twister111 said:

MaximRecoil said:
I don't disagree with any of that, but none of that makes the GOUT "terrible" or "horrible". If we place the GOUT on the "horrible" scale, then all of the LaserDisc releases were what? "Extra horrible"? And all of the LaserDisc transfers (TR47, Moth3r, Dr. Gonzo, etc.) were what? Extra extra horrible? And all of the VHS releases? Extra, extra, extra horrible?

Video standards change over time and fans doing what they can with limited resources is substantially different to a release from a multibillion dollar company with every resource at it's disposal. You're removing the context of the releases and comparing them as though they were done under the same conditions.

Saying that something is "terrible" or "horrible" has no context, thus I couldn't have possibly removed the context. If you add context such as: "The GOUT is horrible compared to such and such", then that is something else entirely.

People were gushing over the Cowclops/TR47 v.2 release (link), and that was right around the time of the release of the GOUT (see post 706). People don't gush over things they think are simply "horrible" or "terrible", no matter who released it. With the GOUT (way better than the things people were gushing over), people are confusing their disappointment with an objective assessment of quality.

Gogogadget said:

Really don't see how anyone can defend the GOUT.

It's the best officially released source we have yes, but it's still unwatchable.

"Unwatchable"? More hyperbole. "Unwatchable" is a good word for those VCD encodes of theater bootlegs shot with a low-end camcorder that were circulating on the internet in the late '90s and early '00s. It is funny that this site thrived for years on copies of the OUT that were inferior to the "unwatchable" GOUT. I guess no one was actually watching their LDs or LD-to-DVD transfers back then, you know, because if the GOUT is "unwatchable", the LDs were "extra unwatchable" and the LD-to-DVD transfers were "extra, extra unwatchable".

Maybe you should try a TV for which 4:3 DVDs were intended.

hairy_hen said:

Pretty sad that 'better than anything else officially available' still has to mean 'full of aliasing, DVNR smearing, excessive gate weave, badly faded colors, and general low resolution'.

It is only used as a source for the Despecialized Edition because it has to be. Once there are 35mm sources for all the missing pieces, those sections will be replaced.

That's not the point. The fact that the GOUT has enough quality to be used at all in that project is the point. If the GOUT were truly "terrible", "horrible", or "unwatchable", it obviously couldn't have been used with good results in that project (and by most accounts, the results were good).