Editdroid's SW 1977 DVD (Mysterious 720p Anamorphic LD Preservation?) (Released) — Page 7

"Look sir, droids."

zombie84: I think you're right about the degraining issue in home video releases. Here's why I'd still prefer the "clean" approach with GOUT: this noise filter they applied for the laserdisc back in 1993 seems to be a temporal one, which means it compared neighbor frames to figure out what is noise and what's detail. The result sux, and it's negative effect is present on every frame, although sometimes it isn't very visible. So the filter created this static layer of artifacts on top of the "cleaned" image. Every time the camera moves, you see these remains of past frames. Even if these artifacts contains the trace of film grain or just dirt, I think at this point it's not valid image content and better to get rid of it. Having said that, G-Force's script can't do it perfectly, so it's still a compromise.

But as you said, it's good to have different versions of this thing, and I'd say everyone should take a look on this new EditDroid disc.

Too bad we're stuck with the GOUT as the main source. (It's the root of lots of evil. :)  )

zombie84 said:

If G-Force's script is the same as dark_Jedi's DVD releases, and unless I am mistaken I believe it is, then I would have to seriously object.

DJ's currently released version uses quite an early version of G-Force's script that he has since developed.  He is planning to implement G-Force's new scripts for the other films as they become available.  You should read the GOUT image stabilization thread.   Given the relatively high degree of interest that G-Force's release generated, and the fact that you seem interested in theatrical reconstructions, I'm pretty incredulous that you think that G-Force's release is just the same as DJ's old release.  `

Damn Lucas is tearing us apart!

;-)

I did a quick comparison with dark_jedi's SW ANH GOUT sourced custom DVD and I have to say the colours of dark_jedi's was superior. The Editdroid one is great don't get me wrong but there was a bit too much noise in the opening scene in various places when vader and his troops board the rebel ship compared to dark_jedi's. Also some of the colours are a bit muted and washed out in places. Still I would say that Editdroid's has better definition in areas but this sometimes looks like obvious sharpening.

Overall I'd say it's a worthy addition to any Star Wars collection. :-)

Here is some screens comparing dark_jedi's GOUT sourced DVD and Editdroid's V3 DVD:

Editdroid V3 DVD

darj_jedi GOUT sourced DVD

I'll upload some more comparisons later if you want me to.

Be careful in discussing where you obtained what it esentially a custom DVD, EvilSupes. I have been told off for that before.

I have now seen both.  G-Force's is superior in my book.

Chewtobacca said:

zombie84 said:

If G-Force's script is the same as dark_Jedi's DVD releases, and unless I am mistaken I believe it is, then I would have to seriously object.

DJ's currently released version uses quite an early version of G-Force's script that he has since developed.  He is planning to implement G-Force's new scripts for the other films as they become available.  You should read the GOUT image stabilization thread.   Given the relatively high degree of interest that G-Force's release generated, and the fact that you seem interested in theatrical reconstructions, I'm pretty incredulous that you think that G-Force's release is just the same as DJ's old release.  `

 I've read that thread, and I realize that dark_jedi's version is based off the script as it was like 6 months ago, but I can only judge based on what's available to me. There are no comparison caps posted, and I'm not going to download the same DVD three times when I wasn't very impressed with the first version (it was actually a later version of DJ's encode). People were saying how amazing that version was, but it really just looked similar to a de-noised VHS in terms of detail, maybe a bit better. Are you telling me that G-Force's lastest version of the script has zero softening and zero detail erasure, and also doesn't leave the image 100% grainless? Because unless there is absolutely no impact on the sharpness whatsoever, it's a deal-breaker, it makes the image worse. Companies can maybe get away with it with a modern HD transfer (not to me, though) but as I said, the GOUT cannot tolerate any image softening whatsoever, it defeats the purpose of trying to enhance the GOUT because it is already terrible. G-force's scripts are great for other aspects, but I haven't seen indication that he solved the detail issue. If he has, then great, although I would never want the grain removed like that anyway since it often just makes it look like video (the ideal situation IMO is probably in between the GOUT and g-force, but its more authentic to have the GOUT grain levels rather than the smoothness of dark_jedi-encode-era g-force, especially if it wipes away all the fine detail as well; the grainiest shots with g-force script look more appropriate, but the softening in the versions I've seen also sometimes smear it into video-like noise rather than actual grain). But as far as I can tell, the issue hasn't yet been totally solved, although I'm sure it looks better since last I saw it. Dark_jedi's encode did have pretty nice colors though, a lot of people seem to jack up the saturation (again--another major problem caused by the HD trends) but all that does is make the colors pop, because ANH (by its video transfers at least) has more pastel coloring, which is another reason why I liked the slightly muted approach of Editdroid, which looks far more natural most of the time. 

