negative1 said:
so, are any of you planning parties to watch
these new releases that are out?
later
-1
I kind of want to get some people together to watch the first two Puggos (and maybe use the X9 of Jedi), but I don't know how many people would actually appreciate it or if they would just complain about the poor quality.
Stupid Vimeo won't let me watch any of these >:(
msycamore said:
...the only negative about it I can think about is the blown out highlights, but I guess that was something that couldn't be recovered...
After watching Puggo Grande, the blow-outs in PSB look much better than I was expecting. Most of the stuff that is in there is also like that in the 2004 and the GOUT, so it's not really that bad at all when you think about it.
High def LCD television. I'm too lazy to check the brand, but there's no input lag on videogames, so it's top stuff in my book.
No surround setup (or even a 2.1 setup, just the TV's speakers). I'd kind of like to get one some time, but honestly, I've never been impressed by surround ever. The only time I ever notice it is in maybe 5% of movies when they use it to go "Check it out, this helicopter is flying past your head!" or in The Grudge where they made it sound like the ghost was making noises behind you.
My DVD player is XBMC on my XBox (not a 360, that's why I called it an XBox and not a 360). It can do standard def MKV files, but I'm sure it would struggle and sputter if I tried going higher def
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
Maybe someday, but I was assuming the other projects (such as ROTP) would have higher precedence.
Oh, of course RotP has higher priority =) I was just surprised when you talked about it in the bonus features, because I didn't remember you mentioning having two prints before.
Also, speaking of the 35mm...I was wondering about something we were talking about on the blog before, and if the film (PSB) really is supposed to be that blue, or if it was to compensate for the yellow of the bulbs they used back then (like how most of the Star Wars print they have is blue). I noticed a lot of the bonus trailer was very blue also, like a lot of shots from ANH that aren't usually tinted like that.
But then, like -1 said, there's a lot of parts later that look more natural. I don't have as much of the 35mm to compare to as he does...
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
I'm pretty sure I grabbed rsortor's audio too.
I'm assuming you're going to release that transfer later, too, like you did with the Swedish print?
WinRAR opened it for me. 7ZIP will probably open it without giving an error.
It looks like it was done on a Mac, so Stuffit or something will probably do the trick if need be.
Mavimao said:
The christmas special was shot on 70's era studio video cameras. (think soap operas). It's on magnetic tape not film.
I know, it was a joke =|
I still haven't seen it. Maybe this year it'll happen.
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
captainsolo said:
OMG THAT BONUS! COMPLETELY UNEXPECTED! MY FAVORITE!
A 16mm capture, too. :)
Speaking of Christmas, when's that 16 mm preservation of the Holiday Special coming out ;)
Ah okay, it's just the bare files. I figured it'd be reupped as an ISO or something.
AntcuFaalb said:
Which torrent client are you using?
The same uTorrent I mentioned a few minutes ago ;)
I can help seed (with my crappy, sporadic Comcast connection) if you tell me how to prepare the files.
It was covered, but I guess there were some issues there.
About 20 or so people (last I checked) managed to finish downloading it, though. WinRAR tried to tell me the archive was corrupt, but it looks like it all extracted okay, and I did a "force recheck" in uTorrent and everything looks good.
But now there are no other peers, so I guess someone's going to have to pick back up the torch @_@
I trust you guys to get the cropping right. It's not like seeing slightly more of the frame than we've been seeing for the past 30 something years is going to add anything significant to our lives =)
Like was mentioned at the blog, films are purposly shot to have extra "throwaway" area around the edges. We only have situations like Puggo's transfers because he tried to keep as much information from the already severely cropped picture as possible (which actually looks much nicer on my TV, the overscan covers the edges up completely).
Infinity said:
I do hope you consider a 2.1 of the AVCHD, but if not it will just force me to buy a blu-ray burner.
Is it not possible to create an AVCHD from a BluRay video?
pittrek said:
DVDs ARE good enough for people with SD TV sets. But soon as they buy an HDTV, they will upgrade their movie collection with HD sources. I know it - I have bought my first HDTV only last year and I was shocked when I noticed how BAD the DVDs look on it, even when they looked AMAZING on my old CRT TV.
I've seen some DVDs that look great, and some that do not. Same goes for Blus.
As far as good DVD vs. average Blu, I'd have to sit closer and wear my glasses to be able to see the difference. Or see them projected. Tron and The Princess Bride on Blu looked great when we saw them at a theatre on the big screen, but there were others that I thought were DVDs until I noticed the text in the credits didn't have noticable compression artifacts.
NeverarGreat said:
...at least as long as Lucas stands in the way.
Even if George himself said it was okay, there are many others who own the copyrights to the movie(s). If he ever released his preservation, his career would be in serious jeopardy.
NeverarGreat said:
If you had two or more 35mm prints of a movie, both in poor condition (scratches, blurring), would it not be possible to scan both of them and merge the frames using an algorithm?
Perhaps. But blending together a good condition print with a poor condition print doesn't sound like it would improve much =)
ww12345 said:
-1, I think this has been said before, but I'm pretty sure your project has decimated the GOUT.
Allegedly, the word "decimate" means "to reduce by one tenth".
They're trying to ruin the English language >:(
Mavimao said:
They seem pretty clean on my mac, so I am guessing it is indeed the player...
Hmm, yeah, I guess it must just be the setup on that computer.
It's weird though, most of the other scenes don't look that bad...
Yep, the fixed one looks the same.
Here's a really good example: http://i47.tinypic.com/9tzdy0.png
This isn't my computer, though, so maybe it's just a codec issue or something.
I've watched a few of them, but obviously the stuff from the reel you won't be using isn't as interesting as the real deal B)
No puns, please.
No, there is another...
Erikstormtrooper said:
I wonder if you're seeing a side effect of the black crush that the Blu-ray source suffers from.
I don't know why it would cause those kinds of side effects, but yeah, I noticed that color correcting the black crush gives it a weird sort of feel.
bilditup1 said:
Beginning download of the AVCHD now. (EDIT: Speeds are actually half-decent at ~1.5MBps!)
And the DVD5 does NOT look bad...certainly not waxy or dvnr'd.
I don't know, the one I watched did.
I'd take screenshots, but I deleted it already =) I'll download the fixed one and check to see if it looks the same.
AntcuFaalb said:
However, less (or no) cropping would be helpful to someone wanting to do stabilization work on the grindhouse version.
They're already stabilizing the film, using the sprocket information.
bilditup1 said:
I've made a torrent for the fixed DVD5 over at the spleen if anybody's looking for it; CatBus nuked his upload of the old one some time earlier today.
So I downloaded the nuked one, and is it just that that transfer had something weird going on, or does the 2.0 in general have a very DVNR look to it?
A lot of the details looked very waxy, like there had been a "look like a painting" filter applied to it. I thought maybe it was just some sort of upscaling done on GOUT footage or something like that, but it didn't look like it was GOUT sourced (and wasn't even footage that would have needed to be de-CGIed).
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
Makes me wonder if I should be bothering to worry about people who don't have remotes.
I think you answered your own question ;)
I've never seen a DVD player that didn't at least have a "play" button on the front of it, so neg's buddy seems to be in the vast minority (of an already "no remote" minority).
If anyone is really worried about it, you can link them to DVDShrink and they can reauthor it to autoplay with whatever audio they want.
