Sign In

towne32

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
3-May-2014
Last activity
26-May-2017
Posts
4250

Post History

Post
#1079217
Topic
Doctor Who
Time

SilverWook said:

I have the NTSC two disc release. Seems cheap or lazy to use a heavily compressed version as an uncompressed master for the recon must be somewhere?

Hard to say.

More importantly, Derek Handley offered to allow them to use his new Power of the Daleks telesnap recon in the set and it was either too late to do so, or they did not want to. I think inclusion of the BBC recon was just a simple bonus and not a main attraction. There’s nothing fancy about it, and even if they didn’t use Derek’s, it would have only taken a day or two to simply build another one out of the higher quality, cleaned up telesnaps they now have.

btw: In case you’re not aware, Derek is the guy from Loose Cannon. They’ve used his recons on for Marco Polo and Galaxy 4 in the DVD range before, as well as in the Out of the Unknown DVDs.

Post
#1079212
Topic
Doctor Who
Time

SilverWook said:

The telesnap recon suffers from a shockingly low bitrate. (Probably the only way to cram it in on the same disc.) Nearly every fade out/fade in, or dissolve pixilates very badly.

I know this is a really old post, but I think the telesnap recon is simply low bitrate because it came from an MP3 CD recon from a bunch of years back. It was the equivalent of a quicktime/realmedia thing in the early 2000s.

I’m a bit confused as to which release you got? On the NTSC version, the color copy is on disc 1. The Blu-ray is actually region free as far as I can tell (the included DVDs are not). Plays fine on my US PS4 (and probably any machine that will do 25P?). Even on that case, where there’s plenty of room on the BD50 for the SD recon on disc 2, and it’s still pixelated, as it was back on the audio CD.

The initial PAL DVD came out before the color animation was completed, and R2 territory never got a second 2-disc DVD release.

Then, the US and Australian DVDs came out. These had the black and white version crammed in with all of the extras on disc 2. The jaggies are insanely bad and almost unwatchable. The color version is a bit messed up. The credit fades are based on earlier renders. Sometimes the text jumps around, or the fade is actually missing. In one episode, there are early Dalek renders shown, which are left-handed (mirrored).

Then the Blu-ray came out. It has 2x BD50s + 2x DVDs. BD disc 1 has B&W plus most extras. BD disc 2 has Color and the recon. This is the only way to get the R2 color DVD. However, only the main B&W and Color features are on these discs, not any extras. It’s worth picking up. At 1080p, you can see a pretty nice fake grain effect on the B&W version, which gives it a bit of a vintage look, and all the line work is much smoother.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1079103
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

joefavs said:

I think you’re probably fine with the blu-rays. When in doubt, the current official release is a good rule of thumb. Especially since it’s looking more and more like they’ll just ride out the 2011 discs until they do a 4K release rather than putting out a remastered SE in the meantime.

Yeah, no point encouraging the purchase of discs that will pretty much only benefit ebay sellers asking for way more than they’re worth.

Post
#1078814
Topic
Our open letter to Disney and Lucasfilm
Time

Fang Zei said:

Darth Lucas said:

towne32 said:

As I thought, the reddit thread is full of scumbags.

You shouldn’t link the thread directly here, though. AFAIK, that constitutes brigading and can result in deletions/bans.

Facebook comments arent much better. Lots of “get over it”.

I just loved how the very first reply in that reddit thread talks about how Kennedy said she wasn’t going to touch George’s versions when that has nothing at all to do with restoring the original versions.

To be fair, the majority of people even here seem to be dead set on interpreting it that way. Hell, poita just posted the same yesterday.

Other than that, we’re just getting the same old parroted comments about how the film is destroyed, or how Fox would never allow Disney to sell something that would make money for both parties.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1078805
Topic
Our open letter to Disney and Lucasfilm
Time

As I thought, the reddit thread is full of scumbags.

You shouldn’t link the thread directly here, though. AFAIK, that constitutes brigading and can result in deletions/bans.

Post
#1078804
Topic
Our open letter to Disney and Lucasfilm
Time

As I thought, the reddit thread is full of scumbags.

You shouldn’t link the thread directly here, though. AFAIK, that constitutes brigading and can result in deletions/bans.

Post
#1076953
Topic
Neverar's 1080p Star Wars Color Correction
Time

Octorox said:

Out of curiosity, what’s the rationale behind this reversion:
"-Returning R2’s jump cut roll in the Tantive IV secondary corridor"

I think I might be the individual he’s talking about.

The way I see it, one of the goals of this project is to use it as a base for one of Harmy’s future projects. As such, it’s pretty painless to just insert the nice HD 2004 copy of a despecialized shot so that someone (such as Harmy) has a color matched shot already present instead of needing to match it to the surrounding color and contrast.

