You’re generally nice/positive/curious and put punctuation at the end of your sentences. So if anyone complains about your prolific posts, just consider how you rank against our other prolific posters in these regards, and you have to conclude it could be a lot worse.
I definitely notice the two-frame difference in Jedi, but only on English-language audio tracks or audio tracks that contain an English-language component like a voiceover. But it’s definitely something you can miss – it’s right on the edge.
It may be exaggerated by the fact that the GOUT audio was already nearly two frames out of sync at that point, as reported by hairy_hen in the other thread, so audio synced to match that would actually be nearly four frames off.
Fix the audio, don’t butcher the films.
Fix it for one project, and break it for the others? No thanks. I don’t have the time or disk space to maintain for more than one frame standard simultaneously. If other projects decide to join in this new standard, that changes the calculus, but we haven’t reached that point yet. I’m willing to wait. Right now, it’s just a matter of one odd man out, and it’s not even certain to be the last standard. Who knows, maybe someone will decide the Reel 1 leaders need to be preserved for posterity as well, and we’ll have to pad some extra time on the beginning of all our audio tracks to account for that.
That said, the original question was about dubs and subs, which aside from three specific languages, are a complete non-issue with a frame difference this small. So when it eventually comes time to change things, there’s not much to change.
But shouldn’t historical preservation be the top priority instead of convenience?
It all depends on how literal you want to be. Two frames is 83 milliseconds of a film. It’s also not unusual for a few frames to get skipped at a reel change, so it’s unclear how many theatrical audiences really saw those 83 milliseconds in the first place.
I get the argument both ways. But it’s 83 milliseconds that breaks stuff (but not as much stuff as people think), so it’s ultimately a matter of how much you really want them. Different people, different priorities.
Nobody could ever guess mine 😉
I think I got you beat there.
The magic school bus on magic mushrooms? 😉
Navigate a nostril! Spank a plankton, too!
This is already discussed in the GOUT Sync thread. While I agree that I’m not particularly convinced of the need for a new video standard that’s only a couple frames off from the previous standard, the team is clearly all-in on this.
And for subtitles and typical dubs, I do not think there will be any noticeable sync issue. For voiceover-style dubs (Russian, Ukrainian, Polish), it will be noticeable, but just barely. Subtitles in particular often have larger than two-frame differences from audio all the time for other reasons. Don’t sweat the subtitles.
I am closely watching this development. If it turns out other major video projects start using this standard, I’ll make sure nobody’s left in a lurch. If it turns out this is just a quirk of this one project, then I’m less inclined to rush into things.
Nobody could ever guess mine 😉
I think I got you beat there.
Because it’s been getting really obnoxious and makes it hard to follow projects when threads keep showing new posts only for it to turn out to be you saying “Interesting” or “The more you know” or “That was informative” or something equally pointless.
Ojason does the exact same thing and you don’t see anyone complaining.
No, he really doesn’t.
To get back on topic:
So how much of a difference would a two-frame discrepancy between GOUT and 4K83 standards matter when it comes to subtitles anyway?
Completely unnoticeable. Subtitles are regularly off by more than that with respect to audio for unrelated reasons. It’s really the dubs, and in particular the voiceover-style dubs that are the only concern within my bailiwick.
But if everyone else jumps on the 4Kxx frame standard, you know I’ll add a few milliseconds to my subs because I can’t help myself. It’s just how I am. I hold off for a long time, but once I commit I’m all in.
CatBus said:
Multiple derivatives of the same source video with different processing options isn’t really the same thing IMO.And once frame-complete 4k versions of the OT are out, how many other projects will go to the trouble of dropping frames to maintain GOUT sync if they no longer need to (audio from those 4k versions being readily available)?
That’s the question. I’m willing to jump on board if some other video maintainer does, but at the moment I’m not jumping based on speculation/probability.
If more than one major video project uses it, I’d agree it’s a de-facto standard. Otherwise I’m of the opinion that it’s just Balkanization (no offense, I love the Balkans!) Multiple derivatives of the same source video with different processing options isn’t really the same thing IMO.
