Sign In

CorellianSmuggler

User Group
Members
Join date
19-Jan-2005
Last activity
11-Aug-2020
Posts
13

Post History

Post
#1368217
Topic
Recently switched to Mac. Is it possible to fanedit?
Time

Don’t forget that at the moment, all current macs are also PCs. So if you really need, you can install a windows 10 partition and boot into windows on your mac. I use Parallels and it’s really fast and reliable for the windows software that I need to run in addition to my Mac software.

I have also worked with everything from SD to 4k dpx files on the mac, it’s my reliable machine of choice!

As for software, I keep getting more and more impressed the more I use DaVinci Resolve. If you’re working only up to 1080p, their free version can’t be beat. I do own the studio version, and it’s becoming the ideal tool for professional work across the board. (The only flaw, is that I wish it had many of the plugins of other apps, but this is quickly changing to include resolve as well.)

Best of luck!

CS

Post
#1366302
Topic
Info: Guide for Working with 4K HDR Blu-ray Rips in SDR
Time

44rh1n said:
The color is “washed out” and “completely off” because it’s a Rec.2020 source, but your video editing application is assuming it’s a Rec.709 source. What software do you use to edit?

I’m using DaVinci Resolve. However, my 4k footage was converted to Rec.709 following the above proceedures. Is there a way to make it properly identified as Rec.2020 or do I need to alter the ProRES encoding to reencode it to be Rec.2020 before editing? I’d prefer to just have the ffmpeg conversion I already made in Rec.709 be seen as Rec.2020 and be output as Rec.2020 correctly.

I’m editing on an iMacPro, so I have a HDR (although not top specs) screen and can playback MKV’s with HDR with color intact.

If you want to preserve the original HDR grading without making any modifications, then it should look washed out on your SDR display. That’s normal. And then in your timeline and export settings, you need to specify that it’s Rec.2020 ST2084 so that it doesn’t default to exporting in Rec.709.

I did try this with the ffmpeg generated Rec.709 prores files, output as Rec.2020 ST2084 (I believe) and again, washed out, or even worse than before.

This is a simple color management setting in DaVinci Resolve.

I’ve now matched to your example above.

In other common editing programs, unfortunately, it’s complicated and sometimes not even possible to specify your timeline and output color space and gamma. So I recommend DaVinci Resolve for that reason.

For UHD/4k work, I’ll always use DaVinci Resolve for this reason and others.

HDR video will always look washed out on an SDR screen unless it’s being tonemapped. So when you’ve exported your film, you can try playing it in VLC or MPV to see it with the tonemapped colors. (Or just simply play it on an HDR TV).

I’ve tried the output using VLC, and the results are still washed out, but I believe this is because Resolve is still reading the ffmpeg ProRes conversions as Rec.709. Is there a way, and it is the proper equivelent, to have Resolve see them as Rec.2020 instead, and is the Rec.2020 range still in the files converted by the ffmpeg system presented in this thead.

My goal is to the find a way to either output my edit back to a HDR UHD disc, or a HDR compatible file that I can play on a HDR 4k TV.

Thank you SO much for your help! I really want to just work this whole thing out… 😉

Post
#1360841
Topic
Info: Guide for Working with 4K HDR Blu-ray Rips in SDR
Time

Thank you for this. It’ll be very helpful.

I have a question. I want to take a UHD and edit the film. I want to keep the grading that it was released with, but do my edit, and be able to output the edited version with identical grading from the source, but with the new edit.

This used to be as easy as making an MKV of the film, converting it to ProRES, and then outputting a new ProRES after the edit. NOW when I try this, the color is washed out and completely off, and I believe I lose the HDR grading entirely.

I really appreciate the direction to process the MKV to ProRES 444, that’s good… but I still see it with the ungraded look. Is there a way to extract a LUT from the MKV?

Thanks so much for your help.

Post
#220153
Topic
Will the OOT *even* be DVD9?
Time
When you consider the fact that these letterboxed 4x3 transfers are almost 2/3 black. even at top compression quality, they will still likely fit on one DVD5. Crap in, Crap out...

