AntcuFaalb

jero32 said:

AntcuFaalb said:

jero32 said:

I never did mind a little cropping if the movie wasn't really meant to be shown fully anyway.

I compare it to nes games. Some games "counted" on there being overscan areas so they put garbage in the tiles on the sides, turns out that modern tvs DO display everything, and you get to see it all. It's quite distracting.

Super Mario Bros. 3 is an excellent example of this.

Super mario 3 is actually something slightly different than garbage tiles. (I won't bother you with the technical details unless you really want them)
But they couldn't really prevent it in that case.

I've done quite a bit of NES programming, actually.

The SMB3 garbage tiles are probably the result of keeping the first (less than 4) name table columns blank, but storing non-zero attribute table entries to colorize the visible parts.

Edit: Using an MMC5 would be an expensive way to get around this.

jero32 said:

I never did mind a little cropping if the movie wasn't really meant to be shown fully anyway.

I compare it to nes games. Some games "counted" on there being overscan areas so they put garbage in the tiles on the sides, turns out that modern tvs DO display everything, and you get to see it all. It's quite distracting.

Super Mario Bros. 3 is an excellent example of this.

I'm beating my head against the computer.

Unlike with raw capture #5, QuickPar'ing the raw capture #4 RARs consistently fails with the message: "Failed: Could not allocate output buffer". This is supposedly caused by having too much memory available, so I tried running it with 1/2 of my 4GB in use, but it was still a no-go. Similarly, I tried running it with a minimum amount of memory in use and, as expected, it was a no-go.

>:-O

jero32 said:

I"m definitely checking them out, I just didn't want to keep posting the same OMG THATS AWESOME over and over again.

Same goes for me, -1!

negative1 said:

AntcuFaalb said:

Troyig88 said:

I really hope you don't crop to much.  To me,  more in the frame the better.  but Do understand your point.

I understand his point, of course.

However, less (or no) cropping would be helpful to someone wanting to do stabilization work on the grindhouse version.

relax, 

there's a lot of leeway with this, because i'll

be the one putting it out... they'll be a lot

more discussion and transparency about it.

because, honestly, not too many people will

want to see the rough/dirty cut of it..... 

there's a small audience sure...

 

but if it was huge, then we'd all still be watching puggo's 16mm

version which is my all-time favorite.. however, for most

people it's more of a curiosity instead of their main

version that they watch.

 

to give you an idea, most of the red test reel frames,

and video are completely uncropped at the sides and

edges...

 

later

-1

 

 

I'm relaxed :-) I'm sorry if I don't seem to be...

I'm just devoted to seeing your preservation with as many of its uglies intact.

Keep up the excellent work!

Troyig88 said:

I really hope you don't crop to much.  To me,  more in the frame the better.  but Do understand your point.

I understand his point, of course.

However, less (or no) cropping would be helpful to someone wanting to do stabilization work on the grindhouse version.

i'm thinking they will also be cropped off in the

grindhouse versions too.

I know you and your team have creative control over this project and I appreciate all of the work you're doing. However, I going to have to agree with Darth Vader here in saying: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Darth Mallwalker said:

Yes, different.
Pioneer CLD-59 vs. CLD-97
Post_10

Updated!

I also broke the list into two sections. I will add more later when I start to include extras, etc.

russs15 said:

Judging by the link to the thread in Post 3, they are the same.

Don't forget the Cowclops/TR47 V2 which I am also sure is from the DC.

OK, updated. I'm still trying to figure out what to do with captures vs. releases based on other captures.

Was that a different capture from V1?

OK, I edited the first post to include a more complete list. Please let me know if I'm missing any collection and if any of those listed are not unique captures, but remixes using another (already listed) capture.

I'm almost ready to upload raw capture #4... :-D

You and Doctor M are right. (My apologies to Doctor M.)

Can you get away with replacing the worst sub-sequence of the shot?

(Because the LD looks better in the second snapshot, but the GOUT looks better in the first.)

negative1 said:

well, you can be excited.

 

but hold off with the fireworks and praise,

until you actually see something, or have it.

 

it's better to remain skeptical until

proven otherwise. (x0, x9, v8, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc)

 

mark my words.

 

later

-1

I would generally agree, but..., but..., well..., you're -1!

I can't wait either. This is excellent news!

Great job, -1! You're the best.

Posting about their personal time expenditures can be construed as a sign.  Maybe probably it's just me being hyper-sensitive.

That makes sense. I do appreciate your concern and advice, of course. I tend to be rather explicit, so trust me: if I'm burnt-out, I'll come out and say it.

(For the record: I posted about my personal time expenditure to give me a crutch to lean on for my explanation of why the final PS78 release is so delayed.)

Then this is probably not the thread to get those people's attention.  But you never know who lurks...

Well, I was using their project as an example. I don't know who'd be interested in it, so I asked here.

That was a ridiculous comment.

It was a question, not a comment, but you're right in that it was ridiculous to ask.

