THE STAR WARS SAGA - 1080P AVCHD DVD-9 for PS3 & Blu-Ray players - Episodes 1, 4 & 5 available now — Page 5

Positive posting from the negative!

 tcib,

i think you're in the wrong thread, this is for the HD versions of the trilogy.

 

if you're looking for the 'A new hope : revisited' , go over here:

if you have a rapidshare account, you can get it from:

http://www.fanedit.org -> do a search for star wars

 

Thank you ever so much for being so specific.  More often than not people can be ignored or shrugged off for such info.  I thank you.

That fanedit site has just made my eyes open somewhat.  Downloading the avi right now from rapidshare, however I posted in this thread as seeing it in HD would be amazing.

Of course, I'll just be happy to see it.

GF just looked at me with baited breath as I ran downstairs to tell her I found it.

Of course, I'll just be happy to see it.

GF just looked at me with baited breath as I ran downstairs to tell her I found it.

Erm, dont quite know how to follow up that.

Happy days?

Sorry tcib.

Win/win either way :-)

Darth Solo said:

GF just looked at me with baited breath as I ran downstairs to tell her I found it.

 

Dont quite know how to follow up that line ;-)

Happy days?

Sorry tcib.

Hey Star Wars gets me excited! ;)

Gimme chance to edit my rambles.

Your in the right crowd then buddy.

PS. Have a dig around as this place can be better than the GF ;-P

Welcome.

vadershmader said:

ADYWAN is the man. I have not jumped into the BR pit yet but hats off to him anyway.

It may be the right time to Jump in as Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull and Iron man are due out in a month or so on BR.

The Test clips look great on a 130" front projector screen. I just hope that compression wont be an issue on an 8.5gb disk. I'm really exited for this one......and Episode V revisited!

Flan

negative1 said:

darthflan said:

vadershmader said:

ADYWAN is the man. I have not jumped into the BR pit yet but hats off to him anyway.

 

It may be the right time to Jump in as Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull and Iron man are due out in a month or so on BR.

The Test clips look great on a 130" front projector screen. I just hope that compression wont be an issue on an 8.5gb disk. I'm really exited for this one......and Episode V revisited!

 

Flan

why would compression be an issue? there are plenty of 9 gig HD versions of movie using .h264 and VC-1 that are crystal clear.......

 

also ESB:R is no longer in HD sadly, just regular DVD quality, but it still looks good, check out

that thread for the latest samples..

 

later

-1

 

 Crystal Clear?  Not a chance in hell for a "crystal clear" version of any movie with 8.5 gb.

Exactly. The AVCHD versions all fit on dual layer DVDs and they are absolutely "crystal clear" IMHO.

BMadden said:

Exactly. The AVCHD versions all fit on dual layer DVDs and they are absolutely "crystal clear" IMHO.

 Oh yeah?  what size screen are you watching it on?  Just because it looks "crystal clear" and "blows away the DVD version" doesn't mean it's an up-to-snuff HD version.  If you take that version and compare it to a proper blu-ray encoding, it's not going to compare.  I'll guarantee that.  Plus, the sound needs to be uncompressed.

Don't get me wrong, it's a great interim solution because, for the moment, that's all we have.  But eventually the official release will (quality-wise) blow it away.

negative1 said:

digitalfreaknyc said:

BMadden said:

Exactly. The AVCHD versions all fit on dual layer DVDs and they are absolutely "crystal clear" IMHO.

 

 Oh yeah?  what size screen are you watching it on?  Just because it looks "crystal clear" and "blows away the DVD version" doesn't mean it's an up-to-snuff HD version.  If you take that version and compare it to a proper blu-ray encoding, it's not going to compare.  I'll guarantee that.  Plus, the sound needs to be uncompressed.

Don't get me wrong, it's a great interim solution because, for the moment, that's all we have.  But eventually the official release will (quality-wise) blow it away.

 

 how in the world can you predict how well a movie is encoded? i have several HD-DVDs that

are marginally better than the DVD despite them being 1080p...... yeah, let's wait until it

IS ACTUALLY RELEASED and then talk...... not theoretically, and not hypothetically...

later

-1

 How can I?  Becuase the higher the bitrate, the better it's going to be encoded.  There's going to be less blocking.   There is absolutely NO WAY IN HELL regardless of the codecs currently used that it will look great in comparison to an eventual properly mastered blu-ray.  Call it what you want but I will promise to buy you  a blu-ray set if the paultry 8.7gb avc RE-encoded version will be better than the eventual official release.  Save this posting. 

Remember, there's the original master...and then there's an mpeg-2 encoding (or whatever the original broadcast used for this encoding was) and then there's this avc RE-encoding.  That's just another generation away and mpeg-2 is just a horrendously outdated upsetting codec. 

