In VLC, you can crop the 16:9 video into a 2.35:1 ratio, thereby removing the black bars.
she/her
mwah
We just did an interview with Team Negative 1:
http://www.theexpandedfandomverse.com/2016/03/episode-048-team-negative-1-strikes-back.htmlthanks for sharing the link. Have you guys gotten a hold of MikeV for an interview? His project is also of interest…
You might be interested in this one.
http://undressingunderground.com/post/128630282964/episode-27-mike-verta
In VLC, you can crop the 16:9 video into a 2.35:1 ratio, thereby removing the black bars.
That would still project letterboxed through a 4:3 or 16:9 LCD/DLP, and Bobajett is looking for a fully anamorphic source.
I guess the ideal here (while staying within the bounds of HD) is a 4:3 projector displaying 1440x1080, fitted with an anamorphic lens - this would sort-of approximate the behaviour of a film projector. Then it would be a case of recreating scope anamorphosis in the video source: crop off the black bars, and resize to 1440x1080 with a 2:1 pixel aspect ratio.
Since you’re more likely to be using a 16:9 projector, the maths are a little different - your projector (and therefore source) will be at 1920x1080, so the PAR for anamorphic scope would be more like 1.5:1. Which of course means that the anamorphic lens needs to be that ratio too, but it seems there’s already a market for this:
http://www.panamorph.com/home-theater-projector-lens/
Indeed, it’s supposedly possible to make your own:
http://www.zuggsoft.com/theater/prism.htm
Disclaimer: I’m definitely not an expert on this - I put up with letterboxed projections myself - but hopefully that’s a little closer to answering the question.
Well, there is no true anamorphic project available and I doubt there ever will be, so what you need is to use MPC-HC and use the the numeric keyboard to adjust the aspect ratio (num8 to stretch, num2 ti shrink vertically) until the picture fills the screen - it won’t actually add resolution, of course, but it will make sure the AR is correct in anamorphic projection and you use all the light emmited by the projector). Alternatively, in VLC, you can set the cropping to crop off the black bars and then set the AR to whatever the AR of your projection is before the anamorphic stretch.
Well, there is no true anamorphic project available and I doubt there ever will be, so what you need is to use MPC-HC and use the the numeric keyboard to adjust the aspect ratio (num8 to stretch, num2 ti shrink vertically) until the picture fills the screen - it won’t actually add resolution, of course, but it will make sure the AR is correct in anamorphic projection and you use all the light emmited by the projector). Alternatively, in VLC, you can set the cropping to crop off the black bars and then set the AR to whatever the AR of your projection is before the anamorphic stretch.
Thanks for the input yall. It was more a thought than anything. Ive been in the market for a new projector and have seen the anamorphic lenses starting to pop up in the HT market along with projectors that sort of emulate “constant image height” by scaling the 810 lines of vertical resolution to include all of the llight possible, making for a brighter image. I was just wondering if there was a fairly easy way to convert the current MKV file into a scope source and then let the projectors zoom feature stretch it back out into a 2.39:1 image. Just a thought.
There are many programs that could do that, but it would always mean re-encoding the video, so doing it on the fly using a software player is the best solution for image quality. Also, since all commercial Blu-Rays of scope films are 1920x1080 with black bars, the projector, if it is meant to be used in this way, simply has to have a function to do this on its own.
Yeah, I’ve looked at a couple more write-ups (and videos) on the subject, and it seems that the higher-spec projectors have an inbuilt v-stretch mode that fills the 16:9 image with the 2.35:1 source, so it’s all ready for an anamorphic lens to restore the full width. No need to mess with re-encodes in that case.
'spleen log
However, in practice you must take into account the “fuckwit factor”. Just talk to Darth Mallwalker…
-Moth3r
That’s a guy who previously tried uploading Mike’s raw color sample images. So that might’ve been Mike’s raw Technicolor scan, somehow.
That’s a guy who previously tried uploading Mike’s raw color sample images. So that might’ve been Mike’s raw Technicolor scan, somehow.
I downloaded it, its a blend of the red faded title crawl spliced with the spanish LPP
'spleen log
That’s weird, because I was reading the spleen news bits, and they said Star Wars stuff would be unaffected.
This signature uses Markdown syntax, which makes it easy to add formatting like italics, bold, and lists:
Edit
If you go into the forums, you’ll see a user named Negative1 asked for the Star Wars projects they created to be deleted as they plan on upgrading them.
Close (To The Edit)
Edited.
If you go into the forums, you’ll see a user named Negative1
He’s not hiding behind a team account?
If you go into the forums, you’ll see a user named Negative1 asked for the Star Wars projects they created to be deleted as they plan on upgrading them.
How kind of him.
This signature uses Markdown syntax, which makes it easy to add formatting like italics, bold, and lists:
Couldn’t really find anything definitive anywhere on this, so I will ask here:
I am a mac user. I have a Mac pro 1,1 running OS 10.7.5
I just installed an internal Blu-ray burner into said Mac Pro.
What is the best way to burn this and other MKV files to blu-ray disc properly and, preferably, without any reencoding?
I see Leawo has what is supposedly decent software. is that the way to go or is there something better?
I was also referred to TS Muxer, but I can’t seem to get that to open on my Mac without crashing.
I have no intention of buying a PC, nor do I want to put these on USB drives or stream.
Any suggestions?
Feel free to PM Me to avoid cluttering the thread 😉
What would be the protocol for something like that.
If anyone of us spots a sale of complete reels to a film of interest, whom, here, should we contact?
The definition of “protocol” here can sometimes be anything the person using the term seems to want it to mean depending on their purpose for using the word and to whom the word is being referred in relation to the other persons purpose who is doing the said referring.
It’s an old jedi mind trick of sorts.
😉
So Negative1 just had the torrent of this nuked? By lying and saying he was going to be adding a better version? What a jerk!
Is there any way that we can reupload this? Not everybody has Usenet, after all.
Not on spleen. They nuked it as a favor to him.
dafuq? srsly?
**😮ver&out:
**mumbles
dafuq? srsly?
What I mean by that is that he requested it in the forum under his own name that is neither the uploader or, if you believed him, a member of the team that produced it.
Meaning, on paper, he asked for it to be deleted as a random person on the internet and they complied. So you should not expect your own upload to fare any better. But who knows.
dafuq? srsly?
What I mean by that is that he requested it in the forum under his own name that is neither the uploader or, if you believed him, a member of the team that produced it.
Meaning, on paper, he asked for it to be deleted as a random person on the internet and they complied. So you should not expect your own upload to fare any better. But who knows.
Yeah that’s what I got from that I just couldn’t believe it and said response was the only thing I could say about it. There’s no way in hell they’re going to have better versions of ALL the files. They got played. Hopefully they’ll re-upload those torrents.
**😮ver&out:
**mumbles
Is harmy’s uloz version still on tehparadox? I know a lot of people prefer torrents but that’s another good option.
dafuq? srsly?
What I mean by that is that he requested it in the forum under his own name that is neither the uploader or, if you believed him, a member of the team that produced it.
Meaning, on paper, he asked for it to be deleted as a random person on the internet and they complied. So you should not expect your own upload to fare any better. But who knows.
Yeah that’s what I got from that I just couldn’t believe it and said response was the only thing I could say about it. There’s no way in hell they’re going to have better versions of ALL the files. They got played. Hopefully they’ll re-upload those torrents.
Whether or not they update them, those were good releases and TN1 should have been proud of them. I’m sure most members were.