Yes, the laserdisc masters will look superior when used for the DVDs. DVDs have better contrast and color than laserdisc with considerably less video noise.

Now... people like me with a video projector that projects 16x9, we really hate the quality of movies that are not truly anamorphic, because when we zoom in on a 4x3 lletterboxed movie, it looks horrible.

There is no excuse for not releasing the original versions anamorphically. and with 5.1 tracks. (Each film was originally released with a six track recording on it.)

My two cents...

CS
Post
#210635
Topic
New DVDs NOT 16x9
Time
Why is anyone surprised? We've been saything this all along... George just wants your money and the ability to sue the people who transfer their laserdiscs over to dvd... because NOW he's released a PRODUCT of that version, and you are now stealing from him where you weren't before... This is easily all about money... He's not doing it because we asked for it, he's bowing to Queen AllMightyDollar.....

George is a whore, and he's whoring his children. What part of this is unclear? Accept the fact that we, as the public, are the 'Johns'...

Anyone want to bet whether or not these discs are single or double layer? Double-layer costs a tiny bit more... and since money is the object here... I bet we get overcompressed crap. Anything to make the 2004 editions look better... and for us to not watch the originals.

Crap in... Crap out...

Damn

Hey Neil! You were right all along! (Why didn't everyone listen to you?!?!?:!)
Post
#207051
Topic
The Official 2006 Discs Will Be No Better Than What We Have!
Time
No one in their right mind would talk DOWN one of their releases as 'highest quality from 1993'... unless they already knew we'd have a problem with it. It's like selling a 1993 calendar in 2006.....

And... in 1993, there was no such thing as an anamorphic transfer... so what makes anyone think that these releases will be enhanced for 16x9??? They won't be... (unless someone is smart enough to pay attention to our bitching and moaning online to realize that not making them true 16x9 transferred films (Don't stretch the old laser transfer!!)....

Anyone who says that these will be 16x9 are just speculating... Bill...

Post
#207029
Topic
The Official 2006 Discs Will Be No Better Than What We Have!
Time
Actually Neil... I find that the 1985 mix is so very faithful to the original... and so much better than the original... in audio clairty... that I would be upset if they did use a 2.0 before the 1985 digital remaster by Ben Burtt. So that is the only exception to what you're saying that I believe.

I truly want the six track... that's how I saw the film for the first time at the Loew's Astor Plaze in New York when the film was in it's initial run before wide release.. and it was in 70mm.

So I want the 1.0 mono, the 2.0 1985 mix, and the six track converted to 5.1. Then I will be happy... (So long as they don't overcompress the audio as well.) ... well...be happy with the sound. (If there's room, I wouldn't mind the 1993 THX remixed audio as well, but the others above are essential.) I expect we're going to get the THX remixed for laserdisc audio which was last used... instead of something that was used 'the first time; we saw the film in the theater.

The mono mix was so very different from the Dolby 2.0.... and the Six Track was amazing... and has never been released... I hope someday we will get this released, but if not on this release, it's likely lost forever... That's really too bad because it's a piece of history and hard work of George and Ben Burtt.... At the barest minimum of what we could expect, I'd wish that if they are only planning to include the 1993 THX Remix, that they go back to the six track and once and for all give us a 5.1 mix of it. Just like seeing the film letterboxed after so many years of Pan-and-Scan, the six-track mix has been missing from my viewing experience since 1985... the last time I saw it in six track....

So please... if anyone's listening... get the six track from 1977, and mix it into 5.1 for the release... PLEASE!
Post
#206569
Topic
The Official 2006 Discs Will Be No Better Than What We Have!
Time
Does no one else feel outrage that lucas will short change us like this? Great... he's going to become a bootlegger himself... good for him... what's the difference from what we are doing here and him... oh yeah.. .he has a few generations better copy of the films. If he isn't going to take care of the films, then George is an offensive whore.

Yeah... we're all like lemmings going to fork over our cash to the lucas-god... for his table scraps....

Minimal effort, $$$ reward... this is all about business... and while we 'whiny fans' keep screaming that we want OUR films back, he's going to give us the minimum he can...