Think you are a little off by just saying the "Blu-ray" encode will be better than this one. Look at the difference between the 2004 DVD and Revisited. Ady's versions no matter what will probably look better than any of LFL versions of the film officially released on blu-ray unless his group does the same thing Ady is doing and fixing the color problems. And yes.....with proper encoding a 9GB version can look just as good.....mainly becasue alot of the blu-ray movies are not much bigger any way. The movies are around 12-15 GB and the extras on the rest. There are still alot of the movies coming out on the single layer blu-rays. Don't get me wrong.....there are many on the dual layer ones and the movies are much larger so the picture looks better in the dark and bright sequences. Do not discount Ady's versions as just re-encodes because I will put money on it that his versions will look better picture wise then the LFL releases.

hempler said:

Think you are a little off by just saying the "Blu-ray" encode will be better than this one. Look at the difference between the 2004 DVD and Revisited. Ady's versions no matter what will probably look better than any of LFL versions of the film officially released on blu-ray unless his group does the same thing Ady is doing and fixing the color problems. And yes.....with proper encoding a 9GB version can look just as good.....mainly becasue alot of the blu-ray movies are not much bigger any way. The movies are around 12-15 GB and the extras on the rest. There are still alot of the movies coming out on the single layer blu-rays. Don't get me wrong.....there are many on the dual layer ones and the movies are much larger so the picture looks better in the dark and bright sequences. Do not discount Ady's versions as just re-encodes because I will put money on it that his versions will look better picture wise then the LFL releases.

 "Better" is subjective.  It's absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for the detail to be better on ady's than an official.

Again, I'm not discounting ady's.  I will be downloading his immediately when they're released.  In fact, his "revisited" was the very first (and up until this point, ONLY) fan edit I've ever downloaded and watched.  I thought it was absolutely FANTASTIC. 

Again, let's investigate how all of you are watching these things.  Are you watching them on 42" screens?  I hate to say it but there's not a single person on here that i'd trust to do an accurate review of any of these. Send them to the professional reviewers with 100"+ screens and then you'll see all the problems with the original mpeg-2 files.

I think what digitalfreaknyc is getting at is even though the HD Broadcast version is indeed a step up form the dvd the more you compress a movie the more fine detail is lost and more motion artifacts are introduced. Its just a simple fact, because both VC-1 and AVC are lossy compression algorithms and there is nothing getting around it.  Its like compressing a dvd which has mpeg2 at at least 4.5 GB -> 700 MB AVC encode. Sure for the most part it looks pretty good compared to the DVD, but when you actually examine the footage you do start to see blockiness in fast motion scenes and fine detail is lost throughout. I actually made my own personal version of SW-Revisited (just has a couple of tweaks that were for my own personal tastes)and it took an AVC encode of about 2800MB to make an encode that stood up a 120" screen. The scene that really was my benchmark oddly enough was inside Ben's hut because of the texture on the wall kept getting blocky at lower compression rates.

Now on topic... Ady I know you may be doing minor tweaks to the movies themselves (Han shoots first , etc) Any chance you can just yank out "Jedi Rocks"? I know you can't put in Lapti Nek with the orginal puppets, but the new song and dance number is awful. Hell I wouldn't mind an abrupt "cut to next scene" over having to being yanked out the movie completly with the horrible CG critters.

negative1 said:

digitalfreaknyc said:

Again, let's investigate how all of you are watching these things.  Are you watching them on 42" screens?  I hate to say it but there's not a single person on here that i'd trust to do an accurate review of any of these. Send them to the professional reviewers with 100"+ screens and then you'll see all the problems with the original mpeg-2 files.

 

 i grant you of course, you can see differences on a 100" screen, is that what you have? ok..

well, i've only got a tiny 32" widescreen...so that's why i don't notice it as much..

later

-1

 at 32"...even HD doesn't really matter all that much.  With all due respect, you're certainly not in a position to judge.

I have a 60"...almost double yours. 

negative1 said:

digitalfreaknyc said:

negative1 said:

digitalfreaknyc said:

Again, let's investigate how all of you are watching these things.  Are you watching them on 42" screens?  I hate to say it but there's not a single person on here that i'd trust to do an accurate review of any of these. Send them to the professional reviewers with 100"+ screens and then you'll see all the problems with the original mpeg-2 files.

 

 i grant you of course, you can see differences on a 100" screen, is that what you have? ok..

well, i've only got a tiny 32" widescreen...so that's why i don't notice it as much..

later

-1

 

 at 32"...even HD doesn't really matter all that much.  With all due respect, you're certainly not in a position to judge.

I have a 60"...almost double yours. 

 

well, when made your blanket statement without clarifying the conditions, that why i wrote

back with my evalution, i never said it was definitive.

later

-1

 

Well, again, no offense but there's really no point to HD on a small screen.  I mean, i have a 32" in my bedroom and, yeah, it looks good but I'm not really judging on something that small.  It just looks good.  But it's the same thing as looking at some avi's on your computer.  Sure, they can look good...but the bigger you blow them up, the crappier they look.  Same thing here.