Making our own 35mm preservation--my crazy proposal — Page 57

ww12345 said:

I have to agree. I think that by as many people having the raw files as possible, that the "preservation factor" is the most it can be. It's like some of the studio audio files and bootlegs that leak occasionally; once they're out there, their rarity is diminished. Also, who would've thought even 5 or 6 years ago that a slightly large download would be 16gb? I think that as time goes on, the ability to download huge files will become more commonplace.

unfortunately here in america, the internet speeds are

pretty terrible. even 5 years from now. so that's not

going to change the fact about trying to get several terabytes

of data.

i HAD highspeed internet for the first time 3 years ago.

and have download 5 terabytes or so during that ENTIRE

time.

honestly, i wouldn't even download this if that was the

only way to get it. it's not worth the hassle, imagine

the headache of dealing with partial files, incomplete

files, PAR's etc.... i'm really thinking online is not

realistically going to be an option at all. someone else

will have to pick that up. i'm only going to be dealing

with just the possiblity of one hardware copy, and

that's it.

the thing is 3 people (including myself) already have it.

so we've backed each other up for redundancy. that's

all that we might need for the short term.

later

-1

Well, the issue with the X0 captures is that the GOUT had already come out when they were finally released, and had become rather irrelevant since the GOUT was a digital copy of the laserdisc master tape.

This is something completely different.

However, I also feel that a very small minority will REALLY want the raw captures. In this case, it should be relatively easy to post a hard drive.

Just sayin.

Mavimao said:

Well, the issue with the X0 captures is that the GOUT had already come out when they were finally released, and had become rather irrelevant since the GOUT was a digital copy of the laserdisc master tape.

This is something completely different.

However, I also feel that a very small minority will REALLY want the raw captures. In this case, it should be relatively easy to post a hard drive.

Just sayin.

for an intermediate solution,

a 720p downsample using openEXR

might be a lot more manageable.

we're still messing around with the files.

but if that's a few hundred Gigs, that MIGHT

a lot more reasonable.

later

-1

ww12345 said:

That might be a fair compromise.

I'm CONUS, too, so the shipping for me would not be a big deal - maybe $50-60 tops to ship the hard drives. However, for people who were interested, like Harmy, it could get really expensive really quickly. Not only would they have to fork out the money for the terabyte harddrives, but they would incur huge shipping costs. I just shipped 10 DVDs to a South American fellow and he had to pay $58 in shipping - and that was the dirt cheapest way. I just don't want our non-CONUS members to get shafted because it will be a huge file...

Would one be able to do a 1080p OpenEXR? I read a bit about it yesterday, but am still a little confused about what it does. Does it make the files smaller, using a better compression ratio or something?

shipping is a pain, especially if its multiple drives.

openEXR supports 1080p, with non-lossy compression, and

a whole lot more. it would reduce the filesize, but not by the

amount that would make a huge difference for this issue.

later

-1

ww12345 said:

Interesting. What would be the reduction of file size, just as an estimate?

do you mean for the 1080p or the 720p?

we're not completely sure yet.. but 720p raw data is about

45% of the 1080p to start off with before

compression.

later

-1

negative1 said:

ww12345 said:

That might be a fair compromise.

I'm CONUS, too, so the shipping for me would not be a big deal - maybe $50-60 tops to ship the hard drives. However, for people who were interested, like Harmy, it could get really expensive really quickly. Not only would they have to fork out the money for the terabyte harddrives, but they would incur huge shipping costs. I just shipped 10 DVDs to a South American fellow and he had to pay $58 in shipping - and that was the dirt cheapest way. I just don't want our non-CONUS members to get shafted because it will be a huge file...

Would one be able to do a 1080p OpenEXR? I read a bit about it yesterday, but am still a little confused about what it does. Does it make the files smaller, using a better compression ratio or something?

shipping is a pain, especially if its multiple drives.

 

openEXR supports 1080p, with non-lossy compression, and

a whole lot more. it would reduce the filesize, but not by the

amount that would make a huge difference for this issue.

 

later

-1

I think having the raw capture in 1080p would be an excellent compromise, -1. How big are we talking, in this case?

