Team Negative1 - Unofficial Jurassic Park 35mm (Released)

We are working on a partially cleaned version of the Poita 35mm of Jurassic Park.

============================

• Will be a MP4 high bitrate 1080p version.

• No color or partial minor correction

• 5 pass cleanup, dark/light/scratch/paint/ manual fixes

• Partially cropped

• No stabilization

• Partial flicker removal on a few shots.

Screenshots and clips will be forthcoming.

This is not meant to take the place of other major restorations, but our quick take on it.

Team Negative1

Status Update:

===========================

- Split movie into 4 parts

- 1st cleanup pass

------------------------------------

1 - 70 hours - 50%

2 - 70 hours - 45%

3 - 65 hours - 60%

4 - 20 hours - 20%

===============

- Part 4 - Manual cleanup on end scene and credits. 80%

- Cleaning up DTS intro.

Team Negative1

Neat! What issues with the current release have prompted the team to work on this print?

Sounds great! Are you ever planning to color correct this at any point or only clean it up a little?

We listed the issues here:

================

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Question-regarding-Jurassic-Park-3D/post/779398/#TopicPost779398

We don't have time to do color correction. There will be other people working on it.

Team Negative1

Ah, was hoping for stabilization as well. But the scratch removal will be nice.

RU.08 said:

Just a note - my encode finished and it looks really good. A huge improvement over the original encode at the same file-size (about 3.5GB). What a difference the grain makes! I'll probably just use this version for my AVCHD... I don't think this needs scratch/dirt/damage removal - except for a a handful of scenes mostly involving the end and start of the reels - and frankly I'd rather leave in the residual dirt as it doesn't really detract from the experience at all.

 Sounds nice. Still waiting to see what The Team cooks up, as far as scratches/dirt go. But I agree that it's in decent shape already compared to many films.

Update:

=====================

First pass - dirt

---------------------

Part 1 - 140 hours - 97%

Part 2 - 137 hours - 96%

Part 3 - 150 hours - 100% done

Part 4 - 50 hours - 35% done

Second pass - dirt

-----------------------

Part 3 - 10 hours - 15%

Part 4 - 40 hours - 30%

Test sample done - Part 4 - 15 minutes.

We'll be posting some video samples shortly.

There is definitely dirt, specks throughout the movie, to varying degrees of distraction.

Team Negative1

Looking forward to this clean-up.

Can much be done for the photochemical black crush?

We'll check on the dark scenes sometime this week, but we don't have the raw files.

*** CORRECTION : We do have access to the Raw files, but not all members have them.

Team Negative1

...

- Partially cropped

- No stabilization

...

Hi, does 'partially cropped' just mean a matte? Is this being done to attain a uniform picture width & height?

Why no stabilization?

Also, I really like HEVC/H.265 now, if you haven't already, you might want to test it out.

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

 Not to mention x265 isn't AVCHD/BD compatible like x264 is.

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

I think HEVC is pretty good and while what you're saying may be correct or true to you or possibly even absolutely true in a general or specific technical sense, until I see you have good reason to say what you're saying, I say it's subjective and I disagree.

stretch009 said:

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

 Not to mention x265 isn't AVCHD/BD compatible like x264 is.

Will x265 (HEVC) ever be compatible with AVCHD/BD? I'm not sure if that's a good reason not to use it. Doh!

skoal said:

stretch009 said:

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

 Not to mention x265 isn't AVCHD/BD compatible like x264 is.

Will x265 (HEVC) ever be compatible with AVCHD/BD? I'm not sure if that's a good reason not to use it. Doh!

 My point was if they want to make an AVCHD/BD compatible version also they're going to have to make an x264 version along with the x265.

stretch009 said:

skoal said:

stretch009 said:

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

 Not to mention x265 isn't AVCHD/BD compatible like x264 is.

Will x265 (HEVC) ever be compatible with AVCHD/BD? I'm not sure if that's a good reason not to use it. Doh!

 My point was if they want to make an AVCHD/BD compatible version also they're going to have to make an x264 version along with the x265.

 You're point or points, don't make sense, but keep on talking. Doh!

Feallan said:

skoal said:

Feallan said:

x265 is nowhere near finished, it outputs worse picture quality than x264 at the same bitrate.

I think HEVC is pretty good and while what you're saying may be correct or true to you or possibly even absolutely true in a general or specific technical sense, until I see you have good reason to say what you're saying, I say it's subjective and I disagree.

 

Original frame from Blu ray: http://abload.de/img/761_original_rcued.png

x264 5000 kbps encode: http://abload.de/img/761_05000_x264p2o6x.png

x265 5000 kbps encode: http://abload.de/img/761_05000_ybrad.png

Look at the table. All the grain is gone completely.

Note that I didn't make these images, found it on google. Some settings may have been set incorrectly, but there's a reason x265 encodes are very rarely showing up on torrents.

When I basically said, it's all subjective unless you have something to back-it up, I didn't mean grabbing random images encoded with who knows which settings and which encoder (version). Give me a break. Seriously?

Also, while many on here and else where disagree, showing 2 frames and pointing out grain doesn't mean much. Yes, grain can be good, artificial grain put back in after denoising takes it out can be good, but with video compression it's about perceptual quality and we're not looking at individual frames (in exactly the same way) when we're watching the actual moving picture.

We are not using x.265, someone else can test those.

Also, we mentioned releasing only a high bitrate MP4, and haven't decided on the filesize yet.

The work we are doing on it, is because we have spare machines that can be tasked to work on it. Anything that is scene to scene intensive will not be done, because we don't have the time to work on it.

This is just to create a base version, so that other people can improve on it will color correction and other fixes.

There are other people doing the fixes people want. We just wanted to do something relatively quick and simple.

Team Negative1