logo Sign In

kk650's Star Wars Saga: Regraded and Semi-Specialized (Released) — Page 9

Author
Time
 (Edited)

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

kk650 said:

 I do remember that it took around a week to encode though!

 and I thought that three days encoding was a long time... (-^,)

Yeah it was a little bit nuts, i've never done anything like that since but after seeing that adding the grain was bringing out detail in the transfer that I thought was gone for good, I got a bit obsessed with trying to squeeze as much detail out of the phantom menace blu-ray transfer as I could so I put the quality settings on maximum and just left it encoding.

I would love to see you put your very impressive grain adding skills put to work though on the phantom menace blu-ray, add a 35mm grain plate to it and see how it looks.

If I provide you with a clip from the phantom menace blu-ray, could you give it a shot and add a 35mm grain plate over it so we can see how it compares to my release?

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

Well it sure sounds to me like your OP is misleading.  I'm not even close to a expert in these matters (which is why I asked the question first) but it sounds like you just made the film look more film-ish.  Recovering detail is something else entirely.

Here's a comparison between the blu-ray and my regrained The Phantom Menace release:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/66343

To my eyes, my regrained release has more detail than the blu-ray. That is just my opinion, everybody can make up their own minds, i'm not try to mislead anybody.

Author
Time

For some reason the comparison site isn't working for me, but it's a moot point.  You can't add detail to something that no longer has it by just adding grain.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV's Frink said:

For some reason the comparison site isn't working for me, but it's a moot point.  You can't add detail to something that no longer has it by just adding grain.

We all agree on that.

Neither me or Andrea said that you can create new detail by adding grain, what you can do is reveal detail that is there on the DNRed transfer but was not so clearly visible before, the added grain brings it to the surface, creating a perception of increased detail, as I believe that comparison clearly demonstrates.

Author
Time

That doesn't really make sense to me, but as I am no expert I will let it go.

Author
Time

I like the filmic look (I used it for my own edits), but I wouldn't say it adds detail. It adds noise, which might be perceived as fine detail. 

I guess it'd be like adding some dirt to a slightly blurry photograph. Do a good enough job and it might not look like it is blurry. It's not because it's clearer; it just has a layer of highly detailed noise over top of it. A better example might be to apply sharpening to a blurry photo to make it look crisper.

My stance on revising fan edits.

Author
Time

...brain is a strange animal - mine in particular, I think... you are right, grain is just "organic noise"; it changes from a frame to another, and maybe this is the secret of the perception of increased detail (that obviously is not really there); indeed, if you try to apply a static grain, the result is really bad!

@kk650: you order, I obey! (^^,)

Here you are the 35mm grain plate applied over the same screenshot you used before:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/66357

as you can see, it's more "aggressive" then yours; don't know if it's better or not, but I think it should be seen in motion to understand it.

Sadly my projects are lost due to an HDD crash… 😦 | [Fundamental Collection] thread | blog.spoRv.com | fan preservation forum: fanres.com

Author
Time

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

@kk650: you order, I obey! (^^,)

Here you are the 35mm grain plate applied over the same screenshot you used before:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/66357

as you can see, it's more "aggressive" then yours; don't know if it's better or not, but I think it should be seen in motion to understand it.

lol

That looks really good! The only way to know more though is to apply that grain plate to a clip taken from the blu-ray and see how it looks in motion, which is the most important thing.

If I provided you with a clip from the blu-ray, could you add the 35mm grain plate and post the result here so we could all see how it looks?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Sure; but please keep the test clip size below 1GB! (^^,)

Forgot to mention: right now I'm in the middle of a long encoding process; on weekend I'll be away; so, it will be made on monday, if it's OK for you; in the meanwhile, I could always download it.