There are hundreds of shots that still need to be despecialized, I just figured it was an easy opportunity to roll a quick shot back with Neverar’s color settings intact.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1075604
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

captainsolo said:

You know we should have in there somewhere that there isn’t even an official release that looks as good as the SE prints 20 years ago which weren’t perfect but at least were serviceable and relatively accurate.

While true, I think this strays too far from the focus. The point is to demand the OOT more so than to point out that very few of Lucasfilm’s decisions over the last 20 years have seemingly made any sense. It would be very easy to make them look incompetent, but I don’t think there’s any need.

Post
#1075511
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

althor1138 said:

Somebody should do one of these posts on Reddit:

<----- Number of people that want the original theatrical version of star wars released on blu-ray

If that hit the front page of reddit it would mean quite a bit I think. The OT crowd would definitely have to get the ball rolling. I’m assuming everybody has reddit accounts?

In my experience, the reddit SW crowd is intensely pro-Lucas (and pro-PT/SE). Things related to the original films are usually down voted to oblivion. That and TFN are probably where a lot of our prequel trolls find us from.

If it gained traction in r/movies, this might work. It’s a bigger sub and a default one, so it would be seen by a better variety of people if it isn’t first brigaded by the r/starwars crew.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1075430
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

dahmage said:

Would it be strange to add a line to the end of the letter something like “we would love the opportunity to discuss this with you” or “if you would like to hear our ideas please feel free to reach out”?

Well, the note asks for a response. It’s presumably a public response that they would give (allowing them the opportunity to market it, if they actually wanted to). They’re not just going to email Jay about their business plans and they’re not going to ask us for help or advice, as fun as that idea might be.

Post
#1075406
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

Right. We are not giving them directions or writing a contract. We are hoping to raise awareness and increase discussion, and despite low chances of success, hoping that we might get some kind of information. A comment that is less worthless/ambiguous than the recent Kennedy interview.

If, someday, they release a 2k OOT (first of all, I would still be thrilled), it won’t be because, "hah! You ****ers should’ve specified 4K! Gotcha!"
I know people still feel burned about GOUT, but that didn’t happen due to a misunderstanding.

Post
#1075380
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

Alderaan said:

Actually I like the yes or no line. I think the message should be pointed without being confrontational. Our goal is to get a straight answer, not some PR nonsense.

I agree. With this and certainly with “release” instead of “restore”. This should be as direct and unambiguous a question as possible. If I’m not mistaken, this push is at least partially inspired by (in addition to the anniversary), the absolutely terribly phrased question in some podcast, where the guy essentially gave Kennedy an ‘out’ built into the phrasing.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1075264
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

Fang Zei said:

Yeah, we don’t need to list the differences.

Yeah, I think it’s the wrong way to go. Listing or even giving a count. Mention a shitty one or two, if needed. I think the fans that care about recomposited shots and tweaked sound effects are pretty much confined to this forum. The fans that dislike seeing a closeup of a cartoon bug’s uvula or Hayden Christensen (in no particular order) are surely more numerous. Show something that was lost, like the desolate Mos Eisley pre-dinosaurs.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1075187
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

doubleofive said:

I would say over 900 instances of visual differences, plus how many ever audio differences. Didn’t we have a breakdown of how many frames were different at one point?

I think pointing out the insanity of 900 changes works for those of us who are already on board about the subject. I think TFN’ers and redditors (i.e., Lucas apologists) and such often point out the minor changes we discuss as reasons that we shouldn’t be taken seriously. If any time is to be spent discussing what has changed, it might have more impact to discuss the more glaring changes, where bits of the films were unambiguously lost in the process. Some of the 900 things, normal (uninformed) people might consider to be standard “remastering”.

Post
#1075102
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

I think the shortened version is much more effective. And the point is not only for someone at Disney to read it, but for hundreds or more other fans to read it and retweet, etc. There are tons of fans who comment on any OT related tweet I’ve seen, demanding the OOT or complaining about it not being available (and presumably only a few of them are from here). Hell, Harmy has tons of followers on his facebook that have nothing to do with this site. There’s an audience out there that might respond, and an essay is probably not the way to do that. Perhaps you could include a link to a fuller statement, but I still think it was probably too wordy as it was.

If this is a twitter thing, I think it’s just as important to try to find the right people to retweet it. Prominent people in fandom who don’t suck (or have Lucas apologist followers)? Celebrities? Geeky news sites? Edit: this part of the conversation probably shouldn’t be public.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1073538
Topic
Harmy's RETURN OF THE JEDI Grindhouse 35mm LPP
Time

tbird97 said:

Has anyone released an .iso file for this? Particularly in the same place we might look for other releases? I saw an .mkv file, but I’ve never converted one before. Before I attempt it, I wondered if anyone had already converted it as I’d like to have one burned to a disk. Thanks. Looking forward to checking this out sometime soon.