I made the comment on the old jedi.net forums, but Cineform HD avi is a great mezzanine format.  This is a segment of Temple of Doom:

General
Complete name                            : E:\CINEFORM\Temple of Doom\IndianaJones_TempleOfDoom_FilmLook_p1_CFHD_1080p2398.avi
Format                                   : AVI
Format/Info                              : Audio Video Interleave
Format profile                           : OpenDML
File size                                : 8.15 GiB
Duration                                 : 9mn 43s
Overall bit rate                         : 120 Mbps
Writing library                          : VirtualDub build 32842/release

Video
ID                                       : 0
Format                                   : CineForm
Codec ID                                 : CFHD
Codec ID/Info                            : CineForm 10-bit Visually Perfect HD (Wavelet)
Duration                                 : 9mn 43s
Bit rate                                 : 120 Mbps
Width                                    : 1 920 pixels
Height                                   : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio                     : 16:9
Frame rate                               : 23.976 fps
Scan type                                : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame)                       : 2.411
Stream size                              : 8.15 GiB (100%)

Now, I think I did this as Medium HD rather than High HD, but still the size of a feature is between 90-140GB.

It's now free for home use:

http://gopro.com/3d-cineform-studio-software-download/

Limited to 4:2:0 colour space, but definitely worth considering. We use the pro version at work to ingest from HDCAM SR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CineForm

This is very much a viable option - I wouldn't know where to start working with OpenEXR.

According to the wiki it's supported by most industry packages.

Cineform because it is in an AVI wrapper works also with AVISynth which we've all seen can do some pretty sweet image processing.

I would really like to see a bit of a side by side between these various formats.

DVD-BOY said:

I made the comment on the old jedi.net forums, but Cineform HD avi is a great mezzanine format.  This is a segment of Temple of Doom:

General
Complete name                            : E:\CINEFORM\Temple of Doom\IndianaJones_TempleOfDoom_FilmLook_p1_CFHD_1080p2398.avi
Format                                   : AVI
Format/Info                              : Audio Video Interleave
Format profile                           : OpenDML
File size                                : 8.15 GiB
Duration                                 : 9mn 43s
Overall bit rate                         : 120 Mbps
Writing library                          : VirtualDub build 32842/release

Video
ID                                       : 0
Format                                   : CineForm
Codec ID                                 : CFHD
Codec ID/Info                            : CineForm 10-bit Visually Perfect HD (Wavelet)
Duration                                 : 9mn 43s
Bit rate                                 : 120 Mbps
Width                                    : 1 920 pixels
Height                                   : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio                     : 16:9
Frame rate                               : 23.976 fps
Scan type                                : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame)                       : 2.411
Stream size                              : 8.15 GiB (100%)

Now, I think I did this as Medium HD rather than High HD, but still the size of a feature is between 90-140GB.

It's now free for home use:

http://gopro.com/3d-cineform-studio-software-download/

Limited to 4:2:0 colour space, but definitely worth considering. We use the pro version at work to ingest from HDCAM SR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CineForm

This is very much a viable option - I wouldn't know where to start working with OpenEXR.

we have had terrible problems looking into cineform.

no way we would use that... then again, we haven't

tested openEXR either. 

so basically you have to choose your poison. 

dxNhd :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNxHD_codec

there are so many propietary formats used

by companys for their high end software,

that are kind of standards.. but not really.

if you stick with one software suite,

you want all your tools to work together.

uncompressed TIFFS are huge. jpgs don't

support some of the high end formats.

every filetype format has its pluses and minuses.

later

-1

I can't see the point of using TIF for anything when PNG exists.

negative1 said:

we have had terrible problems looking into cineform.

no way we would use that... then again, we haven't

tested openEXR either. 

What kind of problems?

Rox64 said:

That's funny, I was about to post about the raw pics.

I think everybody could have just a percent of the total raw files to avoid buying several HDD. This way, three or four users have 20 minutes of the film, another three or four users have the next 20 minutes of the movie, and so on. So then if you need the raws from a certain scene, you just need to ask the users who have them. In fact this could work with P2P...

It would be even better if you release the raws at 4k, for preservation purposes, so we could always reedit them in lossless format and then create 1080p or even higher-resolution mkv, but that's just an idea. 1080p is still nice.

that wouldn't work.. people want all the files locally.

i would hate to have to wait on someone making the

files available to me when i needed them.

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

looking at this again, making a private

Star Wars Server would be cool, but very difficult

legally.... it would take A LOT of resources to

get it up, have server space, do administration, etc.

i HATE anything CLOUD related.

we don't have the files in 4k anyways, that would make

it even larger!

