logo Sign In

Got the LD rips - Now How Do I Make Them Work? — Page 2

Author
Time
Post link
Certain Japanese players, which are considered to be of higher quality or of greater capacity for quality playback than the North American units, are occasionally imported by enthusiasts. These include the LD-S9, HLD-X9 and HLD-X0. All three are manufactured by Pioneer and all three contain technology that was never officially available in North American Laserdisc players. The LD-S9 and HLD-X9 share a highly advanced comb filter, alowing them to offer a considerable advantage in picture quality over most other LD players when the s-video connection is used. The comb filter present in these players is unique and is purportedly the finest comb filter ever used in consumer A/V gear, it is still currently in use in Mitsubishi's top-spec CRT rear projection television sets (the Diamond and now defunct Platinum series sets) and Pioneer's Elite line of rear projection televisions. In addition to the advanced comb filter, the HLD-X9 contains a red laser pickup which significantly reduces crosstalk and picture-noise levels compared to players with the traditional inafred laser, it can also read through all but the worst cases of laser rot and surface wear. The HLD-X9 is, lastly, also a "MUSE" player, capable when properly equipped of playing back high definition laserdiscs, called Hi-Vision or MUSE discs in Japan. The HLD-X0 is Pioneer's original MUSE player, and is the player of choice for many enthusiasts despite the fact that it lacks the comb filter shared by the S9 and X9. It was entirely hand built from hand picked electronics and weighed a massive 36 kilograms. Many argue that the newer X9 was a more capable MUSE player but that the X0 had superior performance with standard NTSC discs. Nonetheless, the X9 remains the more popular of the two models, as it includes the newer comb filter and is a dual-side player, meaning that double sided discs don't need to be manually flipped over in order to be played through. - Wikipedia - Laserdisc


X0 (as in "zero") Project

<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
Post link
- the best player (Pioneer XO)
- best source material
- best DVD authoring

While they're at it, they should use the "best" compression method available - MPEG4, not the artifact-prone MPEG2.

COOL project. But I'm disappointed to read, "Our team cannot make our work freely available." That means that you & I will never see it.




EDIT: Wait a minute. Why are they using a Pioneer XO that does NOT have a COMB filter? They should be using the X9.
troy
Author
Time
Post link
"MPEG4, not the artifact-prone MPEG2."

Most consumer DVD players use MPEG2, and so will we. Besides, HD-DVD holds 30 Gbs, which is about the size of an analog capture of a two-hour movie with a 4-1 compression ratio (Blu-ray holds 50Gbs, as does D-VHS, and an uncompressed capture is 200Gbs.) As such, very little compression would actually be necessary.

"Our team cannot make our work freely available." That means that you & I will never see it."

I'd better be able to see it - I'm making the damn thing.

"Why are they using a Pioneer XO that does NOT have a COMB filter? They should be using the X9.
troy "

No, the X9 has a newer comb filter - but it's not newer than the filter used in the computer video card that was used to capture it.

<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
Post link
MPEG-4, Ra Ra Ra!

Why is it you want to beat us about the head with MPEG-4? Do you assume that the fine people who have been restoring and archiving the Original Trilogy in this community haven't heard of it? That by investing time and effort into films of the late 70's early 80's they are somehow stuck in the same timeframe technology-wise?

Is MPEG-4 a better form of compression than MPEG-2. Yes, no-one is disputing that. No-one disputes that MPEG-2 is better than MPEG-1. It is an accepted fact. Technology improves.

So why aren't the people here using MPEG-4.

Well, which version do you suggest they use: Simple Profile, Advanced Simple Profile, Advanced Video Codec (AKA MPEG-4 Part 10, AKA H.264). I would assume AVC as it is considered to offer the highest quality and hence has been accepted by both HD-camps for the next generation consumer player (along with VC1, AKA WM9-DRMless and MPEG-2). But then there was only a discussion today on the DVD List stating that Sony are using MPEG-4 Part 2 for it's HDCAM systems:

Sony IS using MPEG-4 part 2 video for HDCamSR. They are using one of the high quality profiles that allows the encoding of 4:4:4 at 1920 x 1080.

Do not confuse this with MPEG-4 Part 10, A.K.A. H.264 or AVC. This is the original MPEG-4 video codec that was extended to allow for high quality studio applications.


