCHD files as-is), or on a modern PC with a good video card; unknown format by many non-techies, though you just need to tell them to play it in their blu-ray player

DVD

pros:

easy to burn; cheap media (if DVD-5); multiple audio tracks; chapter support; menus and extras; easy to give to friends; plays on every DVD player and PC; reasonable-sized download

cons:

low quality

They all have their place. I think MKV is a great choice, since it is higher quality than the AVCHD, and doesn't require burning to watch it. Many non-techies will not know what an mkv is. Most of us on here will know, and any internet-savvy person who plays lots of media is familiar with it. But it may not be the best format for giving to friends. Personally, I would like an MKV for myself because it's easy to play on my players, and gives me close to blu-ray quality. I'd probably want the blu-ray if it will have some extras and menus, otherwise I'd be happy enough with a good MKV. However, I would certainly want an AVCHD to burn for friends who have blu-ray players. I don't care about DVD, but I can see how some who haven't stepped into the world of digital and blu-ray might find it a blessing.

What I don't understand is why those wanting an MKV are begging Harmy to do it. If we have an SD dvd5 version of these projects, it's because someone else took an initiative and did it himself (chewtobbaca). If you guys really really want an MKV, build one yourselves from the bluray files and offer it to the community. I am pretty positive Harmy would not have the slightest problem with that as long as due credit to harmy is given.

Just get a copy of MKVToolnix, it's just a single command:

mkvmerge 00000.m2ts -o mymkv.mkv

Current versions should be able to handle anything that's in a BD.

hairy_hen said:

The two channel version of the 70mm track isn't in the Despecialized Edition—what I was referring to there was the actual 35mm stereo mix, which I also encoded to AC3 along with the mono.  The links are there just in case there were any problems with the tracks in the first mkv.

 

That reminds me of something I'd forgotten to point out, though: since the 5.1 mix was created by upmixing a stereo track and is not truly discrete, downmixing it back to stereo again is inadvisable.  There is a distinct possibility that doing so could cause phase problems, most likely heard as distortion in the high frequencies, which obviously is a less than optimal listening experience.  The most obvious cause of such phase problems would be the fact that the surround channels (which contain a certain amount of unavoidable crosstalk from the front) are delayed by 10 milliseconds, and definitely won't align properly in a downmix.  Add this to the fact that Dolby Digital decoders may drop the LFE channel when downmixing, in which case the main benefit of the 5.1—namely, the added bass content—would go unheard.

So if, for example, you will be listening to the movie on headphones, or any system without a subwoofer installed, then the two channel version of the 70mm track could make for a more optimal listening experience.

Since it isn't included here, due to the 5.1 more properly representing the theatrical experience, the user would have to mux it in themselves, but it may be worthwhile depending on what kind of listening setup is being used.  The links for it are in this post if anyone doesn't have it yet.

Very cool, but had I known all that yesterday, I probably would have muxed it in before rereleasing. I think I just won't be worrying about it going forward...just too much of a hassle.

OK, I will do the v2.1 AVCHD :-) As to the MKV, what Mavimao said is absolutely right. And you can also make one from the AVCHD just as easily - most MKVs of films this length "obtainable"online are the size of the AVCHD or smaller. I wanted to do the MKV as a really high quality release before I get the BD out but to my surprise, the AVCHD is so good, it wasn't even necessary (I expected the AVCHD compression to be similar to the v1.0 but apparently the quality loss in v1.0 was caused by the editing process using lossy files and non-professional software rather than the final encoding).

As to h_h's 2.0 mix, I didn't include it because it simply doesn't really represent any of the theatrical or official mixes. I was even considering not using the 93 mix but in the end I did because that is a high quality stereo if you need one - 320Kbps encoded from LD PCM.

This leads me to a question about audio - how large will the lossless mixes be? I need to account for them when deciding on encoding bitrates of the other features on the BD.

Harmy said:

This leads me to a question about audio - how large will the lossless mixes be? I need to account for them when deciding on encoding bitrates of the other features on the BD.

DTS-HD MA is a lossless format, so once Hairy_Hen has done the encoding it will produce a log file stating what the average and peak bitrate is.

I always base my bitrate on the peak.

Don't forget with Blu-ray your max br with video and audio is 48Mbps, just video is 40Mbps, so you have 8Mbps just for audio.

Exactly the same as the difference between the MKV and the AVCHD...

@DVD-BOY: Thank you but that didn't answer my question at all. I understand that the size won't always be exactly the same but what is the average size of a 5.1 DTS-HD track? And how big will the stereo tracks be in whatever lossless format is the best for those. I have zero knowledge of this stuff and I'd just like to know the approximate numbers.

Harmy said:

 

Slightly darken some of the very bright shots in the Luke meets Ben scene.

Not that even more needs to be said on this topic, but I'm curious--what's your target here?  Are you still aiming for close fidelity to the Technicolor prints, or are you going for something somewhere between that and your final workprint?  I remember when you were discussing those awful blue tinted shots, you were considering doing a "nod to the blue tint" without actually making it as blue.  Are you considering a "nod to the overexposed look"?

You know Harmy the only thing i missed in the finished mkv of 2.0, was the old cinema countdown like you had in your test parts, would you consider bringing that back for the Blu-Ray?

Kingherb said:

You know Harmy the only thing i missed in the finished mkv of 2.0, was the old cinema countdown like you had in your test parts, would you consider bringing that back for the Blu-Ray?

 ++ Those countdowns were awesome and would make great menu transition lead-in/outs.

well, I was about to get the fixed audio avchd, but I guess I'll wait for 2.1

Any idea when that might be? (no rush, just curious)

Harmy said:

@DVD-BOY: Thank you but that didn't answer my question at all. I understand that the size won't always be exactly the same but what is the average size of a 5.1 DTS-HD track? And how big will the stereo tracks be in whatever lossless format is the best for those. I have zero knowledge of this stuff and I'd just like to know the approximate numbers.

I think Jan best sums it up:

Jan said:

I've seen 5.1 DTS-HD MA tracks varying in size from like 1.5 GB to more than 4 GB for 2 hour movies.

If it is of any help, I took the 5.1 from Dark Jedi's v3 DVD Project, decoded back to wavs and transcoded to DTS-HD MA.

The file came in at 3.25 GB. Average looks like about 3.7Mbps, Peak 4.7Mbps. 1.5Mbps Core.

Verboten said:

Just checking, but is Luke's skin supposed to look so orange during the "For luck." shot?