logo Sign In

The "EditDroid" Trilogy DVD Info and Feedback Thread (Released) — Page 10

Author
Time
Originally posted by: russs15
A bit of news from over at alt.binaries.starwars

As well as posting very high definition covers, disc labels and inserts for the set dubbed the "Mysterious Mysteries" edition, "The Creator" had this to say.............



"It's had this awful name for at least a couple of weeks, so I don't know if it can be changed (you know how names can stick).

If I had my druthers, I would refer to our works under the name "EditDroid." I have no doubt that someday the rest of our stuff will
leak out, and we'd prefer that name be associated with them."



According to another post "EditDroid" was the original Lucasfilm name for the Avid system (whatever that might be???).




- Hello again guys and gals!

I did not mean to offend the creator[s] with my naming of the set they work so hard to create but it is hard to post information when no is out there to find. Please forgive me but rest assured that the name "EditDroid" will be prominently posted with all future release (do you have any acsii art so I can include it in the NFO?)!

I've updated the "MM" Star Wars NFO 3 times now, so the next UPDATED one will be included with Empire as well as the covers for the set!) - IF THERE is any other info that is required in the NFO please email me and I will include that info.

As for the name....

The Next torrent in this set will be released with the moniker of "EditDroid" attached to it but since the name "Mysterious Mysteries" has now stuck; I will release the Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi with this name.....

The "Mysterious Mysteries" Collection by EditDroid

I gave this name to the set as it was a TOTAL mystery as to who created the set but the main reason is that I released this on "MYSPLEEN" which started out as an INVADER ZIM episodes mirror/torrent site (the phrase 'MY spleen!' is a quote from the Episode "Dark Harvest") SO being an Invader Zim fan myself I figured the name "Mysterious Mysteries" was apt.

Again I truly ment no offense...


“My skill are no longer as Mad as the once were” RiK

Author
Time
Originally posted by: russs15According to another post "EditDroid" was the original Lucasfilm name for the Avid system (whatever that might be???).


That was my post. I was also the one to ask what the the poster wanted the collection called.

The Avid system is the de facto standard editing system now used for editing motion pictures. Check out www.avid.com for more info.
Author
Time
Rik: I don't think the creators want "Mysterious Mysteries" anywhere on stuff you're going to "release."

Maybe just stick in the NFO that these were at FIRST called the "Mysterious Mysteries" and that should clear up all the confusion.

I also thought the name was pretty doofy. "EditDroid" is definitely better.
The Best Show You've Never Heard
Author
Time
Originally posted by: The Bizzle
Rik: I don't think the creators want "Mysterious Mysteries" anywhere on stuff you're going to "release."

Maybe just stick in the NFO that these were at FIRST called the "Mysterious Mysteries" and that should clear up all the confusion.

I also thought the name was pretty doofy. "EditDroid" is definitely better.



True, I will be doing a "EditDroid" NFO that includes this information for Empire and Jedi...

But I've not been contacted about this by anyone until this post (I don't read the forum anymore or read my PM's but once a week) so sorry for any delays

Yes, it was I who posted the first disc on the torrents - I've made my case many times about the naming of the set and have IMPLORED the creators for more information but yet none has gotten in contact with me directly. YES, I will be adding the "EDITDROID" name to the set as I posted before so NO worries there gang.....

ALSO, could the creator[s] of the "Mysterious Mysteries" By EditDroid PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE send me an NFO to include with my next release of the The "EditDroid" Empire Strikes Back and The "EditDroid" Return of the Jedi DVD's?

ANY and ALL contact information will remain 100% confidential unless otherwise requested..

I will no longer browse these forums daily after this post; BUT rest assured I will continue to post torrents and release info here on the OT.com so I'll see ya all from time to time...

I will still answer ALL emails so feel free to drop me a line or IF you want to make a request for DVDr copies from my STAR WARS DVD collection!

Word to the Spookies...




“My skill are no longer as Mad as the once were” RiK

Author
Time

ALSO, could the creator[s] of the "Mysterious Mysteries" By EditDroid PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE send me an NFO to include with my next release of the The "EditDroid" Empire Strikes Back and The "EditDroid" Return of the Jedi DVD's?


would you be posting these?

Author
Time
Is there going to be an EDITDROID official thread? I'm never sure where to post comments or questions on this awesome edition.

I just noticed the isolated score on ESB... does this essentially negate the need for the ISOMIX editions?

