Fechin said:
What is the main video difference if any between AVCHD MKV (8GB) and the MKV that is 20GB? Thanks in advance!
AVCHD video bit rate is about half that of the MKV, but Harmy did say:
Harmy said:
Though the difference between the v2.0 AVCHD and MKV is actually super tiny - not that it's not there but you can only really see it in full-screen on a larger TV or monitor.
Beber said:
Harmy said:
Yes, I certainly could do that, which is why I have.
Really? So why is the definition quite less precise and the colors a tad different so that these shots stick out?
Because the 35mm prints he used had lower effective definition and different colors than the Blu-rays, so the matching was imperfect, I'd hazard to guess... and simply using different 35mm projection print scans from an alternate source, as you're suggesting, is unlikely to fix the issue (projection prints do vary, but in general, they have lower effective resolution than interpositives, negatives, and the sort of sources used for Blu-rays, and Negative1's 35mm scans are in no way more magical than other 35mm scans) . Maybe better color matching and blurring up the Blu-ray parts would make it match the 35mm source he used in 2.0 better, but switching to a different 35mm scan will, at best, only marginally improve the edge detail.
EDIT: Sorry, just re-read and saw that you thought he was using GOUT footage. It should suffice to say he wasn't. That's about as good as we're gonna get detail-wise without access to the Lucasfilm vault.
Wait, so the re-zoomed out cockpit shots are a mixture of Blu footage and something else--the slideshow says '97SE, so I assume laserdisc transfer/TV scan. And it's just the colour palette that makes them look different than the bookending shots?
CatBus said:
Beber said:
Harmy said:
Yes, I certainly could do that, which is why I have.
Really? So why is the definition quite less precise and the colors a tad different so that these shots stick out?
Because the 35mm prints he used had lower effective definition and different colors than the Blu-rays, so the matching was imperfect, I'd hazard to guess... and simply using different 35mm projection print scans from an alternate source, as you're suggesting, is unlikely to fix the issue (projection prints do vary, but in general, they have lower effective resolution than interpositives, negatives, and the sort of sources used for Blu-rays, and Negative1's 35mm scans are in no way more magical than other 35mm scans) . Maybe better color matching and blurring up the Blu-ray parts would make it match the 35mm source he used in 2.0 better, but switching to a different 35mm scan will, at best, only marginally improve the edge detail.
EDIT: Sorry, just re-read and saw that you thought he was using GOUT footage. It should suffice to say he wasn't. That's about as good as we're gonna get detail-wise without access to the Lucasfilm vault.
I thought he was using GOUT and 97SE to unzoom the cockpit scenes? I didn't think he had 35mm scans to work with unless he was willing to wait for ESB:R. At least that's what this post said:
Yes, that's is partially correct - if Adywan was willing to share his unzoomed shots, I would have had the finished shots from a 35mm source combined with the BD - since he wasn't I had to use the '97SE to do the unzooming myself. However, after that N1 offered to send me the unzoomed 35mm shots that they provided for Adywan but I declined, because it would be a crapload of work, like several days', possibly several weeks' worth, because of the color correction needed for the faded 35mm print and the frame by frame manual stabilization needed to match it to the Blu-Ray source and it would be super annoying to do all that work knowing that Adywan already did it all.
So I just kept the ones using the '97SE DTV capture or GOUT for the edges of the image, but I think the resolution difference is pretty small and in most cases quite unnoticeable (like I don't think there is any discernible difference in the resolution between here for example) and so are the color differences now.
Thanks for the clarification on that scene. I think you did a fantastic job with it considering what material you had to correct it, and we have something (35mm scans) to look forward to with the next release. Thanks again for all the hours you put into this.
n00b said:
Behodar said:
Unfortunately these fixes (typos in the credits - quote is from page 77) didn't make it into the released 2.0; it looks like you forgot to re-render them. Something for the 2.1 to-do list :)
OMG, none of those typos was fixed? There were at least 10 >.<
EDIT: The necessary fixes are (in order):
NORMAN CHANGER => NORMAN CHANCER (02:01:56)
Dialoge Editors => Dialogue Editors (02:02:39)
JOHN CAMPELL => JOHN CAMPBELL (02:03:04)
Asssistant Directors =>Assistant Directors (02:03:07)
Additional matte Photography => Additional Matte Photography (02:03:33)
Assistant Acountants => Assistant Accountants (02:03:47)
Electronics Engineers => Electronic Engineers (02:03:53)
Supervising Stage Technicians => Supervising Stage Technician (02:03:57)
Minature Pyrotechnics => Miniature Pyrotechnics (02:03:59)
comma after applicable laws (02:04:41)
Beyond that, SirJonah has done some minor adjustments (character spacing etc.).