Sadly my projects are lost due to an HDD crash… 😦 | [Fundamental Collection] thread | blog.spoRv.com | fan preservation forum: fanres.com

Author
Time

It's the same concept as adding artificial tape hiss to a recording from which it has been digitally removed: you get back a sense of 'analog-ness', and it somehow 'feels' like there's more detail in the high frequencies.  If you manage to dial it in right, the constant low level noise throughout the recording helps glue the whole thing together sonically, and it no longer feels wrong as it did when the hiss was just missing altogether.  It doesn't actually add any detail back that was removed by the noise reduction, of course, but it can help make a better listening experience.

Tape also adds slight compression and harmonic distortion, which also help give that sense of rightness even while technically being less 'accurate'.  It's an odd phenomenon, that our brains seem to prefer the slight imperfections of analog, both for the visual and aural realms, because they feel more pleasant and 'real' than the cold over-precision of digital.  But since analog has so many physical limitations, while digital is much easier to work with and is limited only by the accuracy of the equations programmed into it, a blend of techniques from both domains is required to achieve the best possible results.

Author
Time

hairy_hen, you just wrote what I think from years... well done!

Sadly my projects are lost due to an HDD crash… 😦 | [Fundamental Collection] thread | blog.spoRv.com | fan preservation forum: fanres.com

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Ok so these are your screencaps from page 5. I went through the gout dvd just for another reference. I think that yes, they probably look too colorful for how Star Wars would have looked in a theater or even their original positive assembly off the original negative. (whatever the highest generation source that you could project onto a screen) But the color does look mostly accurate.

Here are the frames I did not think looked exactly right. However, keep in mind, I am just viewing them on a laptop that is not professionally calibrated. I have not seen any version of Star Wars in a theater and my only reference is the Gout dvd. Well I do have the 1997 special edition widescreen vhs. But without a digital copy of that, it's harder to look carefully at.

So I may be biased towards how the films looked with the THX mastering in 1993 and 1997, which the more I read here suggests that may not quite have been how they originally looked.

Hope this helps.

tatooine should probably be a little brighter. looks like especially crushed whites kinda flattens the whole look.

I don't know if you can do anything about it but I think the Gout dvd has more different black levels in Vader's cape that were all crushed down in 2004. so while the overall balance seems good, his cape is missing slight different gradations of dark grey, instead it's all black. 

when both this and a gout frame are fully desaturated (turned black and white) the gout actually has more contrast and it's easier to make out the different patterns of sand hills. Then again, the frame I screencaped in windows media player wasn't that close to this one so yeah. maybe try taking down the midtones a bit?

Leia's hologram seems too blue tinted, then again maybe it's supposed to be that way? Well, it wasn't in 1993/2006 but I don't know how correct that is. 

luke's face looks too bright and doesn't stand out as much from the rest of the sky. This looks like a golden color tint was applied to the entire frame blending all the colors together, kinda like instagram but not nearly as much. In gout, the face and sky are definitely set apart as different colors.

this shot is probably different in more versions than any other. (well except for CGI additions) In gout, it's a more purpleish blue. But if I remember correctly, the Making of Star Wars had it more like this while Star Wars to Jedi looked more like the gout. No idea which is more correct but I've always felt the 97 color onward looked too dark and over saturated. If you have two suns, surely it should at least look like you can still see some color in the sky. 

tarkin's face just looks flat here. Like the midtones were boosted but the highlights were not to compensate. His forehead should be a little brighter. Also you can see more shadow detail in Vader's cloak in the Gout again.

again, everything seems to be too golden orange. Namely the landspeeder doesn't look as reddish orange and the smoke doesn't look whitish blue. But maybe the THX color correction in 1993 overdid that and this is actually more correct. I don't know. 

more crushed blacks in the panel to Han's left. Not necessarily easy to fix because other areas look ok and you wouldn't want to effect them as well. 

walls are blue tinted instead of neutral grey like they are on gout. Yet again, not sure which one is right. but this one seems to have punched up contrast.

Again, walls are greenish blueish instead of neutral grey. While the color of the wall is debatable, Leia and Luke's outfits (plus Han's belt) should be white and here they seem green tinted.

Leia's face looks too flat here. Like the highlights of her face should be taken up slightly. also looks overly smooth and soft, like DVNR but the rest of the frame seems fine.

