Originally posted by: Alan Partridge
Is Boris the guy that's always trying to defend the GOUT? If so, I've no idea why you would deduce that we are the same person, since there is nothing in my posts that defends the GOUT (indeed, I think it's a terrible transfer). I'm not saying the transfer WASN'T inverse telecined, I'm just asking for evidence that it WAS. I can't see any evidence that it was myself (and can't think of any technical reason to do so, other than disc space saving), but then I'm not analysing the MPEG data on a computer, I'm merely going by what I see on my TV screen.
Is Boris the guy that's always trying to defend the GOUT? If so, I've no idea why you would deduce that we are the same person, since there is nothing in my posts that defends the GOUT (indeed, I think it's a terrible transfer). I'm not saying the transfer WASN'T inverse telecined, I'm just asking for evidence that it WAS. I can't see any evidence that it was myself (and can't think of any technical reason to do so, other than disc space saving), but then I'm not analysing the MPEG data on a computer, I'm merely going by what I see on my TV screen.
I don't think you are being unreasonable at all, and perhaps those who have researched it more thoroughly can fill us in. I don't know enough about DVD authoring to comment myself.