Info: Back to the Future - without DNR & EE — Page 10

Gonna have to ask again: what do you mean by interpolated?

You don't see the janky frame rate mess when anything moves? Eeeewwwww

I see plain old reversible 3:2 pulldown.

Yep but that plus the interpolation just look ugly, it will do but the wowow/canal are needed

dvdmike said:

You don't see the janky frame rate mess when anything moves? Eeeewwwww

 You mean interlaced then, not interpolated.

Is it in a stable 3:2 pattern? Then it's just telecined and has to be played accordingly and nothing's wrong with it.

dvdmike said:

stretch009 said:

AntcuFaalb said:

dvdmike said:

stretch009 said:

dvdmike said:

drngr said:

2 & 3 HDNet captures are now on Usenet and the bay by which buccaneers congregate (3 posted twice by mistake -- later torrent preferred but it's the same .ts).

Love the first comment.

I thought the HDnet versions were no good, low bit bate and some DNR I did get them off that place and posted here and I thought we all decided we wanted the wowow or canal +

The HDnet versions that were no good with low bit rate etc; were the highly compressed versions from rutracker.  drngr just uploaded the uncompressed source files he found to usenet and TPB.  I have both the compressed and uncompressed of Part II HDnet and the uncompressed looks WAY better than the compressed.

 

 

Interesting, they are falling off the internet as we speak 

What do you mean?

A different way of saying "I'm downloading them", I guess.

 

I do not download anything, but if they carelessly fall off the internet onto my HDD then that is hardly may fault.

And I have to say I am far from impressed, they are still the same interpolated rips just with slightly better compression.

 

As to the AVS thread I remember that argument well, the supposed US DCP had no DNR but the UK version I saw 100% looked like the blu-ray as I commented a few pages back when i saw it before the disc came out.

I have no idea where those shots are from as I understand it you can't screen shot a DCP file due to encryption, you can with trailers however. 

 

DCP/Canal + comparison :

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/20265

 

Also for UK people I am going to try for this 

https://www.odeon.co.uk/fanatic/booking-interactive/s211/p52700000023WXAZMLB/

Damn, I am so jealous!

I missed out on the opportunity to see the digital re-release a few years ago, and the nearest IMAX near me is at Manchester and it's not screening it. :-(

zee944 said:

dvdmike said:

You don't see the janky frame rate mess when anything moves? Eeeewwwww

 You mean interlaced then, not interpolated.

Is it in a stable 3:2 pattern? Then it's just telecined and has to be played accordingly and nothing's wrong with it.

In VLC and MPC-HC it was a mess.  It looks great when I play it back in Windows Media Player though.

stretch009 said:

In VLC and MPC-HC it was a mess.  It looks great when I play it back in Windows Media Player though.

 

Video players are not reliable for analysis. It should be checked in VirtualDub via AviSynth and not through DirectShow - or in some other reliable video editor.

Is the laserdisc still being preserved in this thread or just the audio now?

My google fu is strong

ilovewaterslides said:

rockin said:

Is the laserdisc still being preserved in this thread or just the audio now?

What's the point of preserving the LD? I mean, colorwise it's not the best source available since it's kinda pink/blue tinted compared to the DVD.

Well, to be honest i'm not sure which version is the closest to the original theatrical colors.

Sorry, I must have got confused. Earlier back in the thread you posted some samples of the laserdisc video and I wrongly assumed you were doing a capture of the whole laserdisc.

I have the other laserdisc release, and the colour is also not anywhere near as good as the DVD/HDTV/Blu-ray versions.

The problem is that anything you see on your computer screen isn't reliable. You can find any print, any frame, any theater shot on the net it's still worthless and cannot be used as a reference. At one point, anything you see was taken from an old (thus faded or aged in an other way) print or picture, so it can't look as it original looked to begin with. Add the capabilities of the scanner or the white balance settings of the camera to that, and voila, you're nowhere. It's not even too useful for checking the consistency at least, as different color components can age differently; so scenes shot in different color environment may not suffer from the same fading or color shifting. There are so many uncertainty in the process before you have something on the computer screen, that it's almost useless.