Luke and Leia's shirt seem to have crushed whites, also they're not very white. In the gout, they are among the brightest points in the frame, except for the lights (of which one is above 3po's head). Here they kinda don't stand out.

Again, this looks too golden tinted for the whole frame, making it lose the color differences between different objects. Crushed whites like in previous frame.

Although you didn't seem to use any shots changed for the special edition, this one had the elements digitally recomposited so there isn't a mismatch in contrast. Looks good as far as I can tell. 

too yellow gold tinted, too high contrast, too much crushed blacks. This is probably one where I think the Gout footage looks far more natural, in terms of being less mucked with.

the Gout looks far better for these shots cockpit shots than the official 2004 version, hands down. While your shot undoes a lot of the crushed blacks/whites and lack of natural color spectrum, I still feel it doesn't go far enough with color correction/contrast adjustment on this shot.

This one probably looks the worst of your version. Whites are way too crushed. With the midtones brought up from the official transfer, the highlights also need to be increased to correspond.

EDIT: Oh yeah, I do have screencaps of the gout dvd that are fairly close to most of these frames. Although I don't know if there would be much point in posting them seeing as the dvd was readily available and most other people here could probably get an exact frame to match it.

Oh and when you play the gout dvd in a dvd drive, my disc is officially named- Star Wars: Episode IV: A New Hope [1977 & 1997 Versions] [P&S]

But the bonus disc is always widescreen, even if you buy the fullscreen 2006 dvd. And I do have the widescreen edition.

Take back the trilogy. Execute Order '77

http://www.youtube.com/user/Knightmessenger

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Knightmessenger, let me start off by saying that all feedback on this thread, whether positive or negative, is very much welcome so thank you for your thoughts.

First thing though, the screencaps from page 5 you're commenting about don't represent the latest settings, those are on page 7, plus those page 5 screencaps are taken directly from the regrader preview, which is noticably more contrasty and saturated that the final encode. The screencaps on page 7 are the final classic and technicolor settings for Star Wars, taken straight from encodes, not the ones on page 5, so they best represent how the Star Wars regrade is going to look. Feedback aimed at those screencaps would be more relevant.

Secondly, its a bit silly making definitive judgements on the grading of people like myself that are using large professionally colour calibrated monitors when you are using an uncalibrated laptop, which are notoriously bad at judging the colours of anything, especially for something as sensitive as grading a film, unless you own one of those really expensive ones professional photographers use to view/modify their photos that have been professionally colour calibrated.

Thirdly, the GOUT has a hell of a lot of problems, brightness/contrast/saturation levels are inconsistant across the whole film and fleshtones are too red. It was useful to give a rough idea of what the film should look like but nothing more. I'm not interested in creating a shot by shot regrade of the GOUT because it wouldn't look good to me personally. If a recreated GOUT using the blu-ray as a source is what you're looking for, then these Semi-Specialised editions are not for you.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

Sure; but please keep the test clip size below 1GB! (^^,)

Forgot to mention: right now I'm in the middle of a long encoding process; on weekend I'll be away; so, it will be made on monday, if it's OK for you; in the meanwhile, I could always download it.

Cool! No worries, i'll keep the clip below 1gb hehe

I've got 180gb of empire strikes back encodes using different settings on my computer right now though so space is a little short (I have to put The Phantom Menace blu-ray onto my hard disk). I'll put the clip up on monday once i've hopefully made up by mind about the classic/technicolour settings I want to go with and can finally delete some of these encodes...

Author
Time

The GOUT is not at all a good color reference, since it is significantly faded, washed out, and red-shifted.  Being closely based on a Technicolor print, the Despecialized Edition v2.5 is far more accurate to the way the movie is supposed to look, and any comparison of what is correct would do well to start with that.

Author
Time

Any news KingKong? Looking forward to your latest.

I love everybody. Lets all smoke some reefer and chill. Hug and kisses for everybody.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I've been very busy with other releases but yesterday I think I pretty much finalised the classic and technicolor settings for ROTJ.

