Sign In

Team Negative1 - Unofficial Jurassic Park 35mm

Replies
106
Author
Time

We are working on a partially cleaned version of the Poita 35mm of Jurassic Park.

============================

- Will be a MP4 high bitrate 1080p version.

- No color or partial minor correction

- 5 pass cleanup, dark/light/scratch/paint/ manual fixes

- Partially cropped

- No stabilization

- Partial flicker removal on a few shots.

Screenshots and clips will be forthcoming.

This is not meant to take the place of other major restorations, but our quick take on it.

Team Negative1

This post has been edited.

Saving Star Wars - One Reel at a Time! The Star Wars Trilogy [Facebook] (https://www.facebook.com/The-Star-Wars-Trilogy-441501702602041/ “Facebook”)

Author
Time

Status Update:

===========================

- Split movie into 4 parts

- 1st cleanup pass

------------------------------------

1 - 70 hours - 50%

2 - 70 hours - 45%

3 - 65 hours - 60%

4 - 20 hours - 20%

===============

- Part 4 - Manual cleanup on end scene and credits. 80%

- Cleaning up DTS intro.

Team Negative1

Saving Star Wars - One Reel at a Time! The Star Wars Trilogy [Facebook] (https://www.facebook.com/The-Star-Wars-Trilogy-441501702602041/ “Facebook”)

Author
Time

Neat! What issues with the current release have prompted the team to work on this print?

“After a time, you may find that having, is not so pleasing a thing after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.” - Spock

Author
Time

Ah, was hoping for stabilization as well. But the scratch removal will be nice.

Author
Time

Will you be keeping it at 1.78:1?

@towne32; I currently have a 720p version encoding as we speak with image stabilisation. I'll see how it looks when complete, and then probably wait until this version is released and work off that for an "unofficial" AVCHD file.

Just a note on that though, I did a test encode a few days ago (with faster settings and CRF not 2-pass), it came out at the right size (about 3.5GB) but there was clear macroblocking due to the level of grain in the print. Which makes it obvious why we see macroblocking in the previews that Team Neg 1 upload of the SW stuff - the bit-rate just isn't high enough to cope with the low compressibility of the source. So this time I degrained it, like I said though I'll probably wait until the -1 Team release their version and then work off that. I didn't do any scratch removal because the algorithm I used left behind smearing (akin to what's commonly referred to as DVNR). If the Negative 1 encode is free from DVNR I'll use it, if not I'll leave the scratches in.

The AVCHD is not intended to in any way to replace the current version though, it's just something I'm doing for the more public trackers so the film can be shared in acceptable quality.

__Valeyard.net __Vimeo

Author
Time

"Partially cropped" - does this mean you're leaving it open matte? While JP was NEVER meant to be seen like this, I am definitely interested in watching it like this just to see what kind of junk is out of frame. 

If not, anyone want to make a quick and dirty encode...? My 2009 white macbook is definitely not up to the task.

What's the internal temperature of a TaunTaun? Luke warm.

Author
Time

Here's the retro-looking disclaimer I made in all of 2 minutes. Click the picture to download (3.4 MB)

http://i.imgur.com/PtfUwkV.png

__Valeyard.net __Vimeo

Author
Time

Just a note - my encode finished and it looks really good. A huge improvement over the original encode at the same file-size (about 3.5GB). What a difference the grain makes! I'll probably just use this version for my AVCHD... I don't think this needs scratch/dirt/damage removal - except for a a handful of scenes mostly involving the end and start of the reels - and frankly I'd rather leave in the residual dirt as it doesn't really detract from the experience at all.

__Valeyard.net __Vimeo

Author
Time

RU.08 said:

Just a note - my encode finished and it looks really good. A huge improvement over the original encode at the same file-size (about 3.5GB). What a difference the grain makes! I'll probably just use this version for my AVCHD... I don't think this needs scratch/dirt/damage removal - except for a a handful of scenes mostly involving the end and start of the reels - and frankly I'd rather leave in the residual dirt as it doesn't really detract from the experience at all.

 Sounds nice. Still waiting to see what The Team cooks up, as far as scratches/dirt go. But I agree that it's in decent shape already compared to many films.

Author
Time

Update:

=====================

First pass - dirt

---------------------

Part 1 - 140 hours - 97%

Part 2 - 137 hours - 96%

Part 3 - 150 hours - 100% done

Part 4 - 50 hours - 35% done

Second pass - dirt

-----------------------

Part 3 - 10 hours - 15%

Part 4 - 40 hours - 30%

Test sample done - Part 4 - 15 minutes.