Author
Time
Probably. Although a good presentation, the ISOMIX version's picture quality is a bit lacking.
Author
Time
"I just noticed the isolated score on ESB... does this essentially negate the need for the ISOMIX editions?"

Presumably, one should compare the scores before coming to that decision.

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
The ISOMIX set will always be a favorite. Of all of my OT sets, that once has gotten the most play-time.

D.O.

edit: The point that I was trying to make is that the ISOMIX is a true classic in my eyes.
¤ The Dark One In Costume ¤

...at last we shall have revenge...
Author
Time
Originally posted by: terryeden
I've just finished watching the Mysterious Mysteries disc. Wow!

Before I heap general praise on it, I'd like to point out four (very) minor problems with the disc.
Now, I'm not sure if some of these were cause by my viewing set up - streaming the disc over my LAN to a modified PAL Xbox running XBMC - or the disc itself, but here they are.

1) There's a slight horizontal wobble pressent. This is most noticable on the opening and closing credits.


Yeah, I also noticed the horizontal wobble. I still have to get Empire, but is the wobbling present on that version as well? Other than that, I'm very impressed with the image quality.
Deep Thoughts, by Jack Handey:

If you ever fall off the Sears Tower, just go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will try to catch you because, hey, free dummy.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v58/downtown_11/avatars/malla_sig_2.jpghttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v58/downtown_11/avatars/luke_sig_2.jpg
Author
Time
Although the picture quality of this version is nicer than Dr Gonzo's in a lot of ways, the fact that it's not anamorphic makes it almost useless. The drop in image quality from zooming on my TV renders non-anamorphic DVDs unwatchable for me

Still, it IS a nice capture.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: RichKS
Although the picture quality of this version is nicer than Dr Gonzo's in a lot of ways, the fact that it's not anamorphic makes it almost useless. The drop in image quality from zooming on my TV renders non-anamorphic DVDs unwatchable for me

I've watched this disc on a friend's widescreen TV and it looks great. Could be the problem is with your TV. Is every non-anamorphic title you watch unacceptable?
The whole "convert letterbox to anamorphic" debate has gone on elsewhere in this forum and on the net. I stand in the "leave it alone" camp. Encoding noisy laserdisc material is hard enough without wasting good bits on the bad pixels you get by expanding the image.
Author
Time
"the fact that it's not anamorphic makes it almost useless. The drop in image quality from zooming on my TV renders non-anamorphic DVDs unwatchable for me"

As opposed to "zooming in" on the LD video in one's video editing program? That's all that was done for Gonzo's version.

Sounds like your TV is the problem, not the video transfer.

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi


Sounds like your TV is the problem, not the video transfer.


Yup, mine, and all the other 16:9 displays I've ever owned or used.

Hey, I'm not dissing the set, it's a great transfer. But images zoomed on a 16:9 screen look awful to me. All the 16:9 displays I've ever seen look rubbish on zoom mode, to me at least. I live in the UK, 16:9 has been common here for a long time. I've had 3 different 16:9 TVs over the last 7 years (oh god, that makes me sound really old!). The latest one looks better than the others did on zoom, but still awful by comparison. In Widescreen mode, anamorphic DVDs look fantastic. Crisp and lovely. Maybe it's something to do with PAL enabled equipment (although obviously the DVD player and the TV are operating in NTSC while watching these disks) or maybe it's the fact that the RGB output from my DVD player is so sharp, that it really notices when it's not quite right. America never really embraced RGB as far as I can tell, but don't you guys have that new thing with a whole bunch of wires that looks just as good?

So to me, on my setup (and the 3 other 16:9 setups I've watched these DVDs on), Dr Gonzo's disk just looks better, hands down. On a standard 4:3 screen, I'd say EditDroid is noticably crisper, but not on any 16:9 display I've seen it on.

Bottom line is for me: A DVD which is not anamorphic is not as watchable as one that is. Unless it's a 4:3 presentation of course. It's not a bad disk, in fact a very good one. But certain "deliberate creative decisions" (ie, making it letterboxed instead of anamorphic) have been made which render it not as good as Dr G's to me.

My problem, not EditDroids. Personal taste comes into this as well. Some of my friends don't mind the drop in quality. One guy I know watches all his DVDs on a PS2, with all the attendant sound synch issues and he claims not to notice. 2 or 3 people I know refuse to watch DVDs at his house because the synch drives then insane, but it doesn't seem to bother him one bit.