I have to look at the ESB and SW settings again to make sure that I'm still happy with them, otherwise they might need slight adjusting.

My main aim, apart from making sure the films look as appealing as possible of course while at the same time respecting as much as possible how they looked theatrically, is to make sure that there is a colour continuety between the films so they look like they're a trilogy and part of the same universe. I'm almost there I think but I'm sure there's still a little tweaking to do, especially to ESB that is the hardest to decipher colourwise.

Author
Time

For the most part (from what I've seen) I really like your settings for Star Wars. Can't wait to see what ESB and ROTJ are like!

Author
Time

PM sent to KingKong650. Thank you again kk650 for the LOTR and hobbit re-grades.

I love everybody. Lets all smoke some reefer and chill. Hug and kisses for everybody.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

My pleasure vbangle! It's always great to hear that people are enjoying my releases, it helps keep me motivated to release more, thank you for your support! :D

A new fellowship of the ring regrade where i've taken a completely different approach to my previous release, very closely matching the image dynamics of the theatrical blu-ray and hdtv transport stream, will be coming out tomorrow. It has a lot more visible shadow detail than the previous release like the theatrical blu-ray and makes the daylight shots in Hobbiton brighter like they were on the theatrical blu-ray. Should be interesting to see what everybody thinks.

The Classic version of the Star Wars Semi-Specialised Edition should also be out by Sunday. I'll put up some screencaps either tomorrow or the day after. :)

Author
Time

Tremendous! I await it anxiously. Thanks for the effort. I grew up with the 1997SE, so sometimes I prefer to watch something more akin to it than an OOT restoration.

My stance on revising fan edits.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

kk650 said:

A new fellowship of the ring regrade where i've taken a completely different approach to my previous release, very closely matching the image dynamics of the theatrical blu-ray and hdtv transport stream, will be coming out tomorrow. It has a lot more visible shadow detail than the previous release like the theatrical blu-ray and makes the daylight shots in Hobbiton brighter like they were on the theatrical blu-ray. Should be interesting to see what everybody thinks.

 Oh, this is great to hear...I actually just posted my thoughts on your existing (25gb) attempt at tackling the FOTR green tint issue here.

I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with this time, and glad to read it should be closer to the theatrical.  Will it be another 25gb version? (hopefully).

Thanks for doing these!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Nick66 said:

kk650 said:

A new fellowship of the ring regrade where i've taken a completely different approach to my previous release, very closely matching the image dynamics of the theatrical blu-ray and hdtv transport stream, will be coming out tomorrow. It has a lot more visible shadow detail than the previous release like the theatrical blu-ray and makes the daylight shots in Hobbiton brighter like they were on the theatrical blu-ray. Should be interesting to see what everybody thinks.

 Oh, this is great to hear...I actually just posted my thoughts on your existing (25gb) attempt at tackling the FOTR green tint issue here.

I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with this time, and glad to read it should be closer to the theatrical.  Will it be another 25gb version? (hopefully).

Thanks for doing these!

It is indeed a 25gb release. :)

I have finished the encode and it looks good. I'm very happy with the image dynamics ie. contrast, brightness, etc. I'm not so sure about the saturation though.

Certain scenes in the theatrical blu-ray are very colourful, some are very desaturated, its very difficult to know which way to go when regrading the extended edition transfer, more colourful overall or more desaturated overall. All my previous releases have leaned towards being more colourful, like this one does, because it generally appeals to me more. More desaturated might be the intention of the filmmakers though with this film, I don't know.

I'm going to create another encode with the same image dynamics but the saturation reduced, much like i'm doing with the Star Wars films where i'm creating both Classic and Technicolor versions. I'll put both up and everybody can go with what they prefer. It means I'm going to have to delay the Fellowship of the Ring and Star Wars releases though. Or do you prefer that I put up the Fellowship of the Ring version i've already done straight away, then get on to encoding the other desaturated version?