AntcuFaalb

OK, raw capture #2 has been uploaded.

Can someone please help me convert this process into AviSynth?

I've made some progress, but no success as of yet.

frank678 said:

AntcuFaalb said:

With that being said, I know that all of the VHS and LD transfers are horribly inaccurate, but I'm still interested in which one is the best of the worst.

 

Whats your impression of whats right from your collection? Every transfer seems to have its own pros and cons in terms of filtering the colour ranges down from 35mm . I don't think anyone can pin it down 100% yet in the sense that no one has access to a mint print straight from the lab from 1977, to put side by side to the official releases.

Well, I grew up watching only the 1995 NTSC "Faces" Pan&Scan VHS collection, so my opinion might not really be worth anything in this context :-(

TServo2049 said:

poita said:

None of them. If you compare them to a print, they are all off. The SC is in the correct spectrum but the saturation is way too low and the colour is way off in some areas. The THX laserdisc releases are closer to correct saturation, but the tint is off. The bootleg tapes are also not all that close. The PAL THX ones are closer than the NTSC ones.

The only reliable source is a print, anything else and you are only matching to the telecine colourist's choices of the day.

Agreed. That's also the view Mike Verta takes.

I've talked about how the PS78 bootleg transfer offers important clues to how the original '77 Eastmancolor prints looked*, but even so I understand that it is not a truly accurate representation.

Video transfers can only provide clues, you have to project an actual print under the correct conditions to see how the film actually looked. It's a pity that any surviving Eastman prints have faded.

*For example, the IB Technicolor prints have some unique color flaws, like some shots of the lightsaber duel having a blue tint. All of the bootlegs I've seen have a normal color balance in those shots, proof that even the IB prints don't provide a full picture of how the film looked in theaters in '77.

Agreed. This was an excellent and informative post. Thanks!

With that being said, I know that all of the VHS and LD transfers are horribly inaccurate, but I'm still interested in which one is the best of the worst.

Edit: Also, the biggest problem with PS78 seems to be the occasional blown-out or severely-dark shot. These, interestingly, last for the entire shot and occur when there's a big change in brightness between shots (dark->bright, bright->dark).

I'll be uploading raw capture #2 tonight. I also plan on uploading raw capture #1 this weekend.

Jay said:

It's still in the design phase. For starters, there will be a proper advanced search with more filtering options (by post author, for example). Results won't be a massive dump of entire posts like it is now. It'll be far more usable--not hard given the current state of things.

I know how horrible the results are, trust me :)

It's probably too much to ask, but can you include a means to search within search results? Something similar to piping the output of an invocation of grep into another invocation of grep.

I'm officially done with- and unsubscribing from this thread. Let's let it rest.

*sigh*

TV's Frink said:

This might have been a better place for a whiny rant about workplace behaviors with exaggeration used for emphasis.

You're right. This would have been a better place, but who really gives a shit?

doubleKO said:

AntcuFaalb said:

Discussion?  Your first ever post in off-topic was a whiny rant about workplace behavior for people who have had something horrible happen to them.

Wrong. It was a whiny rant about hostile workplace behavior in which I used so-called horrible things for emphasis.

Funny thing is, it sounds like the guy you are describing might just be a jerk.  But your OP immediately set things off on the wrong foot.

I agree. I shouldn't have tried to use anything for emphasis.

You should try hanging out in the Politics thread for a bit.

I doubt that I will.

But you've already got the formatting down perfectly!

;)

Inline replies? That's as old as e-mail and Usenet! :-D

TV's Frink said:

twooffour said:

Wrong.

Interesting.

Did you actually read my reply or did I not (tl;dr)-proof it enough?

TV's Frink said:

AntcuFaalb said:

Seriously, if you have a problem with me, don't beat around the bush, but instead come right out and say what's on your mind.

Funny. Maybe you can use your words next time, sweetie.

Discussion?  Your first ever post in off-topic was a whiny rant about workplace behavior for people who have had something horrible happen to them.

Wrong. It was a whiny rant about hostile workplace behavior in which I used so-called horrible things for emphasis.

Funny thing is, it sounds like the guy you are describing might just be a jerk.  But your OP immediately set things off on the wrong foot.

I agree. I shouldn't have tried to use anything for emphasis.

You should try hanging out in the Politics thread for a bit.

I doubt that I will.

TV's Frink said:

You're hilarious.

I wasn't trying to be, but I do appreciate the complement.