I said that you are trading one blurring for another.  The edges of the buildings are stabilized, but the details of the building, windows and the speeder are blurred.  C3PO is pretty much a gold blob.

I don't want to derail this thread anymore than I already have. If you'd like to continue discussing the finer points of this 139 frame shot, I'll gladly follow you to the more appropriate thread. You first!

You_Too said:

Don't. I'll try that myself when experimenting a bit on the files.

And it's ok if we talk about this over pm. :)

I'll present the result here later anyway.

OK, sounds good.

Did you see my edit?

You_Too said:

AntcuFaalb said:

So you'd rather have a severely-blurry upscaled image than an upscaled image with less fine detail?

I think he was just worried we'd sacrifice what's left of the grain in the luma, and some resolution, to get it cleaner.

I'm very careful when I do these things, just like with the frame cleanup.

Oh, I see. If you'd like, I can keep ~20% of GOUT's luma when I do the merge for the samples. The blurring doesn't start to show up until 25-30%.

Edit: Also, what's the consensus on the grain in GOUT? It looks artificial to me. Take a look at the grain patterns on the DEATH STAR conference table in the scene with the line: "Until this battle station is fully operational we are vulnerable." As Dr. Hannibal Lecter would say, it looks desperately random.

Doctor M said:

No.  It is not good.

While the buildings have cleaner edges, the fine detail of the shot suffers. 

Windows in the buildings are more blurred and the speeder and its occupants are less distinct.

Since this is upscaling to HD, sacrificing detail seems like a bad idea.

So you'd rather have a severely-blurry upscaled image than an upscaled image with less fine detail?

It is the right place but there was also an answer.  In the first post, with visual proof in the third, and in the first post your project is mentioned.

Oh, I read those posts, but I meant something entirely different, and should have given more detail.

By high-quality, I meant (for example) going through PuggoGrande's credits and removing the barrel distortion, crushing the blacks, doing noise reduction (and other cleanup), color correcting, etc. That is, making a version of the 1977 opening day credits that would fit right in with something like DJ & You_Too's project.

You are not the first person to feel overwhelmed by their projects, at least two others round these parts are publicly expressing their desire to step out for a bit.  If you need to, do so.  It's better to enjoy the hobby then turn it into a burden.  Don't need to tell anyone, just go do something else you'd like to do.  This place is everyone's free time.

I'm not overwhelmed and, if I were, I most certainly would not think I'm the first person to feel that way.

Edit: You're not the first person to bring up the topic of feeling overwhelmed (or burnt-out) to me around here. What am I saying or doing to give (some) people that impression?

none said:

AntcuFaalb wrote: Would anyone be interested in a high-quality version of the 1977 opening day credits? Does one already exist?

This thread is not about quality.  I'm willing to turn any preservation project's credits into a pic.  We know of the different opening day credits from Moth3r's effort and it was confirmed in the 16mm preservation by Puggo.  Was going to do the PS78, but you've been improving the project, so have been waiting for that to become public.

I'm sorry for the PS78 delay. I can only progress when I have 3-4+ hours (due to processing time and the like) to work on it and, lately, haven't had that kind of time available. Filling the ~1 hour per night with little one-offs (e.g., the smear-free infamous speeder scene shot) keeps me interested.

This thread seemed like the appropriate place to ask such a question :-(

Would anyone be interested in a high-quality version of the 1977 opening day credits? Does one already exist?

negative1 said:

AntcuFaalb said:

To see the Huffyuv-encoded (sorry, I'm lazy) AVI sample of the aforementioned technique applied to the infamous speeder shot: click here. Make sure to only click the "Click here to start download from sendspace" link, as all the rest are spam.

Notes:

• The bottom is, obviously, what you should be looking at.
• I only did minor cleanup using my RemoveDirtMC script, so there's still some defects/dirt/dust hanging around. These can be fixed with, e.g., Photoshop.
• The affine image alignment forced me to crop a bit from the end result.

 

Enjoy!

cool.

 

could you post screenshots over here:

------------------------------------------------

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Best-source-for-the-Mos-Eisley-speeder-pass-by-shot/topic/13924/

and continue discussion over there?

 

later

-1

Yes, but it'll have to wait for later on tonight. I didn't mean to derail this thread!

I've managed to acquire sealed copies of what previously arrived unsealed. Now every set I have is composed entirely of sealed copies. Here's what I have, to date:

SEALED

• 1992 Fullscreen/P&S Set
• 1992 Widescreen/Letterbox Set
• 1995 THX Fullscreen/P&S Set
• 1995 THX Widescreen/Letterbox Set

UNSEALED

• 1982 Fullscreen/P&S ANH Rental

frank678 said:

The background buildings in the bottom 'fixed' clip look much more fixed, solid, stable, less blurred. Am I seeing that correctly?

Yes, you are. The black-and-white (i.e., details) portion of the image is entirely from the Technidisc LD preservation. No magic was applied :-)