It's a fine line to cross in terms of how much grain to leave, especially because viewers have a lot of uninformed preferences these days. Professional restorationists struggle with the same thing--look at the early days of Lowry, and even their modern versions go too far IMO. And it must be very difficult to come up with scripts that can take out the grain without taking out the detail--there's a reason why Lowry was considered very revolutionary with its technology. I don't know if g-force solved the issues--I don't think he has based on the info available--but I hope he does, and if he has with the version he put out a little while ago someone should post some caps. Editdroid's release makes for a good intermediary until those issues get resolved though. Again, the main issue with GOUT wasn't the grain, it was the shitty ass Laserdisc (non-)detail, and Editdroid's version seems to have been able to pull the most amount of picture information of all the releases (while also being slightly less grainy than the GOUT, actually), which makes it the most useful in my opinion.

zombie84 said:

zombie84 said:

If G-Force's script is the same as dark_Jedi's DVD releases, and unless I am mistaken I believe it is, then I would have to seriously object.

 I've read that thread, and I realize that dark_jedi's version is based off the script as it was like 6 months ago, but I can only judge based on what's available to me. There are no comparison caps posted, and I'm not going to download the same DVD three times when I wasn't very impressed with the first version (it was actually a later version of DJ's encode).

You have a strange definition of the same.  If you did realize that G-Force's script was in fact based off the script, then why use a conditional in the earlier quotation?   Why isn't it available to you?  It's in the same place that everything else is, and it seems to me perfectly clear that downloading successive improved versions of an encoding doesn't amount to downloading the same DVD three times.  

EditDroid's version isn't bad: it's a substantial improvement on the GOUT; I just think G-Force's version, which undeniably has its own problems, looks better overall.    Nonetheless, if there were to be a second version of EditDroid's release, I would download it and give it a try, regardless of the fact that I wasn't greatly impressed with the first version. 

Part of what sold Dark_Jedi's transfers to me was the image stabilization.  From what everyone here's been saying about this EditDroid release, image judder is still an issue.  If there were a good combination of EditDroid's overall picture quality (based on the cap above, much more detail is present than Dark_Jedi's) and the G-Force/Dark_Jedi image stabilization, I'd be a very happy person indeed.

Come on CA, don't let Star Wars get you down.  Be happy anyway!

I'll admit I don't know nearly as much about video as I do audio, but I was under the impression that film grain was generally too small to see in standard definition.  The 'grain' in the GOUT has always looked like video noise to me, it doesn't seem like it belongs there.  And even if it is actual grain, isn't it more likely to be excessive dupe grain owing to the films having been copied and transferred so many times?  Also that kind of noise wreaks havoc with mpeg image encoding, causing compression artefacts even at high bitrates.  Just going by those screenshots, the Editdroid does seem slightly sharper, but might even be the same kind of illusion caused by turning the sharpness control up on a tv set--it adds stronger edges throughout, fooling the eye into thinking there is more detail when there actually is not.  Turn up the sharpness too far and the picture takes on a fake and hideous appearance, but at moderate levels it could cause what's being seen here.  The description of the Editdroid, strange as it is, does say that the fine detail was sharpened artificially, does it not?

I'm not any kind of expert, but that's how it strikes me, looking at them together.  Even if the G-Force version is slightly softer, the application of anti-aliasing outweighs it for me, because the GOUT's jaggies are fairly horrific, and the difference is clearly evident on the droids in those screenshots.

I have nothing against film grain, and I like seeing it when it belongs there, but the GOUT's resolution is too low to reveal 'real' grain in my opinion, while its image noise is thick enough to be apparent even on a 12-inch screen.  That said, it's quite possible that the G-Force script removed a bit too much, and that a lesser approach to the grain reduction could give more pleasing results.

