Harmy's STAR WARS Despecialized Edition HD - V2.7 - MKV (Released) — Page 254

negative1 said:

guiser said:

negative1 said:

just watched your version on a bigscreen tv yesterday,

it matched our's pretty closely also... for some reason

watching it on a tv with different settings was quite

different from viewing it on a monitor....

 

i'm used to watching almost all my videos on monitors,

so it's just a matter of setting your color preferences

to match what you think is right.

 

later

-1

I wonder, do you think this has something to do with the differences in output range between TVs and computers?

that, and the colorspace..

 

but mostly the gamma settings are different for 

those devices..

 

also, once harmy tweaks the scene (or scenes),

it will match even more closely with the 

reference shots..

 

later

-1

Very interesting.  The recent versions of MPC-HC seem to support color management.  Movies on my hardware calibrated display seem to look much better when compared side-by-side with other players, though there are many options that change the look.

You seem to be able to set output range, gamma and rendering intent (the one I'm still the most confused by).  Are videos tagged with a profile similarly to the way photos can be?

bilditup1 said:

If possible you should also learn how to open your ports so that people who don't have theirs open can also connect to you (unless you're on a university network or something)

I'd go for a 2.1 AVCHD.  I don't have a BD burner, but I do have a player.  This is my format of choice, but I'm waiting for the final product :)

CatBus said:

FWIW, here's how I see the releases in different formats:

 

AVCHD: I don't see much point now that it's not the top video-quality tier for the DeEd anymore.

Ummm...  You do realize that a lot of people don't have BD burners, right?

Oh, and I definitely would like a V2.1 of the AVCHD, Harmy.

Edit:  Ok, I saw your edit but still I think there's enough demand around here for an AVCHD.

I'd still go for an AVCHD. Its good if you just want the full movie-going experience (straight into the fanfare) and aren't worried about the Blu extras. Also, the lower bitrate will be barely noticeable, outside of slightly better grain performance.

SpilkaBilka said:

CatBus,

Interesting.  Those are good points, but I actually see the AVCHD as possibly being the MOST important release.  I'm looking at this from a "spread HD restored SW to your less tech-savvy friends" perspective.

While it won't look as good as the BD or MKV, it'll still look pretty amazing.  And I know plenty of people who have BD players, but I literally know no one (save some people on internet forums) who has a BD burner (I don't have one either).  I think for most of us trying to spread the gospel of an HD, restored SW, being able to get near-BD quality with only a DVD burner is essential.

The MKV is great and all, but to me is the least convenient, and probably not very useful to our less tech-savvy friends.

Just my opinion.

edit: whoops, everyone answered this much more quickly and succinctly than I did :)

This ^

Will the BD have better PQ than the MKV or the PQ will be the same, but there will be added features on the BD?

I already downloaded the MKV, but if the BD will have better PQ, I will be waiting for it.

Harmy said:

Most people still don't have BD burners (got beaten to it), so the AVCHD may be their only way to watch this in HD on their BD players na the encode quality is still very very high. And I think that if there's another SD DVD, it will be a DVD9, because this is very grainy and that doesn't agree well with mpeg2 compression.

I very much hope you will decide to do a 2.1 AVCHD. I believe that will definitely help many like me who do not have a blu-ray burner, but want to watch it in HD. I am likely to download the blu-ray also, since my media player connected to my tv will play back ISO and blu-ray folders, but I think AVCHD is important for many people.

CatBus said:

FWIW, here's how I see the releases in different formats:

BD: everything and the kitchen sink, hell yeah!

DVD5 downscale: still a must-have for visiting relatives and friends, lots of people still can't do HD.  I'm hoping your 2.1 release gets the DVD5 treatment too.

AVCHD: Neither here nor there.  Not as pretty or feature-rich as a BD and not as compatible as the DVD5.  I don't see much point now that it's not the top video-quality tier for the DeEd anymore.

MKV: I actually still like this as a way to get the best-quality video without all the extra bulk from lossless soundtracks and (yes, I admit it) subtitles cluttering up the thing.  Then again, I'd actually like a .264 download which would work just as well and would be even more bare-bones ;)

EDIT: Oh yeah, forgot.  The point of AVCHD is people without BD-burners.  I think this is a shrinking market, the media and burners have both been down to reasonable prices for a long time.

I do not own a blu-ray burner, nor is one on my list any time soon. Eventually I will have one, but money is extremely tight for me. The availability and affordability doesn't mean that everybody owns one now.

I do agree that the mkv is a great trade-off. I personally like the MKV, but I know somebody I would like to give a copy to, and for him it would need to be the AVCHD since I cannot burn a blu-ray and he doesn't have a media player for his tv for mkv playback. I think all of these formats are ideal, for different people.

CatBus said:

Harmy said:

Most people still don't have BD burners (got beaten to it), so the AVCHD may be their only way to watch this in HD on their BD players na the encode quality is still very very high. And I think that if there's another SD DVD, it will be a DVD9, because this is very grainy and that doesn't agree well with mpeg2 compression.

I dunno, my opinion is that the whole point of a DVD downscale is to cover the lowest common denominator, and a DVD5 does that better than a DVD9 (media, layer-change issues, tech-savviness, etc).  Also I actually think Chewtobacca's DVD5 downscale looked fine for SD (weird software playback glitches notwithstanding).  I'm not really sure throwing more bits at MPEG-2 SD content would improve matters that much.  I guess it's a bit early to argue that one though.

I think a DVD-9 would make a huge difference over a DVD-5, especially if multiple soundtracks will be included. It could definitely use the higher bitrate, and a DVD-9 is just as easy to burn as a DVD-5 (though I admit the media can be more finicky). I use Verbatim DVD-9 with my lite-on drive and they always burn beautifully (for DL that is). I do think a DVD-5 has less playback issues.

I can't understand why people STILL use DVDs. And especially SINGLE LAYER DVDs for 2 hour long movies with multiple audio tracks.

MKV is the future. And the present too

The type of file I would be happiest with for friends and relatives would be a 720p MKV @ 4.37GB. Works in Blu-ray players, consoles, PCs and HDD based media players. A much better quality option than DVD5 for those not limited to DVD players and you can still go cheap with single layer discs.

Just sayin'. I'm happy with whatever we get!