EDIT 2: @ Beber
Thanks!
So just wondering... are there any plans to immediately rectify these typos for version 2.0? Should be a relatively easy fix?
Watched the TESB 2.0 MKV this weekend and was blown away. Thanks Harmy for all of your hard work on this! Looks fantastic and I love the HD audio track of the 1980 mix. When I show my son Star Wars for the first time, the despecialized editions will be the ones that he sees.
deusxanime said:
I created an xdelta patch for going from the pre-fix version to the final fixed version (with correct audio labels, etc.). If you have the old version and don't want to redownload ~20GB or muck about with mkv editors, you can use this. Just extract it to the same folder as the mkv video file and run the .bat file. You need to make sure to have the same name as originally downloaded or to edit the .bat file if you've changed it. And be sure to have another ~20 GB available before starting as it will create a whole new file!
Dropbox link, hopefully will work here
I tested and verified, the fixed version should match the official md5 of 1e34878403b05924f71354e961016fce after completion.
Huge thanks for this Deusxanime. I had been meaning to change my file and start seeding but I was too lazy. This was the kick in the pants I needed to get this seeding again. I really appreciate this.
“You know, when you think about it, the Ewoks probably just crap over the sides of their tree-huts.”
deusxanime said:
I created an xdelta patch for going from the pre-fix version to the final fixed version (with correct audio labels, etc.). If you have the old version and don't want to redownload ~20GB or muck about with mkv editors, you can use this. Just extract it to the same folder as the mkv video file and run the .bat file. You need to make sure to have the same name as originally downloaded or to edit the .bat file if you've changed it. And be sure to have another ~20 GB available before starting as it will create a whole new file!
Dropbox link, hopefully will work here
I tested and verified, the fixed version should match the official md5 of 1e34878403b05924f71354e961016fce after completion.
Thanks for this!!!
The sheer increase in overall detail and recovering the backgrounds, fine detail and skin tones from the botched (again) BD is alone reason for looking at the Despecialized, but here with the new color timing ESB finally begins to look again like a 1980 motion picture as it should and not some modern video with no life to it.
And having both the 1980 stereo AND the 16mm mono track in lossless just seals the deal. Harmy, you have seriously mined for everything out of Bespin here, another stellar job to match SW 2.5.
VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader
Mackey256 said:
deusxanime said:
I created an xdelta patch for going from the pre-fix version to the final fixed version (with correct audio labels, etc.). If you have the old version and don't want to redownload ~20GB or muck about with mkv editors, you can use this. Just extract it to the same folder as the mkv video file and run the .bat file. You need to make sure to have the same name as originally downloaded or to edit the .bat file if you've changed it. And be sure to have another ~20 GB available before starting as it will create a whole new file!
Dropbox link, hopefully will work here
I tested and verified, the fixed version should match the official md5 of 1e34878403b05924f71354e961016fce after completion.
Huge thanks for this Deusxanime. I had been meaning to change my file and start seeding but I was too lazy. This was the kick in the pants I needed to get this seeding again. I really appreciate this.
No problem. I took one for the team and downloaded the new file even though I had the pre-fix one, so I could create the xdelta. It didn't take long with my connection, but it did kill my myspleen ratio downloading them both. So everyone needs to get on myspleen, grab the torrent, and download the fixed version off of there so I can get some seeding going! =)
deusxanime said:
I created an xdelta patch for going from the pre-fix version to the final fixed version (with correct audio labels, etc.). If you have the old version and don't want to redownload ~20GB or muck about with mkv editors, you can use this. Just extract it to the same folder as the mkv video file and run the .bat file. You need to make sure to have the same name as originally downloaded or to edit the .bat file if you've changed it. And be sure to have another ~20 GB available before starting as it will create a whole new file!
Dropbox link, hopefully will work here
I tested and verified, the fixed version should match the official md5 of 1e34878403b05924f71354e961016fce after completion.
Pardon my ignorance, but what is this?
Basically it's a differences file, which, when applied to file 1, changes it into file 2. This one converts from DeEd v1 to DeEd v2.
It's also an interesting idea for distributing fan edits if Disney starts coming down hard on them. Just distribute xdeltas that convert the Blu-rays to the DeEds. Absolutely no infringement.