Moth3r said:

I posted some screenshots in this thread. Will add shots from the DJ/g-force version soon.

Nice screenshots much better than mine. You can tell I am not used to do doing them or the format of this board - hence the reason why the screenshots seem to be drifting off to the right. :-D

Erikstormtrooper said:

Yes, Evilsoupes. More please!

I'll let Moth3r post the next ones as he is much better at it than me. ;-)

ChainsawAsh said:

Part of what sold Dark_Jedi's transfers to me was the image stabilization.  From what everyone here's been saying about this EditDroid release, image judder is still an issue.  If there were a good combination of EditDroid's overall picture quality (based on the cap above, much more detail is present than Dark_Jedi's) and the G-Force/Dark_Jedi image stabilization, I'd be a very happy person indeed.

 The Editdroid release has a stabilized picture. There was one or two shots where I noticed a bit of instability, but only because I was looking for it; overall it looks fine.

 Hairy_Hen:

I'll admit I don't know nearly as much about video as I do audio, but I was under the impression that film grain was generally too small to see in standard definition.  The 'grain' in the GOUT has always looked like video noise to me, it doesn't seem like it belongs there. 

There's video noise too, like in the shot of the sandcrawler (where some of the grain also gets smudged into noise-like artifacts) and the shot of the binary sunset, but the majority of what you are seeing is grain. In the aforementioned examples it is extremely bright colors (the sky--blue in the sandcrawler, purple/red in the binary suns) that 1990s telecines could never handle. There's also multiple layers of grain because this is at least third generation in quality. And because of this, some of the fine grain isn't totally apparent and may seem noise-like because it's not fully defined, it gives the image a texture (probably this is the negative layer). But there is most definitely fully apparent grain as well, its very obvious and coarse and this is probably the duplicate layer from the IP itself because it is so coarse. This is what people had a problem with, because we weren't used to seeing it--it's basically appropriate considering the source, but also there is legitimacy about wanting this gone because it's probably not on the negative itself. Personlly, it's not a huge deal to me, its just grain and I like the tactile quality, but it would be preferrable to get rid of it. Unfortunately, no one has yet done this.

And even if it is actual grain, isn't it more likely to be excessive dupe grain owing to the films having been copied and transferred so many times?  

Yes, a lot of it is dupe grain, most of it in fact, although how much depends on whether you consider the negative the "true" source (since it is the Interpositive that actually represents the final, completed film). A lot of it also is dirt and scratches, in both positive and negative layers.

 Also that kind of noise wreaks havoc with mpeg image encoding, causing compression artefacts even at high bitrates.  Just going by those screenshots, the Editdroid does seem slightly sharper, but might even be the same kind of illusion caused by turning the sharpness control up on a tv set--it adds stronger edges throughout, fooling the eye into thinking there is more detail when there actually is not.  Turn up the sharpness too far and the picture takes on a fake and hideous appearance, but at moderate levels it could cause what's being seen here.  The description of the Editdroid, strange as it is, does say that the fine detail was sharpened artificially, does it not?

Obviously since all the projects are working from the GOUT, you cannot create picture information where there was none before. However, the GOUT is pretty soft, and can stand to be artificially sharpened by a tiny bit, it does make fine detail and texture more apparent. The reason artificial sharpening is bad is because it creates it own noise and brings out all the flaws in the image. However, the Editdroid version seems to have avoided this, as the grain and noise appears improved over the raw GOUT, the picture looks a bit smoother to me.

I'm not any kind of expert, but that's how it strikes me, looking at them together.  Even if the G-Force version is slightly softer, the application of anti-aliasing outweighs it for me, because the GOUT's jaggies are fairly horrific, and the difference is clearly evident on the droids in those screenshots. 