With regards to XVID, the fact is both XVID and DIVX offer compatibility with MPEG-4. Infact I believe both offer a spec similiar to Advanced Simple Profile. DIVX has moved further away from the spec and has also insisted on sticking with the AVI as a container format, which supposedly doesn't offer the 'flexibility' of .MP4 or .MPG specs (Some people have gone as far as to say AVI containers 'cripple' the CODEC.) Although I haven't tried it myself, I understand that it is possible to extract the video stream from an XVID file and place it within a legal MP4 container.

I would also not consider now to be the best time to start putting all of your eggs into the MPEG-4 basket, especially not as an archival format. Software and Hardware encoders are still coming to the market, and as far as I know none of them offer all of the facilities of MPEG-4 to produce the best encodes (number of B frames etc etc - check Doom9 for all of the techy details)

Probably most importantly, MPEG-4 is an inherently lossy format, and so is not the best way to archive video. How easy is it to edit? What colour information is lost? I would assume considering how relatively cheap storage is today, that projects like X0 will be archived into HUFFYUV AVIs, which is considered one of the best capture CODECS on the
'market'.

MPEG-4 will have its place over the next few years, but at present it makes no sense to step away from MPEG-2 / DVD as a distribution format. People want to enjoy these products on their TVs with a few cold ones (Have you never read Rikter's NFO files). MPEG-4 may make a smaller file to download, hence a quicker file, but at present I can't burn that to a disc to watch in the lounge. DIVX, yes, on some players, but the specs mean it is currently far more restrictive.

DVD has been hugely popular, and has become THE way to watch video content.

On a final note, I shall assume that you are a relative newcomer to these forums, so let me just point to the fact that there have been discussions about whether these preservations should upscale the video to 16:9 Anamorphic from their original 4:3 Letterbox, the issue of cutting-edge video codecs doesn't even reach the table.

And I'm done...

Save London’s Curzon Soho Cinema

Author
Time
Post link
"I would assume considering how relatively cheap storage is today, that projects like X0 will be archived into HUFFYUV AVIs, which is considered one of the best capture CODECS on the'market'."

That is precisely correct, sir. (And I have close to a Terabyte of local storage.)

<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
Post link
Originally posted by: MeBeJediNo, the X9 has a newer comb filter - but it's not newer than the filter used in the computer video card that was used to capture it.
Does newer = better? The article you posted said: "The comb filter present in these players is unique and is purportedly the finest comb filter ever used in consumer A/V gear, it is still currently in use in Mitsubishi's top-spec CRT rear projection television sets." That sounds damn good! Why did you decide to not follow this guy's advice & not use the X9's "finext comb ever"?

Also, you're lucky to be part of that project, and have a chance to see the original trilogy in crystal clarity! Still disappointed you guys are not sharing with the rest of us. ;-(



BTW, my computer is connected to my surround sound system, with a 30 inch screen. I view my videos straight off my computer, in hi-resolution, and that's why the MPEG2 DVD standard doesn't really do it for me. (shrug) Sorry if I offended you.

Cheers,
Troy :-)



Author
Time
Post link
"Does newer = better?"

With all due respect, isn't that the very thing you are claiming with MPEG4?

"Why did you decide to not follow this guy's advice & not use the X9's "finext comb ever"?

Transfers from an X0 and an X9 were captured and compared by a member of our group who is far more knowledgeable about the technical aspects of each than I (he explained it somewhere, but I've not been able to locate this post yet.) Regardless, the X0 picture came out on top. As good as the X9's comb filter is, it's not the sole aspect in regards to a great transfer. Technical specifications are one thing, but actual experience plays an important role as well. In regards to technical specifications, however, the X0 had better components overall IIRC, while the X9 had a bit more "fluff" (side-flips and such.) That's as specific as I can get for now, as this conversation took place months ago.

"Still disappointed you guys are not sharing with the rest of us. ;-("

Technically, that only means that we cannot legally sell this transfer.

"that's why the MPEG2 DVD standard doesn't really do it for me. (shrug) Sorry if I offended you."

I've not taken any offense, but while I can now see why you are beating the MPEG4 drum so hard, you must realize that your viewing situation isn't "the norm", for lack of a better word. As much as I am comfortable with computers, I have no desire whatsoever to hook my computer up to my entertainment center, and most people don't even have the technical experience necessary to do this and have it work consistently.