Seriously, if you have a problem with me, don't beat around the bush, but instead come right out and say what's on your mind.

bkev said:

^Welcome to OT.com. They scare off a lot of people like that, but... not usually in off topic.

It's not so bad.

The problem with threads (as a model for discussion) is that they quickly become echo chambers. Even if someone were to write a post saying that they agree with me, it'd get lost in the noise of the mob.

TV's Frink said:

Gang rape?  Really?

 

Wow.

You thought I was serious?

I was dicking around.

TV's Frink said:

This thread is ridiculous.

I agree. I wasn't planning on posting anymore, but... I did.

It seems to be the case that most people here disagree with me and that's fine. I acknowledge that I do take an extreme position on this issue. With that being said, it does seem like a many-on-one fight or, possibly, gang rape.

msthec1 said:

boy do i wish i could find the 1997 Special Editions the ones i have are really bad. i looked everywhere on the internet and cannot find them i have the vhs ones and what i think to be a laser disk set that i found on the internet in 1999.i  only say that because they are better quality then the vhs ones, you just cant find the 1997 ones on the internet anymore that sucks. 

MySpleen has the Star Wars Special Edition 1997: The G'Kar Edition. It currently has two seeders.

Well, I hope for your sake nothing ever does.

Thanks, me too.

I took 2 weeks off.  I should have taken 2 years, but I couldn't afford it.

That's unfortunate. I hope you didn't consequently take it out on your coworkers, for their sake.

Anchorhead said:

AntcuFaalb said:

Can you ask more explicitly? I'm running on very little sleep :-(

So what you're saying is that your lack of sleep has caused you to become intolerant of others? 

I think if people have had very little sleep, even no sleep, they should be able to turn that exhaustion off when they log in here and not start angry ranting topics.

Incorrect. I was saying that my lack of sleep prevented me from understanding what he was asking of me. It had absolutely nothing to do with my level of tolerance.

Nice attempt at trying to turn my argument against me, but sadly, it didn't work.

A+

pat man said:

IB Technicolor print.

 http://savestarwars.com/technicoloribscreening.html

 

http://petergaultney.smugmug.com/Movies/historic/Star-Wars-at-The-Senator/13089279_nXePV#!i=948662138&k=wuqj9

 

And Harmy Despecialized Editition V2.0(or remastered).

 

https://plus.google.com/photos/109609428403596349302/albums/5781873106061439201?banner=pwa

 

I should have been more explicit. I meant: which VHS or LD has the most accurate colors?

Bingowings said:

Yeah but you have a body of an ape thanks to that filthy goddess Ellen Tigh.

No, I lack the body of an ape. I'm more like Crow from MST3K.

Bingowings said:

NO GOD DAMMIT YOU WILL BEND TO MY WILL OR I SHALL OBLITERATE EVERY FIBRE OF YOUR FLIMSY APE BODY!!!!

opps....

 

 

sorry... bad day.

lol ^_^

I don't have the body of an ape. I'm one of the six. I'm a robot.

Bingowings said:

How is a mood injury significantly different from a skin or tendon injury?

You need your mind and your body for work.

If you injure one it may cause a small amount of  impairment but not necessarily enough to prevent you from working.

However if someone has a 'thing' about limps and sees a limping man as a distraction that slight malfunction in one worker triggers a concentration malfunction in the other.

If they worked on their attitude to limps so it wasn't a 'thing' anymore they guy with the wobbly foot and the guy who used to be hung up on limps both can get through the day and pick up their wage check without having to resort to ugly bloody violence.

Similarly one worker may have been mentally traumatised before coming to work.

Maybe her cat was run over by a slow moving car or his wife had foolishly allowed herself to be caught their bed with another man.

This is the limp but in a mental sense.

They can still work but they have a bit of a short fuse (nothing fatal) but enough to annoy someone who finds short fuses distracting enough for it to be a 'thing'.

You follow?

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think we'll ever find some sort of middle-ground upon which we can agree.

Let's agree to disagree, yes?

Bingowings said:

Warbler said:

AntcuFaalb said:

Even if yesterday your house burned down, everyone in your nuclear and extended family died, and you were a victim of identity theft, if you choose to come into work, then YOU LEAVE THAT SHIT OUTSIDE.

I can't fucking stand rude and temperamental people in the workplace. I can't, even if they have OK reason(s) to be.

Seriously, many adults need to stop acting like children at work.

WTF

sorry we're not all robots.

How many of you are robots?

6