RU.08

I loved it too, sorry I didn't post yesterday when I watched it!

You could offer to rent it from the seller and then post it to whoever he sells it to directly, if he's willing to close the auction and wait a couple of weeks. That would net him the extra rental cash with no loss. Besides doing that, you may as well let the disc go - I haven't viewed the footage myself, but it's not like it contains long-lost deleted scenes or anything.

If you're talking about my GOUT/HARMY synced version (at 720p), no technical flaws were introduced, yes that's how it looks in the original release. It also has the pixelation at the end, I haven't even bothered to download the corrected version yet as to me that's really trivial and adds to the overall charm of the release.

Encouraging is a positive thing, and that's what I do.

You have a PM.

I found it very interesting that the opticals tend to degrade more than the body of the film, for some reason. I'm certainly not levelling any criticism towards Legacy, decisions like that are up to the restorer - no? Perhaps I should have said that before, I agree with Harmy but I also agree with you that some flaws are in the source and others are introduced in the print. :)

I do agree with you Harmy about the flaws, what I liked most about negative 1's release was the grain levels changing during every scene with optical effects in it. I was reading this forum page (it's very fascinating), and paid particular attention to this comment by Jim Wicks:

I have color restored over 200 classic motion pictures to date, and picked up quite a number of observations.
Typically, I have noticed that the opticals change at a much different rate than the body of the film.
The opticals are the opening title sequence, fades, cross dissolves, and closing credits.
It's as though I am working on two completely different films: the opticals and the body of the film present different challenges.

paszczak said:

I hope my trilogy is salvageable as it comes without additional editions but if Polish audio can't be removed, it's not worth it.

 

Yes, as others have mentioned, the audio can be removed and replaced with audio from another source. If you're interested in seeing some VHS rips of other films, come over to AMPSdeux there are some on there.

It's a shame it got booted off MySpleen, it's not against their explicit rules, they seem to view any Disney as being "high risk".

Cool, I've ordered a disc (from amazon.co.uk since it was cheaper), thanks for the info. Ideally you would regrade both discs and then go through scene-by-scene and select the better source, because in the screenshot you posted the mondo looks much better than the MGM, but in other shots that is not the case.

I was just thinking about the "tuco torture scene", and the fact that not including it was clearly a "creative choice" of the distributor since they did have the entire scene intact on a print and could have included it. It is GREAT that you can include it from your scan, and finally complete the movie. You may want to take the whole 4-5 minute segment from your film so there are no seams with the commercial releases in there, but that's up to you.

Asaki said:

They also may have lost just the teeniest, tiniest, smallest, most insignificant amount of credibility when they threw the Holocron into a blazing furnace meant for biohazard waste, and maybe just a fraction of a fraction of a percentage of credibility when they kicked LucasArts in there with it and slammed the door shut behind them.

I don't know much about the EU so I'm not going to comment on it, but as for LucasArts, frankly it deserved to be dissolved. But the way Disney went about it was stupid.

The point is to use the IB as the colour reference, not the others (certainly not the MGM 4k). But my comment was that the Mondo already looks very accurate.

I have a question though, is the Mondo bluray and the 01 Distribution the same transfer? And if not, does anyone know how the 01 looks?

Danfun128 said:

As far as I know, VHS tapes have only one audio option.

VHS does have two audio tracks, however players will only read one. When the VHS specs were first released, along one edge of the tape was the audio track, the other edge was the control track, and in-between was the video tracks in helical scan (the tracks which represent odd and even fields are pressed against each other with no space between them). Later, Hi-Fi audio was added to the VHS specification, but as I've just described every area of the tape is already used by video, the mono audio track, and the helical-scan video tracks. So in order to add the stereo audio, the hi-fi tracks were added physically underneath the helical-scan video tracks; thus they are non-continuous helical-scan tracks also. Unfortunately there is no way to select the audio, and any Hi-Fi VCR will read the Hi-Fi track (if present) instead of the mono track, however you can play the same tape in a mono VCR that does not have Hi-Fi heads and it will play the mono track and. It's very unlikely that it would differ from the Stereo track, but it's certainly not impossible.

Of course you have to have a Hi-Fi tape to begin with, and there's no guarantee that the OP's VHS tape has Hi-Fi audio if it's a really old release, in which case it will only have one audio track. If her tape does have HJi-Fi then it is possible to capture each track separately using two different VCR's.

Mason, dude. The Mondo looks pretty damn good in that screenshot, and moreover pretty damn accurate to the colours on the IB as well (remembering that the IB scan's colour correction is still a work in progress). If anything it shows how the IB's contrast is higher. That said, the scan still looks very good in its own right!

Ok, at the conclusion of our PM exchange this is now up on demonoid. Please feel free to help seed!! The files are all the same as from myspleen, so if you downloaded that you are set to seed.