CatBus said:
Basically it's a differences file, which, when applied to file 1, changes it into file 2. This one converts from DeEd v1 to DeEd v2.
It's also an interesting idea for distributing fan edits if Disney starts coming down hard on them. Just distribute xdeltas that convert the Blu-rays to the DeEds. Absolutely no infringement.
I think, in this case, that it doesn't convert DeEd v1 into DeEd v2 (even though this is most certainly possible), but rather from the uncorrected v2 release to the corrected one: v2->v2'.
A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.
I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!
—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3
CatBus said:
Absolutely no infringement.
Also, a binary diff-and-patch (e.g., xdelta) would likely be considered a "derivative work" in a US court of law.
It reduces to a "bit coloring" problem: http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23
A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.
I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!
—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3
So, such a file could basically make sure, that whoever downloads will first need to own the BD? That sound like a good idea, except that would mean that the person would have to have a BD drive in their computer and it would also probably take ages for a slower computer to do it.
Harmy said:
So, such a file could basically make sure, that whoever downloads will first need to own the BD? That sound like a good idea, except that would mean that the person would have to have a BD drive in their computer and it would also probably take ages for a slower computer to do it.
Yep, but there's no guarantee that their rip will be bit-for-bit identical to yours since some BD ripping programs screw with the stream headers, etc. You'd have to post which program you used as well as a checksum for your file.
Also, it's likely that the binary diff would be bigger than just distributing the file outright. Binary diff-and-patch schemes really only make sense when there are very few changes to the original file.
A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.
I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!
—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3
Yeah, that's what I figured - in the case of DeEd, it couldn't practically use any data at all from the BD.
Damn! I think this super moon thing is bad for HDDs! Adywan reported a crapped out HDD like a week ago and today, my 2TB external HDD died in agony (seriously, you should have heard the noises it was making!!!) :-/ It was a backup HDD, so no important data was lost but now I don't have anything backed up :-(
I've had some experience with xdelta patches like this, and it would never work for converting a Blu-ray rip to the sort of files you're making, not least of all being that every last bit is different between them. Even if you wanted to make sure the recipient legitimately owned the Blu-ray, whatever is being compared would have to be EXACTLY the same, meaning everyone would be forced to run the same OS as you, have the necessary hardware, and run exactly the same programs exactly the same way, and you already know how well people take instruction. It is a nice thought, but difference files like this are only really good for making small updates between two things that are ultimately similar.
Harmy said:
Damn! I think this super moon thing is bad for HDDs! Adywan reported a crapped out HDD like a week ago and today, my 2TB external HDD died in agony (seriously, you should have heard the noises it was making!!!) :-/ It was a backup HDD, so no important data was lost but now I don't have anything backed up :-(
I encourage you to run a badblocks endurance test on the next drive, please contact me when you get it and I'll walk you through the process. It is pretty simple and well worth it.
Do you think it could really predict that the HDD would die two years later, where one day it was working perfectly fine and the next day, it was dead?
And well, it actually isn't completely dead, you can still browse through it and see all the files and they even start copying when you try but it's going super slowly and in a couple of minutes you get a "can't read file" error message. And it makes these terrible noises. I think the spinning mechanism is broken.
Harmy said:
Do you think it could really predict that the HDD would die two years later, where one day it was working perfectly fine and the next day, it was dead?
And well, it actually isn't completely dead, you can still browse through it and see all the files and they even start copying when you try but it's going super slowly and in a couple of minutes you get a "can't read file" error message. And it makes these terrible noises. I think the spinning mechanism is broken.
Predict a mechanical part breaking? No. But there's plenty that can be discovered with it that might not come up for a year or so, since often there can be bad sectors far enough into the disk that it takes a while to actually get to in general use, but once you do get there, all hell breaks loose.
Oh, and at the stage it is in now, if there actually is anything you need to get off of it, you can wrap the drive in something (to keep moisture off) and toss it in a fridge for a few hours. That tends to get the drive working for a short period, in which you can get some files off of it, or at least generate a list of what was on it, so you know what's missing.
Like I said, I can browse through it no problem, it just seems to spin too slowly to get a proper read. I've read on many occasions, that the freezing method doesn't actually work - do you have some personal experience with it working?
It is a last ditch effort, but yes, it has worked on a few occasions where nothing else would. It has also worked for other people I know. It isn't a solution for every situation, but in the right circumstances it is a handy trick.