Just use tsmuxer to rebuild it into an ISO. It’s not re-encoded that way and there is no quality loss, so no one needs to go through the trouble of uploading another 20 Gb for that purpose. Worked smoothly for me with this release.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1073353
Topic
Harmy's STAR WARS Despecialized Edition HD - V2.7 MKV IS OUT NOW
Time

cybrsage said:

Jedi 2.7 is the color corrected version of 2.5. Harry did the 2.5 but not the color correction.

I’m not sure if this is a joke post or mistake (autocorrect?), but I’ll correct it either way for the sake of the newcomer since he was already confused about this:

I adjusted the color of SW, not Jedi, in a version 2.7, based on Harmy’s 2.5 (there are some other updates besides the color). The latest Jedi release is 2.5, which was released by Harmy.

Post
#1073181
Topic
Harmy's STAR WARS Despecialized Edition HD - V2.7 MKV IS OUT NOW
Time

SparkySywer said:

towne32 said:

SparkySywer said:

I have SW and ESB 1.0, and RotJ 2.7. I’m thinking about replacing SW and eSB with 2.7, what are the differences between them?

Well, SW 1.0 is extremely out of date. Just about everything has been improved dramatically since then. ESB 1.0 isn’t terrible, but 2.0 uses much higher quality sources. The encodings of all the 1.0s are also lower quality (low bitrate, a bit more pixelated).

As for Jedi 2.7, it doesn’t exist which is problematic for comparisons. But Jedi 2.5 is out, and ESB 2.5 will be someday in the hopefully-not-too-distant future.

My bad. Jedi 2.5, then. Is there anywhere I can see comparisons between them? All I know that’s different between ANH 1.0 and ANH 2.7 is that the Leia hologram is different.

The galleries aren’t as easily found and browsed as when Google used the Picasa image system, but you can find the comparisons here: https://plus.google.com/photos/109609428403596349302/albums/5932164278535972945

Post
#1073180
Topic
If you need to B*tch about something... this is the place
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

Has someone posted proof that rogue1 is a negative1 sock?

There is proof, though I don’t know that it’s posted. The mods have checked his IP, and confirmed that it’s negative1/TN1’s, and are just letting him go unbanned. I guess the anti-sock policies of the past have calmed down a bit. Or he’s just getting a pass because of his releases.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1073172
Topic
Harmy's STAR WARS Despecialized Edition HD - V2.7 MKV IS OUT NOW
Time

SparkySywer said:

I have SW and ESB 1.0, and RotJ 2.7. I’m thinking about replacing SW and eSB with 2.7, what are the differences between them?

Well, SW 1.0 is extremely out of date. Just about everything has been improved dramatically since then. ESB 1.0 isn’t terrible, but 2.0 uses much higher quality sources. The encodings of all the 1.0s are also lower quality (low bitrate, a bit more pixelated).

As for Jedi 2.7, it doesn’t exist which is problematic for comparisons. But Jedi 2.5 is out, and ESB 2.5 will be someday in the hopefully-not-too-distant future.

Post
#1072955
Topic
team negative1 - star wars 1977 - 35mm theatrical version (release details and updates)
Time

Fang Zei said:

towne32 said:

Wazzles said:

yotsuya said:

Disco_Lobot said:

I laugh at people buying 4K TVs… your eyes are almost certainly not good enough to tell the difference in the vast majority of viewing scenarios. Total waste of money

http://bgr.com/2015/09/18/720p-vs-1080p-vs-4k-resolution/

If we were just talking about the absolute resolution, you are right. At my normal viewing distance I can’t tell the difference between 720 and 1080. I’m certainly not going to see much improvement from a 4k screen. But it isn’t just the resolution. The more pixels you have to display the image data, the better the image looks. The pixels start to disappear and be truly invisible. I’ve known this about printing for years, but when you apply it to video, it really helps the realism of the image, even if you are watching a 480 DVD. With the proper hardware, everything will look better on a 4k screen, even if you never get a UHD player or media.

My dad has a 43 inch 4K TV and DVDs look horrendous.

It definitely varies by TV. Rtings.com has an SD category in their ratings, and some 4K TVs do a fine job, while others are pretty miserable. It also depends on the DVD player, of course. Something with composite output or a PS3 via HDMI? etc.

Even blu-ray can look terrible on the newer TVs if the settings are all cranked up to eleven.

A little over a year ago I was at a Best Buy where they were playing Captain America: The Winter Soldier on a 4k tv (it was an lg lcd iirc) with what must have been the out-of-the-box settings. It looked truly horrendous.

Oh, absolutely. I’ve got friends who are completely ignorant about audio/visual types of matters. And some of them will say that they “hate HD” because the picture looks terrible and unrealistic. I’ll ask them how they feel about the picture quality on their 1080p laptops and in movie theaters, and of course they think it’s great. But they’re familiar with HDTV meaning shitty interpolated motion, oversharpening, and the host of other features that people will turn on (or, often are turned on by default).

This post has been edited.

To the top