Also, it's even debatable what was original; it depended a lot on the projector. One could project it with a little bluish tint, the other a little yellowish. Not to mention if there's a shift in colors, your eyes will automatically adjust to that after a few minutes into the movie, and you won't notice it's shifted anywhere. Your mind will do the auto white balance. It's the consistency that matters more.

I think BTTF is a relatively simple case. It takes place more-or-less in the modern days and in a realistic universe, and there was no tampering with special tinted filters (which I truly hate in the recent movies) as we all remember. So a reasonably neutral if vivid color balance do this movie justice. And I believe the present transfers are quite OK in this way. You will never now and no one can ever prove if there was a tiny difference to the original anyway.

rockin said:

dvdmike said:

stretch009 said:

AntcuFaalb said:

dvdmike said:

stretch009 said:

dvdmike said:

drngr said:

2 & 3 HDNet captures are now on Usenet and the bay by which buccaneers congregate (3 posted twice by mistake -- later torrent preferred but it's the same .ts).

Love the first comment.

I thought the HDnet versions were no good, low bit bate and some DNR I did get them off that place and posted here and I thought we all decided we wanted the wowow or canal +

The HDnet versions that were no good with low bit rate etc; were the highly compressed versions from rutracker.  drngr just uploaded the uncompressed source files he found to usenet and TPB.  I have both the compressed and uncompressed of Part II HDnet and the uncompressed looks WAY better than the compressed.

 

 

Interesting, they are falling off the internet as we speak 

What do you mean?

A different way of saying "I'm downloading them", I guess.

 

I do not download anything, but if they carelessly fall off the internet onto my HDD then that is hardly may fault.

And I have to say I am far from impressed, they are still the same interpolated rips just with slightly better compression.

 

As to the AVS thread I remember that argument well, the supposed US DCP had no DNR but the UK version I saw 100% looked like the blu-ray as I commented a few pages back when i saw it before the disc came out.

I have no idea where those shots are from as I understand it you can't screen shot a DCP file due to encryption, you can with trailers however. 

 

DCP/Canal + comparison :

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/20265

 

Also for UK people I am going to try for this 

https://www.odeon.co.uk/fanatic/booking-interactive/s211/p52700000023WXAZMLB/

Damn, I am so jealous!

I missed out on the opportunity to see the digital re-release a few years ago, and the nearest IMAX near me is at Manchester and it's not screening it. :-(

The DCP looks so much better! Less compressed, I think. Can we have acces to this source? Do you have it?

For what it's worth, someone posted WOWOW part one WITHOUT hard-coded Japanese subtitles to Usenet.  The nfo explains how they removed the subs.   It's 25.73 gb's and hopefully I can trash the canal+ version I just obtained with the annoying logo.

Edit:  Man I wish someone would upload part II and III in similar fashion.  Like they said in the nfo 2 and 3 are by far the worst as far as DNR goes for the BD's.

ilovewaterslides said:

rockin said:

ilovewaterslides said:

rockin said:

Is the laserdisc still being preserved in this thread or just the audio now?

What's the point of preserving the LD? I mean, colorwise it's not the best source available since it's kinda pink/blue tinted compared to the DVD.

Well, to be honest i'm not sure which version is the closest to the original theatrical colors.

Sorry, I must have got confused. Earlier back in the thread you posted some samples of the laserdisc video and I wrongly assumed you were doing a capture of the whole laserdisc.

I have the other laserdisc release, and the colour is also not anywhere near as good as the DVD/HDTV/Blu-ray versions.

 

No problem, i just wanted to show how the colors look on my LD but a full capture of it would be worthless for the moment since it's a French edition and obviously the logos and titles are in French.

By the way, which edition of the LD do you have? It would be interesting to compare these two. The master used is possibly not the same.

 

I have no means of capturing the video directly. The only way I could show you what the transfer was like is if I recorded directly off my tv using my phone (which probably wouldn't be very reliable or accurate). I can try and do this if you want me to though.

From memory, I think my laserdisc version is the edition in the blue sleeve but I really need to dig it out and take a look to confirm but I am pretty certain it is that one.

Always wanted those, shame I never won the lotto 

Never even heard of Hi-VISION Laserdisc, how do they compare to blu-ray?