Well, when you look at them side by side, you can see the huge difference in picture information on the g-force versions, all the fine detail is just gone, and its all smoothed out. But the problem with g-Force in addition to its softening is that the film should not look that clean. It looks like it is shot on video or something, it has that smooth, soft, airbrushed quality that is becoming more and more of a problem in consumer trends. Film has texture, and it's part of the image. The Digital Bits had a lengthy rant about this today; it's referring to HD releases, but it directly applies here:

http://www.digitalbits.com/#060710

Which is why I said, even if the g-Force versions didn't have any softening at all, they still have a major, major obstacle, and its more philosophical on the part of the people making the scripts, and THAT'S the problem. Star Wars is a film from the 1970s. There should be grain, and image texture. Not as much as the GOUT, very true, which was grainier than most standard-def transfers, but there should never be zero grain at all, the grain removal on dark_jedi's release makes the 2004 SE look conservative. It doesn't look like a movie any more, as it's not just de-grained, but also smoothed out. The softness is a huge issue, but the grain issue is almost as big, and they are related--if people weren't so concerned with getting a "perfect" image the softness wouldn't be there in the first place. So by not understanding the way a film should look in one aspect, you create a by-product that makes the film look even worse in yet another aspect.

Also,

I have nothing against film grain, and I like seeing it when it belongs there, but the GOUT's resolution is too low to reveal 'real' grain in my opinion.

This isn't correct. You can definitely see grain in standard-def (have you really never seen grain until high-def?). It is only really in the first 20 minutes of Star Wars that the grain is really bad--basically the blockade runner sequence. I suspect this is a complete reel. Certain individual shots are also worse than surrounding ones. And unfortunately it is a white environment, so it is most noticeable. But IMO with the exception of this sequence (and the 3P0-R2 desert scene which follows, which IMO shows more dirt than grain) the GOUT actually doesn't look all that grainy, it is mostly at appropriate levels for an interpositive made from a really abused negative ten years after being shot and from an unstable film stock no less. When people speak of GOUT grain, they usually refer to the blockade sequence, but visually that sequence is a bit exceptional in comparison to much of the rest of the film. Of course, the GOUT is still grainier than anyone would like.

That said, it's quite possible that the G-Force script removed a bit too much, and that a lesser approach to the grain reduction could give more pleasing results.

Yes, I hope future efforts are less extreme. I would say that the g-force scripts need to reduce their grain removal by about close to 50% for it to begin to look like film again, and I hope that they eventually do this. I don't know much about the scripting process, but from what I understand it is possible to basically dial it out to whatever sort of level you want. But as I said, it is basically a philosophical problem on the part of individuals--first, that people making these would rather have a soft picture without fine detail that nearly looks like video, and second that people watching them would want it too. It's impressive that people got the image that clean, to give them credit, but not only did it come at the expense of detail on a transfer that already was lacking, but they went way too far to the point where it ceased resembling a film, and there needs to be more people keeping ourselves in check and pointing this out. It's the reason why our community kicks ass, you know. :p

Again, I don't want to sound like I am ripping on dark_jedi or g-force, because they've done a lot of really good work in other areas and I appreciate all of it, and I also want to encourage them to keep getting better at what they do. And it's not like I have any sort of attachment to the Editdroid release, I neither know the guy who made it nor was involved in the production in any way. But it's a good example to open up debate about how the films should be treated and how they should look.

dp

Interesting, I guess I was mistaken about what resolution was needed to see it.  I think you're right that about half as much reduction would be more appropriate--the grain in the GOUT never bothered me except for a couple places where it is really excessive (the first appearance of the snowspeeders on Hoth, for example).  That and a couple others have to be video noise of some kind, but the rest of it is acceptable, and looking/thinking about it again it does seem like removing it softens the image a bit too far.  Dupe grain or not it isn't nearly as objectionable as some people seem to think.  I am strongly in favour of anti-aliasing--if the Editdroid had added that I would probably find no problems with it aside from the unavoidable DVNR smearing that all the '93 based versions have.

V3

msycamore said:

Looking damn good, dark_jedi!

It is g-force script, your subs, and I will put as many audio options in there as I can, what won't fit will be included in the DVD_ROM folder.

It is just nice having a powerful PC to be able to render and encode these so fast, where it takes some a week, it only takes me hours, and this video here is 6 pass CCE SP2 @ 6500 avg.

I know I am very biased but I think V3 looks better than anything out as of yet, but any more screens or questions please ask in my thread, I don't really like this one to much, I keep reading the same comments over, and over, and over.