Chewtobacca said:
Yes; the Death Star looks really good. The improvement in the Star Destroyer is even more marked, in my opinion. I am really excited about the new version of your edit. The color correction pictures look amazing.
Don't get too excited - the amount of things to be done makes lean even more towards waiting for an official blu-ray and doing an HD edition.
I thought this was for blu-ray. I have always been told that unless I am viewing a blu-ray on exact scan I am not getting the full picture quality. This is what I set my TV to every time I watch blu-ray.
Okay, that does make sense - I guess movies don't consider overscan, and a 1:1 correspondence of pixels would make for a (slightly) better picture.
Why is ovescan unrelated to NAB? When I looked at NAB in that wikipedia article it seemed to relate it to overscan. No doubt I've misunderstood again. :-)
It says that NAB is the outermost part of overscan, but that's just coincidence - the two concepts aren't really related.
From what I read it seems that this 1050 instead of 1024 business is just because if you resize exactly to 1024 people with old sets lose part of the picture, as it then seems "lifted" slightly on their screens when it overscans. I don't think this affects the AR itself though. Isn't it more the scope of the film?
1050 instead of 1024 is because only the 704 pixels contribute to the calculation of aspect ratio - the extra 16 are superfluous and should be "resized" to outside of the 1024x576 box.
DE