George Lucas is a whore.... and what's worse is that he's whoring his bastard children instead of cherishing them like they deserve.

It's a sad day, when the Star Wars Trilogy is treated worse than Willow! At least that film received a new anamorphic transfer and a 5.1 mix... or E.T. which has a quality transfer of both versions!

We would scream if this were the only releases of the films... why the hell are you guys williing to accept this disgusting crap that you are being force-fed... We ONLY HAVE NOW to stand up and say DO IT RIGHT!!!! DON'T SHORT CHANGE OUR MEMORIES!!!! DON'T GIVE THE CLASSIC FILMS... THE ONES WE TRULY WANT... LIKE BASTARDS... PERHAPS 'WE' ARE THE BASTARD LOSERS IN THE END.

I for one want quality... If they aren't going to even retransfer the films for this release, you can bet your life that this is the FINAL release of the theatrical versions of the films... Are you willing to live with this crap forever?! I'm not.

(Guys... I'm passionate... and truly on your side... don't flame me... join me!!!)
Post
#206311
Topic
The Official 2006 Discs Will Be No Better Than What We Have!
Time
"but why not also include a 5.1 track based off the 6 channel maxtrixed mix?"

Because that would require a financial INVESTMENT... this is a lucasfilm slap that essentially says that if you people are going to bootleg the laserdiscs... well... we can get some cash from you if we bootleg them ourselves... at least we won't have to spend any money.... so it's free money to us... and since we're whores to begin with... then why not? Besides, if we don't release these now, you won't buy our rainbow colored sh!t next christmas because Hidef will be the going standard... so if we don't release this crap (in their opinion or they'd do something to make it quality) now, we'll lose out on all of that extra money you people are spending... oh yeah... and since it's obviously the die hards who MUST have these releases, then I think we'll screw them too by making the price $30 a film (see www.scifi.com)... and we'll even give you the 2004 editions so that you can see how much better they are... can't you see that the 2004 editions are so much better because we updated them digitally? Look at R2-D2's center eye in ESB when luke is close to dagobah... that's sooo much better than the originals...

http://www.2livefools.com/ArScrew.jpg
Post
#206211
Topic
The Official 2006 Discs Will Be No Better Than What We Have!
Time
No f- way?!?!?!?! Crappy laserdisc masters??!?!? Are these releases supposed to be the way we watched them on video?!??! or the way we originally saw them in the theater!?!?!? That sucks!!!!

So Lucasfilm wants to present the films the way we SAW THEM ON VIDEO, not the way they were in theaters...??? no 16:9? in 1993 there was no 16:9... will the fan made discs actually be better?!?!?

I saw the films in six track 70mm!!! (March 28th, 1985 was the last time...) and the mixes... especially Star Wars was remarkably different!!! So how can they just put a 2.0 track on these releases?!?!? How about the original six track remixed into 5.1...!?!!! Why do a half-assed job!??!

As if people can even remember the last 'major release' that wasn't 16:9... and are these new discs going to be THX certified? I doubt it... so if it's not up to lucasfilm quality standards, why do it? And if our 'fan' releases of the films can be 16:9, are the fan discs going to be better than the lucascrud stuff?!?!?!?!

or are they putting the new versions of the films in the box so that they can actually use THX on the box and mislead the customer again???

Does George not believe that his new versions are truly superior, so he has to screw the old films quality to insure that his new crap looks better? I'll bet anything that they don't even fix the sound on Star Wars!!!! It sounds like this is the cheapest releases ever!!!!

Hey, didn't Spielberg have an anamorphic transfer of E.T. theatrical edition in his release? Is E.T. more important the Star Wars?

What was the last film that was a classic release that was widescreen that wasn't 16:9?!?!?!

We need to speak up now!!! The original films should be respected and the same quality standards that the new versions are.... Give the negatives to Lowry (DTS) Digital, and make the films as incredibly beautiful as the 2004 crap!!!

THEY HAVE TO DO IT RIGHT, OR WE'LL JUST KEEP BOOTING THEM!!! WE'LL TAKE THE NON-16:9 DISCS and CONVERT THEM TO 16:9 OURSELVES!!!!

HELP!!!!!!

CS