Mielr said:

negative1 said: 

look at my sig, look at it very closely, someday it will make sense to  you..

"[no GOUT in HD?->gout stabilize  ->color correction ->upscaling to HD ->GOUT IN HD !]"

I think there's a terminology misunderstanding here.

The GOUT is a term that specifically refers to the non-anamorphic DVD release from '06. There's no way it can be made into hi-def.

Do you mean the OUT or OOT? Those are more general terms for the Original Unaltered Trilogy or Original Original Trilogy and they don't refer to any specific release.

 

 

thank you for actually looking at what i have to say..

if you check out the very first link , it points to a script that can be used to take

the VOB files->mpg from either of the released GOUT DVD's, and using avisynth stabilize

the image, and do all kinds of other clean-up on it ...

the second link points to a color correction script that can be used on the resulting file

to produce better colors..

the final link shows you how to upscale the images from SD-> HD ..

so essentially you CAN upgrade your old versions from DVD -> HD ..

give it a try , you'll be surprised at how good it looks, i sure was..

don't forget , there's plenty of people willing to help you out if you need it..

later

-1

Baronlando said:

Again, the complaining and the preservation/restoration of the originals are deeply connected. It's a sad fact, but it's true. Without complaining we wouldn't have the GOUT, we wouldn't have had letterboxed laserdiscs and we wouldn't have the vast majority of lesser known movies on dvd at all. It would basically be nothing but American Pie and Scary Movie 4 out there. Seriously. 

 care to offer up any definitive evidence for any of those statements?

-1

Mielr said:

You're right. The squeaky wheel gets the oil. :-)

There never would have been a Donner Cut of Superman II if the fans had kept quiet.

 is that true? i read up on the history of it, and Donner didn't want anything to do it for quite

some time ......

=>In May 2001, he told the website IGN, "At the time, the studio wanted me to go back in and re-cut the film and add anything I wanted to add or do anything I wanted to do. Quite honestly, I was done with it. I was finished."

and the studio was ready to go on without him anyway,

=>Work finally began on the project in late 2005, though without Richard Donner.

dont you think the studio was committed to doing the project whether the fans wanted it

or not? they were doing restoration on superman, so why not do superman 2 also?

later

-1

Baronlando is right, the early adopters were in large part to thank for letterboxed laserdiscs. And it wasn't just old ladies and soccer moms that preferred pan&scan- I remember listening to Howard Stern about 15 years ago, and he was talking about how he'd bought a bunch of laserdiscs and was going to return them to the store because he hated the 'black bars' lol. 

Negative1, are you familiar with the Home Theater Forum?

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/sd-dvd-film-documentary/

Movie lovers and videophiles discuss various aspects of home theater there, including software, and most of the major motion picture studios get ideas of which unreleased or OOP films are in demand, and they even have chats from time to time with the HTF members, to get information of what home theater enthusiasts would like to see.

Producing DVDs costs a lot of money- it's a gamble, and they won't release a particular title unless they know there's a market for it.

Also, many defective DVDs and blu-rays have been recalled and reissued because of complaints from HTF members.

I believe it was The Black Pearl blu-ray that was mis-framed, and because people on the HTF site and other sites complained, the disc was corrected and there was a replacement program instituted. 

I guarantee that if people had not complained, Disney would not have volunteered the information about the discs because it cost them money to replace them.

That is only one example, but it has happened countless times, including with the Back to the Future series which was also misframed, and the most recent release of Superman: The Movie because it lacked the original theatrical soundtrack.

Negative1 said:

so essentially you CAN upgrade your old versions from DVD -> HD ..

 

I really wish that was true, but according to the experts on this site and many others, you cannot create detail where there is none. I'm sure there are ways of making the GOUT look better, but it is never going to be hi-def resolution because the lines of resolution are just not there. 

Mielr said:

 

I really wish that was true, but according to the experts on this site and many others, you cannot create detail where there is none. I'm sure there are ways of making the GOUT look better, but it is never going to be hi-def resolution because the lines of resolution are just not there. 

I think you are all missing my point.

 i never claimed it was True HD, it's just a method that provides results that are very

good. My whole point is, its about learning about the technology, and the methods,

and the resources that are available on this board. Not whether it fits the technical

definition of what HD is.

later

-1

iRantanplan said:

 

No it's not very good. The picture will still have lot's of ghosting, faulty IVTC artifacts, lot's of film-defects and the scenes in the deserts still look like a big yellow blob. The only thing you get rid of is the instable picture and the windowboxing on WS-displays.

so have you ACTUALLY tried it, or are you just speculating,

have you tried tweaking the scripts?

have you asked for advice on improvements?

have you even bothered to give it a chance?

if you have, fine that's your opinion ..

i have a thought, why don't you help us fix it with

improvements, instead of just complaining about it?

BUT YOU COMPLETELY MISSED THE POINT AGAIN,

its not just about the technology, its about the

fact that we have the capability and the knowlege..

====================================

TO the moderators : WHY IS THIS THREAD EVEN HERE on this forum, and

not under 'GENERAL STAR WARS' or even better 'Theatrical Cuts vs Special Edition'?

later

-1

iRantanplan said:

Actually you missed the point. We say the GOUT DVD sucks because it could have been better. You say I can make it much better with lot's of research and work.