We'll be posting some video samples shortly.

There is definitely dirt, specks throughout the movie, to varying degrees of distraction.

Team Negative1

Saving Star Wars - One Reel at a Time! The Star Wars Trilogy [Facebook] (https://www.facebook.com/The-Star-Wars-Trilogy-441501702602041/ “Facebook”)

Author
Time

Can much be done for the photochemical black crush?

Author
Time

...

- Partially cropped

- No stabilization

...

Hi, does 'partially cropped' just mean a matte? Is this being done to attain a uniform picture width & height?

Why no stabilization?

Also, I really like HEVC/H.265 now, if you haven't already, you might want to test it out.

This post has been edited.

Author
Time

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

 Not to mention x265 isn't AVCHD/BD compatible like x264 is.

Author
Time

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

I think HEVC is pretty good and while what you're saying may be correct or true to you or possibly even absolutely true in a general or specific technical sense, until I see you have good reason to say what you're saying, I say it's subjective and I disagree.

Author
Time

stretch009 said:

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

 Not to mention x265 isn't AVCHD/BD compatible like x264 is.

Will x265 (HEVC) ever be compatible with AVCHD/BD? I'm not sure if that's a good reason not to use it. Doh!

Author
Time

skoal said:

stretch009 said:

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

 Not to mention x265 isn't AVCHD/BD compatible like x264 is.

Will x265 (HEVC) ever be compatible with AVCHD/BD? I'm not sure if that's a good reason not to use it. Doh!

 My point was if they want to make an AVCHD/BD compatible version also they're going to have to make an x264 version along with the x265.

Author
Time

skoal said:

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

I think HEVC is pretty good and while what you're saying may be correct or true to you or possibly even absolutely true in a general or specific technical sense, until I see you have good reason to say what you're saying, I say it's subjective and I disagree.

 

Original frame from Blu ray: http://abload.de/img/761_original_rcued.png

x264 5000 kbps encode: http://abload.de/img/761_05000_x264p2o6x.png

x265 5000 kbps encode: http://abload.de/img/761_05000_ybrad.png


Look at the table. All the grain is gone completely.

Note that I didn't make these images, found it on google. Some settings may have been set incorrectly, but there's a reason x265 encodes are very rarely showing up on torrents.

Fanres - fan restoration forum: https://forum.fanres.com/

Author
Time

stretch009 said:

skoal said:

stretch009 said:

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

 Not to mention x265 isn't AVCHD/BD compatible like x264 is.

Will x265 (HEVC) ever be compatible with AVCHD/BD? I'm not sure if that's a good reason not to use it. Doh!

 My point was if they want to make an AVCHD/BD compatible version also they're going to have to make an x264 version along with the x265.

 You're point or points, don't make sense, but keep on talking. Doh!

Author
Time

Feallan said:

skoal said:

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

I think HEVC is pretty good and while what you're saying may be correct or true to you or possibly even absolutely true in a general or specific technical sense, until I see you have good reason to say what you're saying, I say it's subjective and I disagree.

 

Original frame from Blu ray: http://abload.de/img/761_original_rcued.png

x264 5000 kbps encode: http://abload.de/img/761_05000_x264p2o6x.png

x265 5000 kbps encode: http://abload.de/img/761_05000_ybrad.png


Look at the table. All the grain is gone completely.

Note that I didn't make these images, found it on google. Some settings may have been set incorrectly, but there's a reason x265 encodes are very rarely showing up on torrents.

When I basically said, it's all subjective unless you have something to back-it up, I didn't mean grabbing random images encoded with who knows which settings and which encoder (version). Give me a break. Seriously?

Also, while many on here and else where disagree, showing 2 frames and pointing out grain doesn't mean much. Yes, grain can be good, artificial grain put back in after denoising takes it out can be good, but with video compression it's about perceptual quality and we're not looking at individual frames (in exactly the same way) when we're watching the actual moving picture.

Author
Time

We are not using x.265, someone else can test those.

Also, we mentioned releasing only a high bitrate MP4, and haven't decided on the filesize yet.

The work we are doing on it, is because we have spare machines that can be tasked to work on it. Anything that is scene to scene intensive will not be done, because we don't have the time to work on it.

This is just to create a base version, so that other people can improve on it will color correction and other fixes.

There are other people doing the fixes people want. We just wanted to do something relatively quick and simple.

Team Negative1

This post has been edited.

Saving Star Wars - One Reel at a Time! The Star Wars Trilogy [Facebook] (https://www.facebook.com/The-Star-Wars-Trilogy-441501702602041/ “Facebook”)

To the top