logo Sign In

Arnie.d

User Group
Members
Join date
17-May-2005
Last activity
19-Apr-2015
Posts
1,595

Post History

Post
#306729
Topic
Info: GOUT Anti-aliasing
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/306729/action/topic#306729
Time
Originally posted by: Karyudo
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
Buying a large computer monitor doesn't sound bad but I think it's a bit unpractical if you want to watch tv.


Most new 1080p LCD TV sets have DVI or HDMI support, and a "just scan" (or similarly-labelled) mode, where they have a nice 1:1 computer-to-screen pixel correspondence with no overscan. So they act exactly like a large computer monitor and you can watch TV.

That's good to know. I couldn't believe they all would overscan.
Post
#306711
Topic
Film grain is not your enemy.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/306711/action/topic#306711
Time
Originally posted by: Johnboy3434
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
There is no way to remove film grain without having bad side effects. It's as simple as that. Some may take that for granted, I think it looks stupid.

Let's say you could make King Kong look like it was shot today with a digital camera, it would just look silly with the old "special effects" and in color (which btw would be just a guess of what it would have looked like).

Newsflash, dude: King Kong looks silly without all those enhancements. Decreasing the grain could at least impress people when you tell them it's 75 years old.

What will look more silly, a 75 year old grainy b&w movie with 75 year old special effects or a movie that appears like it was shot yesterday with 75 year old special effects.
How do you want to impress people with a 75 year old movie if it's not the same movie?

Originally posted by: Arnie.d
Or Gone With The Wind with it's beautiful typical Technicolor colors. You want to color correct it to todays standards? You will destroy the film!


The whole point of colorizing a film is so you won't have to watch it in monochrome. Recoloring an already colored film would be a waste of money.

Oh come on! You would remove the grain to make it look modern and leave the weird colors as they are? And I didn't say recolor, I said color correct (which would only take a fraction of the time and money compared to coloring a b&w movie)..
Post
#306705
Topic
Film grain is not your enemy.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/306705/action/topic#306705
Time
There is no way to remove film grain without having bad side effects. It's as simple as that. Some may take that for granted, I think it looks stupid.

Let's say you could make King Kong look like it was shot today with a digital camera, it would just look silly with the old "special effects" and in color (which btw would be just a guess of what it would have looked like).

Or Gone With The Wind with it's beautiful typical Technicolor colors. You want to color correct it to todays standards? You will destroy the film!
Post
#306122
Topic
Info: GOUT Anti-aliasing
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/306122/action/topic#306122
Time
Well, I got everything working and now the audio is out of sync. Can someone check what the frame number is of the very first frame of the crawl (so when "STAR WARS" comes in frame and the music starts)? For me it's frame number 704. What is the total number of frames? I have 174276.

EDIT: I think I know what happened. Cell 1, id 1/1 contains 15 black frames. I think it was placed at the beginning of the file when I extracted the .m2v file although it's from PGC_2. So "STAR WARS" should begin at frame 689, right?

EDIT 2: Yes, ok, problem solved.
Post
#306091
Topic
Info: GOUT Anti-aliasing
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/306091/action/topic#306091
Time
Originally posted by: Moth3r
Originally posted by: Darth Mallwalker
...why do I see so many mid-range LCD TV's @ 1366x768 on store shelves?
Good question.

So all HD TVs have overscan? I thought we were freed from overscan with the new generation of TVs. So even if you play a blu-ray disc with a resolution of 1920x1080 in your $2000 Pioneer blu-ray player on your $80.000 108-inch Panasonic full HD TV it is still being scaled and overscanned? That's just wrong.

Well, at least I won't have to crop the sides now as the "crap" won't be visible anyway.
Post
#306085
Topic
Info: GOUT Anti-aliasing
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/306085/action/topic#306085
Time
Originally posted by: Darth Mallwalker
Please forgive me drifting off-topic...

Originally posted by: Moth3r
I don't know if scaling [...] by a very small % is advisable.
Although I've never studied scaling, I've always presumed scaling by a small percentage wouldn't be desirable.

If that's true, then why do I see so many mid-range LCD TV's @ 1366x768 on store shelves?
Wouldn't it make more sense for manufacturers of LCD panels to build 'em 1280x720?

I never understood those medium range "HD ready" resolutions (regardless of scaling).

