logo Sign In

Idea & Info: an OT preservation project in Anamorphic W/S + on Dual-Layer DVD = ?

Author
Date
Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link

I don’t frequent this forum as much as I should so this topic may have been beat to death already, but anywho…

So the Dr. Gonzo set is fabulous and it’s anamorphic but leaves a wee bit to be desired on the video quality front.

The TR47 (Cyclops v1?) set is amazing looking but not anamorphic and has no extras.

I’ve seen it said here that making a DVD9 ISO (a dual-layer disc) wouldn’t have any effect on the video quality - that Laserdisc video, by its nature, is soft and throwing a ton more bits at it wouldn’t make it a whole lot better.

But - would the dual layer discs make sense for an anamporphic transfer? I mean, anamorphic needs extra data just for the size of the image, right? Plus there’d be data left over for the commentaries from the Dr. Gonzo set.

Am I wrong?

Schnapple
Author
Time
Post link
Cowclops V2. is anamorphic, and has the same extras that Dr. Gonzo's set has (Menus, alternate commentary track.) But of course some people perfer Dr. Gonzo's set. I'm not sure you really need dual layer to do anamorphic, basically.
Author
Time
Post link
At this point, from the sources of the captures that we have, putting any of the original captures on DVD-9 would have either no or just an unnoticable quality change. DVD-9 captures really won't become practical until the X0 project or possibly Citizen's capture (I've only seen avi demos, but his DVD-9s are already released, I believe).
Author
Time
Post link
Ok the way I see it is this, I do notice a picture quality difference between the SL and DL encodes of my fake-anamorphic transfer, the higher bitrate of DL means the detail (grain in this case) can be 'described' (compressed) with more bytes and the graininess doesn't look as bad as on a SL transfer.

You can get round needing a high bitrate encode by smoothing out the grain so there's less detail to compress but this can also mean a slightly blurred picture (looks a bit out of focus) such as with the Dr Gonzo transfer. Throw in some temporal smoothing and it means even less detail to compress but the side effect of this is motion blurring.

Basically the cleaner the source the smaller you can compress the video and it still looks good, a noisy/grainy picture needs a higher bitrate.
http://www.haku.co.uk/pics/LukeCruise.gif http://www.haku.co.uk/pics/dontcare.gif
***Citizen's NTSC DVD/PAL DVD/XviD Info and Feedback Thread***
Author
Time
Post link
That's right, so the transfer with the least benefit from putting it on DL instead of SL will be X0 But I really wonder if you'd get more compression artifacts in an anamorpic transfer than in a non-anamorphic one... There is less black and more image, this makes it harder to compress. But it's also less sharp (when watching them both in a 4:3 ratio) which makes it easier to compress. Would that cancel each other out?

That's no moon. It's a LaserDisc.