I can see there’s no database for The Rise of Skywalker’s deleted scenes.
AFAIK there are no deleted scenes for The Rise of Skywalker.
Indeed, I made my homeworks, but could not find more info… maybe digging in some blu-ray forum would help to discover if it’s the Australian version!
Also Foobar2000 plus one of its plugins.
I’d start with something you could find here:
http://avisynth.nl/index.php/Guides
Advices:
Welcome to this strange world! 😄
I read a lot about BD writer before taking the decision, and I went with this: ASUS BW-16D1HT
Good price, great quality, and most of all it can “read” UHD-BD - warning: you need an Intel CPU (powerful enough) to actually play UHD-BD discs!
According to this: https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Crocodile-Dundee-Blu-ray/215926
the HMV Blu-ray is 104m and then it could be the uncut version…
Bluebird is a Russian site, so it’s normal if they leave the Russian subtitles, of course…
About using BD (or UHD) to get rid of hardsubs, if all of them are on one line, it is possible.
Ready to watch them in 2049!!! 😄
spoRv. Any chance you might revisit your project and share it with us ?
There are some. Few, but not none. 😉
Would be great to see the differences of 3D BD and previous BDs, because, AFAIK, 3D BD still has changes - some that come to mind is the tree at the beginning, and “light ray” from the hand near the end.
I got another idea in mind, but first I need to clear those doubts…
Thanks for your kind words!
Agree, I went maybe a bit too far with noise reduction but, hey, it was one of my first projects, and also the source is what it is… 😄
About grain, it was not present in the LD - or, at least, resolution did not preserve it so well.
Watching it with fresh eyes, the only reason to prefer this to BD is color grading and few shots that were changed in the BD; if I would update this, I’d use BD as main source, regrading it as LD, leaving only the changed shots as in the actual project.
Thanks for the answer!
Yep, it seems your route is the best - the procedures you are following are good!
Not a Beatles expert, but there are a lot of laserdisc editions; it could be possible to find out some mono versions, so I guess laserdisc higher S/N and dynamic could be a better source, at least in theory.
According to this post
https://www.slashfilm.com/the-abyss-blu-ray/
it would be real… still, who knows (now) if it will get the same fate of T2 UHD?
So, I thought to give it a try…
UHD WEB version Vs mine:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/1016
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/1014
UHD test clip 1, regraded - 1m 438MB HEVC 8bit SDR 61.2mbps no audio:
https://fex.net/s/c55vpv3 - will expire in a week, so hurry up!
final version would be 10bit, though, I would like to be UHD-BD compliant (a dream, maybe, let’s see)
Now, would be nice if someone with an UHD TV/display could download it and give an opinion.
Top UHD-BD HDR2SDR, bottom DEFINITIVA test1 (regraded using Umatic as color reference:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/135553
(WORK IN PROGRESS!!!)
It is obviously not the original negative, but a Kodak 2382 lowfade in very good condition.
THAT’S GREAT!!!
Again, US DVD/Blu-ray players and displays are known to have issues with 25 or 50 field/frame content (SD or HD) - they’re generally not made with anything other than NTSC/film specs in mind (whereas European players have been NTSC ready since the DVD era).
Sorry, you are completely right… well, let’s take the 25/50fps to 23.976fps (or 24), and we will solve everything - or not? Even if there is some movie pieces in the PAL sources, they surely not have IVTC problems.
MPEG-2 to AVC conversion is useful only to get the same image quality with lower bitrate, hence smaller file size - yet, some quality will be lost, even if not that much. At that point, an alternative could be to do a nice upscale (that should be better than the average HDTV real time upscale), apply a slight deblock (useful for MPEG-2 encoded video) and possibly a light noise reduction, and have the NTSC 480p 29.97fps as 1280x720 59.94p or 1440x1080 59.94i, and PAL 576p 25fps as 1280x720 50p or 1440x1080 50i - I’d go with 1440 horizontal lines if the DVD material is anamorphic, as 1440=720x2, hence better upscale. So, any PAL and NTSC material, when upscaled, could be burned on a BD-R and be read by any BD player, from US or any other part of the world, without eventual compatibility problems.
I guess the only solution that would suit all users is the ‘bag of files’ option, which isn’t much fun from a user perspective but at least has the benefit of source purity.
“bag of files”, meaning all PAL and NTSC files “thrown” inside a directory/disc?
I’d go with two (or more) disc, one PAL, one NTSC (possibly including two versions, where available).
There is a 1080p version floating around, but it will be great to find out the 2160p - if it exists (already?)
AFAIK the open matte 007 movies are:
Golden Eye on 1.33:1 DVD
Casino Royale on 1.33:1 DVD
Skyfall on 1.78:1 HDTV
and of course as you stated in the first post,
Quantum of Solace on 1.78:1 HDTV
and as SilverWook said,
Casino Royale on 1.78:1 PSP
(curious to see the latter!)
not aware of other titles, but as some of them were released in 1.66:1 and 1.78:1, it is quite possible they were released in open matte - Skyfall and Quantum of Solace are 2.39:1 yet available in open matte, so… 😉
You are 15yrs old, and you dare to make a fan edit? 😉 😉 😉
Congratulations, really! Also, your pictures are very nice, you are a talented boy!
Can you post some screenshot comparison of your edit, before/after? Curious to see the differences.
I recovered my old Technicolor-look-a-like-more-or-less regrade of A New Hope made two years ago, and upscaled the regraded HDTV using this technique:
comparison: http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/131279
test clip: http://www.filedropper.com/anhuhdtest (again 10s, it takes so long to make it!)
Guess I went too far with the highlight, clipping some whites.
So, if someone downloaded the clips, how do they seem? Too fake, plastic-y etc. or watchable? Thanks for the feedbacks!
Sources went through temporal noise reduction, and when needed (usually with MPEG-2 sources) deblock and/or sharpening and/or dehalo.
Using more than one source helps to get some details back, even if the whole process is far from perfect - “guessing” details sometimes, losing them other times…
I downloaded Emanswfan’s 35mm 4K Filmized ROTS test clip; I like a lot his color grading, so I applied it to my test clip (just increased the gamma for the luma, though); added also a finer 35mm grain plate.
Comparison: http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/131243
Test clip: http://www.filedropper.com/rotsuhdtest (only 10s, just to have an idea)
Opinions are welcome as usual.
The fact is, difference in the TPM comparison is so big because the source was quite poor - in comparison to BD, for sure, hence it looks… well, “better” - at least, watched at 1x; in motion “should” be even nices. I guess BD would look not so sharp, yet better than simple “go and upscale”. Color grading apart, of course.
I guess also TPM could have some value, until a 4K (or more) scan will be ready.