Post
#306079
Topic
Info: GOUT Anti-aliasing
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/306079/action/topic#306079
Time
Originally posted by: Moth3r
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
Why didn't you crop the sides Moth3r? I don't have the files on my hdd to check but I thought the PAL versions had the crap from the sides removed and the NTSC version still has them.
Oh, and do you know where I can download the font you used?
The "crap" at the sides is off the edges of the screen on my TV. I thought I may as well keep all the scaling in the y direction only. I don't know if scaling horizontally by a very small % is advisable.

I'm sure Google will find you a site online where you can purchase the Franklin Gothic font family.

Yes, I was also thinking it might be better for the image to only size in one direction.

I also found a free dowload link for Franklin Gothic Demi Cond.
Post
#305966
Topic
Film grain is not your enemy.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/305966/action/topic#305966
Time
Originally posted by: DarkGryphon2048
By the way, I will never support a FanEdit/Preservation/Extended Edition on this site or any other which uses noise reduction.

I don't like the removal of grain either. But a dvd can also contain a lot of noise that isn't caused by grain like video noise. Besides to transfer a film to dvd a lot of grain/noise can be added as a side effect of the transfer that wasn't on the original. And I don't think a dvd has a high enough resolution anyway to display the original fine film grain.

Post
#305874
Topic
Team Fortress 2
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/305874/action/topic#305874
Time
Originally posted by: sean wookie
Originally posted by: lordjedi
I play as [BDS-R] LordJedi.

Do me a favor sean, if you're going to play on BDS servers or visit their forums, don't be an asshat. You'll be banned so fast your head will spin.


I don't even know how to be an asshat while playing a FPS! You won't even know I'm there. Great review of the orange box.

You can play as a spy, those fuckers are so annoying. Always sabotaging my sentry.
Post
#305827
Topic
Info: GOUT Anti-aliasing
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/305827/action/topic#305827
Time
Originally posted by: Oldschooljedi
Originally posted by: DarthBo
Originally posted by: Oldschooljedi
It works really good on my test-encodings (I'm a real dummy in that).

Everything worked fine, as long as I encode without this line: "source.FlimsYLevels(10)"

Any ideas?

I'm guessing it's a typo... FilmsYLevels is probably what it should be.


I'm not sure.

In Moth3r's script the line is "source.FlimsYLevels(10)".

When I try encoding with "source.FilmsYLevels(10)" I get the same error too.

It's no typo. You just need the script for that function (I think, I didn't test it myself):


function FlimsYLevels(clip clp, float amp)
{ wicked="x x 16 - 34,85493 / sin "+string(amp)+" * -"
return( clp.mt_lut(Yexpr = wicked) )
}


Moth3r probably has this function's script in his standard avisynth filters folder. Just put that part in the script just before "source.flimsylevels(10)".

If you don't like the function's name you can change it to anything you like ofcourse.
Post
#305717
Topic
LOST
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/305717/action/topic#305717
Time
Originally posted by: Windexed
Originally posted by: Zion
Wow. Am I the only person here who understands what a union does and why they are necessary? Let me ask you this. Imagine your favorite fast food chain suddenly doubled all their prices. Would you get pissed at the restaurant, get pissed at the beef distributors nationwide who are causing the price hike, or perhaps you'd just say, "fuck those stupid cows, it's their fault because they taste so good."


Anyway, I can't wait for Lost to come back on January 31st. It wouldn't be so bad if they weren't showing the commercials every 5 minutes on ESPN.



That's oversimplifying a more complex situation. Unions were good back in the day (decades ago) because they kept big business in check and levied privatization. However, their usefulness has run its course, and now they are mostly a negative influence on the world of business. Believe me, I have seen and been part of many of them, and they actually, in the long run, end up hurting the people they are supposed to be helping, much less creating collateral damage (in this case, us not getting new shows). Do you really think it's the little Joe Schmoe writer that has instigated the strike? Just my opinion of course, and I have sympathy for the writers who are getting screwed because they are forced to be part of the union.

Back to Lost. I read something where the writers said that the strike shouldn't affect the flow of this season too badly, in that they cooincidentally created something of a cliffhanger for Episode 8 before the strike even began. They said it's kind of a mini finale in and of itself.

Without unions companies can screw their employees how they want and there won't be a balance. Seems to me the writers aren't getting what they deserve. If actors (and everyone else involved) get a fair percentage why can't the writers get that also?