CatBus said:
However, the assumption that the GOUT audio was also synced to that frame reference seems natural.It’s certainly natural, but it’s not something that necessarily follows. It depends on how one syncs audio.
While I’m glad that hairy_hen and schorman are on board with the new standard, because it will make adopting it far easier, I can’t help wondering what will happen with all the foreign dubs. Is someone going to resync them systematically?
IMO for a new sync standard that’s only a couple frames off, the resync priorities would be (in this order):
I’m not seeing much urgency on any of the dubs myself, but I’m lazy. I’m also coincidentally not convinced of the need for a new standard.
I believe Harmy already stated after the release of 4K77 that his projects will now focus more on approximating what a respectful Blu-ray release would have looked like, rather than what a film print would have looked like.
For example, film prints have the occasional damage from an upstream source like an interpositive (the so-called Tantive IV “burn marks”). They have reel change cue marks, they have gate weave, they have different contrast and grain characteristics from the optical duplication process, etc. So even a very clean theatrical print (such as 4k83) will have these things. But your well-regarded high-end bottomless-studio-funding no-holds-barred Blu-ray restoration from camera negatives (Lawrence of Arabia or My Fair Lady) will not.
Harmy had until now been incorporating a little of both worlds (gate weave, remaking damage, etc), and if I understand his intention correctly, he means to make the DeEd’s more like the latter cases – more of what you’d see on a quality Blu-ray, less of what you’d see in a theatre. So I’d expect his goals now look more like: More detail than the theatrical release (well, what you can manage from the crappy 2011 Blu-rays at least), rock solid image stability, extremely clean (but not degrained) image. Things that you wouldn’t actually want from a theatrical preservation because theatrical prints weren’t like that.
For that reason, I expect at least in the long term I’ll prefer Harmy’s versions, because what I’m looking for is a respectful Blu-ray release, not really a theatrical preservation. Others will prefer the 4KXX series. I doubt either will ever be “best” because – at least looking forward – they’ve got different goals.
I have a favor to ask. Would anyone be willing to share screencaps of all of the Jabba’s palace subtitles in 4K, like two or three different frames per subtitle, so that we can account for dirt, etc? It would be great to have 4K sources for the burnt-in alien language subtitles. PM me if you’re interested in doing this.
The GOUT was always a reference for which frames to include.
That’s the way I treated it too. However, the assumption that the GOUT audio was also synced to that frame reference seems natural.
I hate to be “that guy”, but just in case noone on the team has caught it, the site name is misspelled at the end.
Otherwise, beautiful trailer!
ABE SIMPSON: Stop your snickering! I spent three years on that tirlogy!
I had no idea the scale of Emojigeddon. Look carefully at that post, oojason. It’s an italicized smiley. I’m getting back in bed. Maybe Tuesday will be better.
stretch009 said:
Download the HDTVrip from rutracker or Usenet then…Do you have the HDTVrip that you could privately send me? 😉
Oh now you’re just teasing me. FWIW, the HDTV video has a consistent magenta cast compared with the DVD but may absolutely be a better initial source for such a project. I think the DVD’s colors are very very close to theatrical, but it’s hard to say with any certainty since they’re all definitely heavily digitally altered.
Just a PSA, guys - you’re more likely to get a response if you send a PM to the creator asking for a link than you will posting in the thread asking for a PM.
Yeah, I think I’m the only one who can be expected to manage a project like that 😉 Send him the PM or risk getting ignored.
After more consideration, I have to add that this restoration is not just good, it’s great. 44rh1n didn’t miss a thing as far as I’m concerned. Technically he may have used some inferior sources (TE instead of Netflix) but damn if I can tell.
So, since digital restorations of regrades are so easy, when are you going to do O Brother Where Art Thou? Inquiring minds want to know.
I’m in the middle of moving house, so will be offline for about two weeks while I get moved, and try and get unpacked and internet etc. connected.
I hope it’s in a safer spot. 😉
Not sure those exist in Australia, but it’s a nice thought!