Diffren' strokes I guess...
Author
Time
Originally posted by: RichKS
I live in the UK

Gee, that's kind of a vital piece of information you left out of your original post. Duh, of course it won't look that great, playing a letterboxed NTSC disc on a 16x9 PAL monitor in zoom mode. Not only is the video getting scaled up from 480 lines to 576 for admittance into PAL-land, but then getting scaled up again to fill the screen.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: ApolloOne
Originally posted by: RichKS
I've watched this disc on a friend's widescreen TV and it looks great. Could be the problem is with your TV. Is every non-anamorphic title you watch unacceptable?


OK, I am being melodramatic I suppose. Sorry. I don't really mean "unwatchable", I actually mean "not as good". Looking at (for example) the original release of David Fincher's Se7en in it's non-anamorphic ickyness next to the more recent release, the difference is remarkable. The Anamorphic version looks sharper, crisper and all-round better. The letterbox version looks fine until you see what you're missing. Watching Dr G's anamorphic DVDs just looks better than the zoomed EditDroid version. Watch both on a 4:3 display, and yeah. EditDroid DOES look better, but that's lost in the zoom.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: ApolloOne
Originally posted by: RichKS
I live in the UK

Gee, that's kind of a vital piece of information you left out of your original post. Duh, of course it won't look that great, playing a letterboxed NTSC disc on a 16x9 PAL monitor in zoom mode. Not only is the video getting scaled up from 480 lines to 576 for admittance into PAL-land, but then getting scaled up again to fill the screen.


That's not actually true.

My TV (like almost all the TVs here) runs native NTSC when it gets an NTSC signal. They're cheaper to build that way, and I wouldn't buy one that didn't work like that, since 90% of my DVDs and videogames are NTSC native. And the DVD player outputs NTSC as well. PAL DVDs look just as crap as NTSC ones when you zoom in, as do videogames, broadcast etc etc...
Author
Time
Originally posted by: RichKSMy TV (like almost all the TVs here) runs native NTSC when it gets an NTSC signal. They're cheaper to build that way, and I wouldn't buy one that didn't work like that, since 90% of my DVDs and videogames are NTSC native. And the DVD player outputs NTSC as well. PAL DVDs look just as crap as NTSC ones when you zoom in, as do videogames, broadcast etc etc...


Ah, my apologies. I inferred from your original post that the quality was much worse than you actually say it is now, so I was thinking in terms of PAL-60 possibly contributing to the issue. Sounds like you have an ideal setup (I wish our TVs and players were as flexible as ones in the UK). That being said, 16x9 TV zooms I've watched have been excellent, results which seem to differ from those of your experience. As for the reason...who can really say? <shrug>
Author
Time
Originally posted by: ApolloOne


Ah, my apologies. I inferred from your original post that the quality was much worse than you actually say it is now, so I was thinking in terms of PAL-60 possibly contributing to the issue. Sounds like you have an ideal setup (I wish our TVs and players were as flexible as ones in the UK). That being said, 16x9 TV zooms I've watched have been excellent, results which seem to differ from those of your experience. As for the reason...who can really say? <shrug>


To be honest the zoom probably isn't THAT bad, (objectively speaking) maybe I'm just spoiled by the crispness I get from anamorphic? I really do see quite a difference in picture quality. It might be related to the way RGB signals work vs the connection you guys use. I assume the majority of folks in the US use SVHS? Or has component taken off properly? My DVD player is REALLY optimised for RGB, and looks awful by comparison is I use SVHS. A friend of mine has an imported panasonic from the US, which she uses to play her Region 1 NTSC stuff. That looks great with SVHS, but does not support RGB at all. But non-anamorphic stuff (like EditDroid) still looks ropey to me on her rig. Or at least, not as good.

But then I can taste thing like if milk has been stored in plastic, glass or cardboard containers. So I'm probably just uberpicky
Author
Time
Originally posted by: RichKS
Looking at (for example) the original release of David Fincher's Se7en in it's non-anamorphic ickyness next to the more recent release, the difference is remarkable. The Anamorphic version looks sharper, crisper and all-round better. The letterbox version looks fine until you see what you're missing.