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

about the other file formats.. like cineform

we just have had issues exporting it those

formats and re-importing them back into avid,

after effects etc.

later

-1

The cloud is a giant step backward...

Molly said:

The cloud is a giant step backward...

Yes, it is. Remember hardware X-Terminals?

Molly said:

The cloud is a giant step backward...

no, it's NOT!

IT'S great for low level, CLI stuff.

text based forms, and data entry.

which is what a lot of it is..

for anything fancy, gui-based,

or data intensive. i can't stand it..

but if you have a superfast network connection,

or something else, it really shouldn't make a 

difference.

i have yet to see a video intensive EDITING

(not watching like netflix/hulu/etc) application

that can work through a network or wireless

connection that works right.. i could be wrong

in the future it could get better.

later

-1

negative1 said:

Molly said:

The cloud is a giant step backward...

no, it's NOT!

 

IT'S great for low level, CLI stuff.

text based forms, and data entry.

which is what a lot of it is..

 

for anything fancy, gui-based,

or data intensive. i can't stand it..

 

but if you have a superfast network connection,

or something else, it really shouldn't make a 

difference.

 

i have yet to see a video intensive EDITING

(not watching like netflix/hulu/etc) application

that can work through a network or wireless

connection that works right.. i could be wrong

in the future it could get better.

 

later

-1

Are we discussing the cloud or networks in general?

Networks are great for CLI stuff (e.g., connecting with a terminal emulator via SSH to a big *n*x box -- I do my work like this all the time), but the cloud seems to be a less-rigidly-defined means to deal with "big data".

GUI stuff is, more often than not, nasty over a network. However, X11 does a pretty good job at it, IMO.

AntcuFaalb said:

 

Are we discussing the cloud or networks in general?

Networks are great for CLI stuff (e.g., connecting with a terminal emulator via SSH to a big *n*x box -- I do my work like this all the time), but the cloud seems to be a less-rigidly-defined means to deal with "big data".

GUI stuff is, more often than not, nasty over a network. However, X11 does a pretty good job at it, IMO.

a little bit of both..

how would you go about setting up a 'star wars' server?

obviously it would just be plain data storage.

but there was speculation that using some online scripting,

you could do some simple preview cleanup of frames. (i think

'none' suggested that)... and submit some of that back

to the site..

also, you could probably submit avisynth scripts,

and have it run remotely on a faster computer.

and see the results.

i only have access to dual core computers from

about 6 years ago.. so anything more powerful

would be great. i'm not doing any heavy duty

editting, but i can run the software for cleanup.

the other guy have much more powerful computers.

i could use more ram, but at some point i'll upgrade

in the future. however, running windows 7 64bit

works well enough for me with 2 gigs of ram.

it does take a long time to render/convert stuff,

but i'm not in a rush. it's better to get it done right,

than rush through stuff with errors.

later

-1

negative1 said:

AntcuFaalb said:

 

Are we discussing the cloud or networks in general?

Networks are great for CLI stuff (e.g., connecting with a terminal emulator via SSH to a big *n*x box -- I do my work like this all the time), but the cloud seems to be a less-rigidly-defined means to deal with "big data".

GUI stuff is, more often than not, nasty over a network. However, X11 does a pretty good job at it, IMO.

a little bit of both..

 

how would you go about setting up a 'star wars' server?

obviously it would just be plain data storage.

 

but there was speculation that using some online scripting,

you could do some simple preview cleanup of frames. (i think

'none' suggested that)... and submit some of that back

to the site..

 

also, you could probably submit avisynth scripts,

and have it run remotely on a faster computer.

and see the results.

 

i only have access to dual core computers from

about 6 years ago.. so anything more powerful

would be great. i'm not doing any heavy duty

editting, but i can run the software for cleanup.

the other guy have much more powerful computers.

 

i could use more ram, but at some point i'll upgrade

in the future. however, running windows 7 64bit

works well enough for me with 2 gigs of ram.

it does take a long time to render/convert stuff,

but i'm not in a rush. it's better to get it done right,

than rush through stuff with errors.

 

later

-1

Oh, I wasn't talking about setting up a Star Wars server or anything like that.

I was just discussing the cloud vs. network dichotomy.

Edit: Also, I recently noticed that you're a programmer, too. What kind of programming do you do? I work mainly with low-level stuff (e.g., C and assembly).