And if you happen to be the only person on this planet without demonid membership, just PM me. :)

StarThoughts said:

I'm not sure what issue you may have with “BD,” but your use of “BR” as an acronym for blu-rays is, quite simply, factually incorrect. The acronym is “BD,” and has been since the inception of the format.

You're incorrect on two points. #1 - BR is an abbreviation of Blu-ray, and BD is one of two possible abbreviations of Blu-ray Disc, and #2 an acronym is an abbreviation made from the first letter of each word that can be said either as a word or as letters, for example "ASAP", BD, BRD, and BR all fail to produce a clearly vocalised word, thus they are not acronyms (unless of course you're suggesting you can say BR as "burr").

There is nothing incorrect about writing "BR disc", just like there's nothing wrong with writing "DVD disc", the only thing that you can't do is write "CD disc" since that duplicates the word the same as in "ATM machine".

StarThoughts said:

Every single commercially available Blu-ray has a stylized “BD” logo on it somewhere. It looks like this.

So what? I can show you DVDs that have "digital versatile disc" printed on them, or in some cases on the cover, even though DVD doesn't stand for anything.

I am happy to upload this to demonoid (+public trackers) for you. I would still like to see the unfiltered version if possible, you could just encode with a CRF of 14-16 at the original frame size and it should only come out at 4GB or so.

Yes it certainly has a magenta-shift, it should look better once it's been colour corrected. Frankly, from the screenshots the film looks to be in pretty good shape - not the frail, fragile condition described. And I should say in any case, what a great find! The only known IB print of TGTBTU known to be in private hands!!

Welcome back p. I love these 10-year old threads!

You raise a good point, scanning the film is one thing, but it then needs quite a bit of work by someone with the interest and the expertise to create a watchable release.

I was going to ask the same thing - they have lost credibility generally speaking, and I guess they've lost some SW credibility by announcing rapid development with "spin off" films. But rapid development isn't always a bad thing either, for instance Dick Donner shot much of Superman 2 at the same time as Superman 1.

It's on the Spleen and Demonoid.

You're better off just making a straight torrent of it, since all your peers will be presumable. Then ask someone else with a more reliable connection to put it on usenet, or mega, etc.

skoal said:

In my world, which may or may not be your world, BR=Blu-Ray.

Because...

Digital Video/Versatile Disc => DVD, but do folks say Digital Video/Versatile Disc? No. And I hope no one obnoxious chimes in and says they do.

Blu Ray Disc => BRD, but does anyone say Blu Ray Disc? No, folks say Blu-Ray.

Blu Ray => BR

DVD doesn't stand for anything, not "Digital Versatile Disc" and not "Digital Video Disc". CD stood for compact disc, so people took to assuming that the last "D" in DVD must mean disc, which is not necessarily true, so saying a "DVD disc" is not incorrect per se. Thus you are technically correct that by the rules of CD and DVD abbreviation, BRD, BD, or BR should all be correct abbreviations of either "Blu-ray Disc" or "Blu-ray" sans disc. However, it should be said that I am quite partial to "BD" because it goes back to the simplicity of "CD".

AntcuFaalb said:

CatBus said:

I'm not sure he got what he was aiming for with the scanlines.

The scanlines weren't explicitly put in. His script actually emulates how an aperture grille CRT (and other CRTs) functions and the scanlines in this case are a side-effect of that.

That's not really accurate, at least it doesn't look that way to me. On a CRT you only really see scanlines in progressive mode (e.g. old video games, arcade machines, computer monitors). In interlaced mode the scanlines are offset by the following field, but the scanline itself is significantly thicker than it is for the empty space between the scanlines. Here, I'll make a picture...

Simple example (no RGB offset):

Top field:

Bottom field:

Combined:

And this is what happens when all you do is upscale (spline36resize) and then "add" scanlines (really you're adding the "black" between the scanlines):

The difference of course being that spline36resize would keep the film at its original speed-rate, whereas the combination of fields would produce a double-rate file (50 or 59.97 fps) since each field is visible for two frames. You could certainly design such a script that leaves you no visible darkened lines and retains the correct brightness of the image; which is more akin to how it looks on a CRT.

Anyway, yeah you could do that, leave yourself a more solid looking picture, and then apply the RGB offset, but it still won't really look the same as viewing a CRT - better to buy yourself a cheap CRT tellie and watch it direct!

Yes, from a draconian interpretation, a more liberal interpretation says I do own the source material, on a different format. The rule says "content providers deserve to be compensated", which I agree with, I disagree with compensating them TWICE for the same transfer. And that's now where I'll end my part of the discussion.

I own up to four copies of some movies already, the last thing I need is to buy more duplicates in my DVD/BD collection.