Our project is about getting the best transfer possible, and in an easy-to-use format. DVD, as it stands now, is a fine delivery device until new hardware comes around that is easily accessible (i.e. Don't expect a D-VHS version anytime soon. )

[EDIT] I found the information, though I'm not at liberty to repost it at this time. Stay tuned!

<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
Post link
Ta for the PM MeBejedi, just off topic, I downloaded some of the h.264 encoded content from the Apple HD site and batman looks the nuts on my cinema display

HD Gallery
Egon "Don't Cross the streams it would be very bad"

Peter "i'm fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing"

Egon "lmagine the 97 Star Wars Special Editions"
Author
Time
Post link
I'm sure it does, but I'll bet you an indian nickel that the Batman LD wasn't the master source.

<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
Post link
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi
"Does newer = better?"With all due respect, isn't that the very thing you are claiming with MPEG4?! You sir are the *king* of strawman arguments (putting words into people's mouths, they did not say). At *NO* time did I ever say, "MPEG4 is newer, therefore it's better." I never made that ridiculous claim.

Transfers from an X0 and an X9 were captured and compared by a member of our group who is far more knowledgeable about the technical aspects of each, the X0 picture came out on top.
Side-by-side comparison. Makes sense.

I have no desire whatsoever to hook my computer up to my entertainment center, and most people don't even have the technical experience necessary.
It's easy. Just run a single cable from your computer to the stereo jacks. Easier than burning a DVD. ;-) I *love* watching Star Trek Enterprise in 1080i. It's a beautiful thing.

And computer gaming with 5.1 surround is absolutely stunning.

troy


Author
Time
Post link
"You sir are the *king* of strawman arguments (putting words into people's mouths, they did not say). At *NO* time did I ever say, "MPEG4 is newer, therefore it's better." I never made that ridiculous claim."

Wow....34 posts and you know me already. I guess I'm done here.

<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
Post link
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi
"You sir are the *king* of strawman arguments (putting words into people's mouths, they did not say). At *NO* time did I ever say, "MPEG4 is newer, therefore it's better." I never made that ridiculous claim."

Wow....34 posts and you know me already. I guess I'm done here.


HAHAHAHAHAHA - I like you man

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

Author
Time
Post link
Also, you're lucky to be part of that project, and have a chance to see the original trilogy in crystal clarity!

I view my videos straight off my computer, in hi-resolution, and that's why the MPEG2 DVD standard doesn't really do it for me.


...

I'm sure Enterprise looks fantastic in 1080i, but I think the point you're missing is that Enterprise is available in 1080i.

The X0 project will offer the best possible quality transfer of the laserdisc, but ultimately Laserdisc has a lower resolution to DVD - and unless the team do an upscale the video will be 4:3 Letterboxed, not 16:9 Anamorphic.

MPEG-4 compression would allow people to distribute these films more easily than DVD (1.4Gb-ish vs 4.35Gb), but the downside would be they would not be playable on set-top DVD Players.

MPEG-4 offers more efficient compression, it does not magically insert detail.


While I must thank ElectricTroy for allowing me to increase my post-count, I am starting to wonder if this isn't becoming some sort of trolling exercise...

Save London’s Curzon Soho Cinema

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi.......Originally posted by: Troy
"You sir are the *king* of strawman arguments (putting words into people's mouths, they did not say). At *NO* time did I ever say, "MPEG4 is newer, therefore it's better." I never made that ridiculous claim."
Wow....34 posts and you know me already. I guess I'm done here.
I'm sure you're a nice guy, but putting words into my mouth, that I did NOT say, is just plain rude. Think about that.


re: "DVD has higher resolution than LD" only applies at minimum compression. If a DVD is poorly composed (like the Star Trek TNG DVDs with artifacts), then the resolution actually drops below laserdisc-quality.

But I'm sure you already knew that. ;-)




BTW, thanks to whoever told me about IsoHunt and VideoHelp! I found a tv show (earth2) that I've been looking for a long, long time. I wish they'd release this to DVD.
troy

Author
Time
Post link
Is it just me, or is anyone else finding this thread high in entertainment value?

Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here

Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here