CatBus

FWIW, a new capture of the same 80's Brazil dub from better-quality VHS tapes is in the works, but not completed yet (still a VHS capture though, so don't expect miracles).  As for the quality of one dub versus the other, it's always a matter of personal preference, and mine is to never use an SE dub unless there are no alternatives available.

I've let Dennis know that I'm not planning to include the SE dub in my personal archive (which I share with Harmy), but if people want to provide additional dubs to Harmy outside my personal archive, that's fine with me.

EDIT: And, FWIW, we have good-quality Brazilian Portuguese subtitles in Project Threepio, for those interested.

Harmy said:

Contact CatBus, he's our chief foreign language archivist and he'll make sure, that it can be included in any future releases.

For what it's worth, what I aim for is more like "international accessibility" than a "language archive".  For my purposes, once I have one good-quality dub in a given language, there's no need for more.  I know there's some value to someone in every iteration of every dub out there, but not to me--one dub per language is plenty in nearly every case, as far as I'm concerned.

So if anyone wants a true language archive including multiple iterations of dubs in the same language over the years, that's not really what I have.

Jetrell Fo said:

Frink is the infamous king of off-topic

That's Grand Duke to you, mister ;)

I can't help it.  Frink has the other half of my amulet.

PM's sent.

AVCHD's don't work on DVD players, and they don't work on some Blu-ray players, either. They work on many Blu-ray players, though.  If you want something that plays in a standard DVD player, you'd need the DVD downscales, which of course don't have the same A/V quality, are missing alternate audio tracks, etc.

PM sent. The latest version of Despecialized Star Wars is 2.5, IIRC the MKV should be in the neighborhood of 16-17GB.  Empire MKV is 2.0, about 20GB.  Jedi AVCHD is 1.0, about 6-7GB.  Hope that helps.

Well, considering this is the Empire thread, let's say this is a trailer for another Star Wars film circa 1980?

Darth Id said:

CatBus said:

WAS just doesn't have the same ring, and W certainly doesn't.

 I usually just say "honkey".

I think, in this context, "goy" is probably better.

WAS just doesn't have the same ring, and W certainly doesn't.

Ooh, I like that idea.

They're too big to be space stations.

Yirmeyahu said:

chyron8472 said:

[snip]

 Am I being too long winded here? *The black wind howls*

No, you've just posted to a thread that takes long, scenic strolls through off-topic now and again.

We also have a more utilitarian and general-purpose Howto/Technical forum which might be a little more topical to your question, or at least be better able to stay on topic.

Or should that be "brief dashes through on-topic"?

Handman said:

Are they... stars?

My God, it's full of them!

timdiggerm said:

Okay we get it, there's some frames of darkness

Dig that hole, forget the sun.

[SNIKT]

Actually stretch's suggestion to convert the audio track would allow you to keep using the MKV format, so as long as you're okay with all that demuxing, converting, and remuxing, it's doable.

bradt said:

I put the file on a USB drive and plugged it into my Samsung BD-E5300 Blu-ray player. I got video (dear maker, it's beautiful) but no audio. The error message "Not supported audio codec" flashed on the screen.

That means that the player doesn't support DTS-MA audio in an MKV container.  This is a little on the dumb side because a Blu-ray player HAS TO support DTS-MA in Blu-ray video.

Your options are: listen to a Dolby Digital track (tracks 5+), but none of these include the original English audio, or learn how to demux/remux the MKV and make yourself a homemade Blu-ray (Blu-ray burner required).  Or download the AVCHD and try your luck there, although Samsung's support for AVCHD disks is spotty and your player already has one big strike against it.

Actually checking for player firmware updates would be very worthwhile.  This is such a weird shortcoming even they probably consider it a bug.

PM sent.

You can barely see the edges, but each of these images has a little door in it.  I checked the first two doors and they had peppermint and butterscotch, respectively.  The peppermint's still there if anyone wants it, but I just can't resist butterscotch.

applesandrice said:

However, after de-muxing the MKVs and importing the video and audio streams, Encore still requires that the video be transcoded.

It's easy enough to create menu-free BDs using tsmuxergui, which is what I do.  Some authoring tools simply don't let you do anything without a transcoding step, and I'm not sure it's avoidable, other than using different tools.  There may be other tools out there that allow you to create menus without transcoding.

Stinky-Dinkins said:

...I have an Oppo BDP-93...

Stinky... has... good... *cough* *gasp* taste!

Man, I felt like I was fighting against all that was right in the world to just utter that sentence.

camroncamera said:

blurry landspeeder (1970's VFX)

Keep in mind that while composited shots from the 1970's were by no means sharp, they may not be as blurry as a low-res DVNR'd source like the GOUT would lead you to believe.  A proper restoration may surprise everyone with how good even the worst effects look.

Discussion thread here:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/4K-restoration-on-Star-Wars-Official/topic/16857/

IMO, it's a 4K restoration based on some SE version, straight '97 or '97 with re-renders of later changes added on.  Opinions vary.

Alderaan said:

I think watching Star Wars is a little different than watching something like The Godfather, don't you think?

Absolutely. One of them looks and sounds like it did in theatres (although some argue this point because they don't think the yellow tint is from bulb-matching), and one of them clearly doesn't, which is rather the point.

EDIT: If you're talking about "looking dated", you simply need to look at the haircuts.  They are movies from the seventies.  The VFX, editing, haircuts and fashions are all dead giveaways.  I'm sure it's possible to give everyone a digital haircut, freshen up the fashions and color schemes a bit, do some more jump cuts and fewer wipes, and remove the matte lines, but that would just turn it into a seventies movie trying to be a modern movie (and failing).  Which, in a lot of ways, is one of the primary problems with the Special Editions.  To focus exclusively on matte lines is really no different than focusing exclusively on haircuts.  It's the same "I don't like the look of films from that period" writ small.  Not that it isn't a valid opinion to have, but that's what it is.

It's also not my intention to be dismissive of your opinion, just of the idea that you can extrapolate/evangelize your opinion to what everyone else might want. Heck, I wouldn't mind changes to the originals myself (no cue marks, no gate weave, no burn marks, some dirt & scratch removal), but I know there's plenty who would disagree with me on some or all of these.