That's because it's an entirely different transfer. That is a very bad example. And I haven't seen either the Dr. Gonzo or EditDroid set on a 16:9 TV, but I have both and have seen both on 4:3 ones, and the EditDroid blows Dr. Gonzo out of the water. If there were no dot crawl, or greatly reduced dot crawl, I'd say it is perfect DVD quality. But the thing is on my Toshiba setup in my room there isn't any dot crawl at all, but that may be because that's the only TV I'm running with component cables. But if anyone can point me to a way where I can take the original m2v file, run a dot-crawl filter on it so it ends up in a new m2v file and NOT an avi file or anything else because I still have problems converting avi to m2v, please tell me so this would look as good on any TV.
Author
Time
I watched the EditDroid ANH again last night with a Sanyo progressive scan DVD player connected to a Sony 43" 16x9 NTSC HDTV info on the set here calibrated with Avia DVD Guide. The EditDroid image quality is very good. The blacks could be a touch blacker, but it is one of the best transfers I've seen yet.

Now, as far as anamorphic vs. letter-boxed, my TV allows 4 levels of zoom (16:9 zoom, 4:3, full, wide zoom). Anything 16x9 and/or anamorphic set to 16:9 zoom on the set produces the same aspect ratio. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see the difference in aspect ratio between this set and the gonzo set when both are set to 16:9 zoom.

I'm also able to watch PAL videos without any noticable 'distortion' using the 16:9 zoom and my region-free DVD player. When I watch PAL on my 4:3 set the image is 'crushed', but not on the 16:9.

Any info on whether my observations are correct or not?


D.O.
¤ The Dark One In Costume ¤

...at last we shall have revenge...
Author
Time
I think the key is that the 16:9 zoom fills the screen side-to-side and not top-to-bottom. Hmmm, did that make any sense?
¤ The Dark One In Costume ¤

...at last we shall have revenge...
Author
Time
D.O, that sounds like a pretty damn cool setup to me.

Just curious: What's the "full" zoom mode, as opposed to the "wide zoom"? Is this the usual thing where one is the 16:9 mode you use for anamorphic DVDs and videogames, while the other is a stretched and distorted image where the edges of the picture get squished out? It's interesting that you don't have either 14:9 or what a lot of European TVs call "subtitle zoom". 14:9 is a halfway house between 4:3 and 16:9, kinda chops a bit off at the top and bottom and doesn't fill the screen all the way horizontally. We used to have a fair amount of stuff broadcast in that ratio, but that seems to have stopped now (at least, I don't see that because I have digital TV which is broadcast in 16:9). Subtitle Zoom is the same as 16:9 zoom, but the picture is moved up so that if you're watching a 2.85:1 letterbox DVD, the top of the picture is at the top of the screen and all the black is at the bottom. That way, if there are subs in the black, you get to see them. It's telling that the whole time I had a TV that did that, the only thing I ever watched on it that benefited from that was the original trilogy. Newer TVs appear to be able to mimic this by letting you move the 16:9 image up and down, which is how I watched the Phantom Edit DVD. Neither mode really gets a lot of use these days to be honest though.

As far as I can tell, what you're saying is that an anamorphic DVD viewed on the Widescreen mode is the same aspect ratio as a non-anamorphic DVD viewed in 16:9 zoom?

That's what I would expect.

But do me a favour and try this, hopefully you'll see what I'm getting at:

1) Get any anamorphic DVD. Preferably a well mastered one (Hellboy for example)

2) With you DVD player set to 16:9 display mode, watch a couple of minutes of it in Widescreen mode, taking advantage of the anamorphic-ness (I'm assuming this is how you're usually watching anamorphic DVDs)

3) Stop the movie and set you DVD to think you only have a 4:3 display.

4) Start playing again, with the TV set to 16:9 zoom.

Tell me you genuinely don't see a difference?
Author
Time
Of course there's a difference. When the DVD player is in 4x3 mode, it has to throw resolution away to get the anamorphic picture to fit a 4x3 screen (1 out of every 4 scan lines.)

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: Sadly, I believe the prequels are beyond repair.
<span class=“Bold”>JediRandy: They’re certainly beyond any repair you’re capable of making.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>MeBeJedi: You aren’t one of us.
<span class=“Bold”>Go-Mer-Tonic: I can’t say I find that very disappointing.</span></span>

<span class=“Italics”>JediRandy: I won’t suck as much as a fan edit.</span>

Author
Time
The architecture of PAL TVs is optimised for a 50Hz/576 line display, as that is what they will be primarily be used for. They will quite happily switch to 60Hz/480 line mode for NTSC, and will zoom in for non-anamorphic material (losing scanlines off the top and bottom in the process). If I'm correct, this leaves you with just 360 scanlines on screen - on a display where the shadow mask, phosphor dots, etc., are optimised for 576.

When I watch non-anamorphic NTSC material on my TV, I can see noticeable gaps between scanlines.

Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here

Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here