I tried some of the improvements. But I don't want to do more research.

What did I pay 45 bucks for? So I can do their work?

you don't want to take advantage of all the FREE work done here?

but you would rather waste your money on something that you

will always complain about ????????????????????????????????

i guess you dont want to see any free restoration projects

that anyones working on either, (for free)????????????????

so .... easy, sell it, and  never bother watching it again.

problem solved.

later

-1

iRantanplan said:

 

Actually I never did complain anywhere until someone asked why the GOUT sucks that much ;)

 at least you're honest enough to admit it..

it's easy to jump on the bashing bandwagon ...

well said..

and don't worry, if/when we get ever get the restoration done,

you're welcome to get it/watch it/complain about it too !!!!!!!!!

later

-1

iRantanplan said:

If you ask me what I don't like about something you better not be afraid of the answer.

 do i seem like i'm afraid? (ha!)

well, its not like i made the movie .. so i don't really have to worry..

its only when people have an irrational answer, with no logic behind it,

that makes me wonder..

later

-1

It's just my opinion, but to me, upscaled SD is obviously only a fake HD.  I can take a 640x360 video, play it at 1280x720, and it'll look like...640x360.  Maybe a little blurrier.

Molly said:

It's just my opinion, but to me, upscaled SD is obviously only a fake HD.  I can take a 640x360 video, play it at 1280x720, and it'll look like...640x360.  Maybe a little blurrier.

 yeah, that's true, when you do a simple basic 2x, without anything else,

but who would do that????..

but when you do image processing algorithms on it, you can effectively improve it..

(not with detail) ...but with other effects.. so you run it on the series of images,

and the recombine them to video..

=========================

this is for images

http://www.articlesbase.com/software-articles/image-upsizing-best-methods-compared-211251.html

Reshade

This is the newest method from the ones I mentioned. It permits enlargements of up to 200% without losing any quality. This means that even an experienced photographer would have a hard time picking an enlarged version from an original photo.

=========================

this is for video: rescaling SD -> HD

http://www.digitalanarchy.com/resizer/algorithms.html

Two algorithms to rule them all.

ReSizer 2.0 has two algorithms. Well, it really has four, but only two of them are for creating your final footage. Use Best (Smooth) and Best (Sharp) for making SD into HD or just resizing the footage in general. When do you use one versus the other? That's pretty subjective but we have given a few suggestions below. The No Filtering and Fast options are for your pre-work.

check out the examples like:

http://www.digitalanarchy.com/resizer/exampleB.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and:

Video Enhancer can convert your video to any resolution with superb quality. Super Resolution is a technique of increasing images or video resolution. For each processed frame it uses information not only from this frame but also from other frames. If picture in your video doesn't change too fast, then information from several frames can be added to create a picture of a bigger size. No algorithms of ordinary image resize/resample can provide this quality just because there's not enough information in one frame. Here is a couple of examples:

http://www.thedeemon.com/VideoEnhancer/

====================================================

also check out:

Instant HD up-converts DV video into a variety of HD video formats. Choose from a list of preset resolutions to easily integrate DV video into your next High Definition production. When scaling from standard definition (SD) to high definition (HD), Instant HD's algorithms generate the missing pixels with integrated sharpening and anti-aliasing for sharp, clear results inside your favorite video application.

http://www.redgiantsoftware.com/products/all/magic-bullet-instant-hd/

there are plenty more out there..

has no one tried anything like that?

that's why i love image processing (i'm a math major, but never got to use

all those cool things in my jobs)..

there ARE ways of upscaling the image and making it look better..

you just have to try them..

later

-1

The colors and overcleaning.

negative1 said:

 

there ARE ways of upscaling the image and making it look better..

 

you just have to try them..

 

later

-1

 

 

 

Better than what? Better than the original image? No way. Anybody who buys into that is completely insane. YOU CANNOT ADD DETAIL AND THERE BY HAVE A BETTER QUALITY IMAGE BY UPCONVERTING.......PERIOD.

Now you can upconvert with software better than a TV or DVD player's firmware can but in no way does upconverting and using any combination of filters add to the amount of detail in the image.

As an example...take the 2004 SW EPIV DVD and upconvert it to HD....use any filters or software you want, and it will still not look as good as the brodcasted HD version...

Of course you can't add detail which isn't there. I don't think negative 1 was suggesting that.

However, you CAN through the use of filters and such make a low-res image easier on the eyes when making it higher resolution.

Example: Gameboy Advance emulation (unfiltered)

and filtered

There's no extra detail, of course, but it looks better.

kenkraly2007 said:

Janskeet when LFL restored the star wars trilogy episodes 4,5, and 6 in 2004 for the dvd release the 1st where sent to flim restorationest John Lowery to restore them and then they where sent to ILM for Color Correction and any addition changes Mr. Lucas wanted to make to the flims and yes the original version and SE's where restored before work on the DVD began because they where restored from the original nagitives.

Is this a joke?!?! Color correction? The colors weren't corrected, they were fucked up. If an original is restored you would expect it to be made as it was before, not to be majorly changed into something else.

Why would you take the effort to join originaltrilogy.com today and start saying nonsence like this? This has to be a joke by another memeber...