God, so sorry Brazil. I forgot that’s where you were from. Stay safe.
Other than that, Dude, how was your bath?
My college puts out a Faculty reference guide every year, so that community and media can find an expert from the University on whatever timely topic they want to report on and need an expert opinion. Apparently she was listed in a similar reference at her university, as being specifically a native american minority. It sounds like I would have as much claim to this as she (as would probably half of us on this forum), and I’d be embarrassed if I were listed as such.
Yes, I agree and expounded probably a bit too much in an earlier discussion with Mrebo (last page or so) that while all of her specific factual claims about her family history appear to be supported by the test, that it was either misguided or wrong of her to ever imply that the tiny fractional ancestry was particularly relevant. But again, that’s a different (and better) argument than “she made it all up”.
Warren conflated those concepts and should not have, and in doing so stepped over the line of tribal sovereignty. The Cherokee Nation is rightly aggrieved. Warren’s Native American ancestor may have spoken Cherokee, but she was not Cherokee. Needless generalizations help no one.
I don’t understand, how do we know Warren’s Native American ancestor wasn’t Cherokee? We don’t know anything about her. If she spoke Cherokee, isn’t that a good indication that she came from the Cherokee tribe?
I only know enough about tribal politics to know it’s convoluted. At the most basic level, tribes keep records, and the Cherokee Nation in particular has very extensive records. They track all the things other sovereign nations track. They have birth, death, and marriage records, and they have a vested interest in knowing precisely who’s a member and who’s not. There’s also one hell of a lot of politics going on behind the scenes, for those who care to look, but the superficial view may be adequate.
Not all Europeans who speak German natively are German. Similarly, not all Native Americans who speak Cherokee natively are Cherokee. If the Cherokee Nation has no records supporting that her Native American ancestor was Cherokee, then that’s that. Warren said her Native American ancestor was named O.C. Sarah Smith and we have an approximate timeframe for when she lived. So either O.C. Sarah Smith was in their records or not, that part is pretty simple.
Also, I’m only assuming the designation of Cherokee came from the language she spoke. It could very well be from an even less-informed place, such as “she was Native American and most of the other Native Americans living nearby were Cherokee, ergo…” But language was frequently used by outsiders as the way to distinguish tribes, so that’s what seemed most likely.
Let’s not also forget if Trump ever pays up (hahahaha) it’s going to a Native American Woman’s charity.
If she hasn’t already I’d like to see Warren make a donation to it herself, either way.
I suspect she will (yay), but I suspect she’s timing it for better political/media impact (boo).
Back to politics… A Cherokee Nation official says Sen. Elizabeth Warren “is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage.” While I still consider her actions bizarrely disingenuous, I also have to admit that the right’s actions obstructing native American vote is substantively worse.
I very much agree with this statement – the concept of tribal membership has a fraught history. A Cherokee chief (Wilma Mankiller) once said: “An Indian is an Indian regardless of the degree of Indian blood or which little government card they do or do not possess.” There’s a long history of non-Native people telling Native Americans that they’re not real Indians (Sharice Davids, for a current example) because they don’t fit whatever image they had in their head. There are entire tribes still fighting today for formal recognition as “legitimate Indians”. Issues of tribal membership are and should be very much the exclusive purview of the tribes. So on issues of tribal membership, I defer to the tribes. A genetic test cannot support claims of specific tribal membership, only Native ancestry in a general sense.
While clearly Warren’s family history was largely correct, and she never claimed more than the tiny fractional ancestry that she recently found evidence to support, I think her family was far enough removed from tribal politics that they didn’t recognize the implications of naming a specific tribe. It’s likely that her Native American ancestor did speak Cherokee, which is why she was identified as such by Warren’s family, but that’s not the same thing at all as being a member of the Cherokee Nation. Warren conflated those concepts and should not have, and in doing so stepped over the line of tribal sovereignty. The Cherokee Nation is rightly aggrieved. Warren’s Native American ancestor may have spoken Cherokee, but she was not Cherokee. Needless generalizations help no one.