logo Sign In

Darth Editous

User Group
Members
Join date
23-Mar-2005
Last activity
5-Apr-2024
Posts
844

Post History

Post
#399361
Topic
STAR WARS: EP V &quot;REVISITED EDITION&quot;<strong>ADYWAN</strong> - <strong>12GB 1080p MP4 VERSION AVAILABLE NOW</strong>
Time

What's more mysterious is how Anakin goes from an American accent in the PT to having a RP English accent in ROTJ (even if you mess with the pitch of James Earl Jones's voice it sounds like an RP English accent).


Wait, what? It's never sounded RP to me. It's "upper class" as American accents go, but I'd still say it's American.

DE

Post
#397563
Topic
STAR WARS: EP V &quot;REVISITED EDITION&quot;<strong>ADYWAN</strong> - <strong>12GB 1080p MP4 VERSION AVAILABLE NOW</strong>
Time

however, it really surprises me that nobody from LFL has registered here to express their thoughts about Revisited.


Given the likely legal issues - in fact, even just the possibility of likely legal issues - I'm not surprised.

For one thing, isn't it the case that if a company can be shown to have actively not enforced (if you see what I mean) their trademarks, it can harm future action against "real" offenders?

Besides, it's not like they're gonna either admit it's better than the SE, or lie and say it isn't!

DE

Post
#397375
Topic
***The &quot;Darth Editous&quot; Episode IV DVD Info and Feedback Thread*** - a partially &quot;de-specialed&quot; DVD
Time

If by "less contrast" you mean the blacks aren't quite as black, that's down to the gamma correction I've applied to the whole movie. It's way too dark on DVD - see how much clearer the starfield is in the top shot.

Maybe you mean that the left hand side of the picture is a little "greyed" at the start of the wipe - it's like that on the DVD, but my brightener has brought it out a bit more. I may try to fix it, but a lot of the wipes have problems like that.

DE

Post
#397374
Topic
Info &amp; Ideas: ESB and ROTJ Wishlist
Time

There's also the flopped (that's the correct term, says Wikipedia) shots to correct the helmet mic discontinuities during the BoY, which in at least one case results in a cut between two pilots which gives the impression they're about to fly into each other (at least, to me).

The temple footage ends, in Ady's cut, with Artoo facing one way, then facing the other way after the (shortened) wipe, but that one doesn't jump out at me so much. It's more incongruous simply because I've seen those shots the "wrong" way round so often.

DE

Post
#397278
Topic
Info &amp; Ideas: ESB and ROTJ Wishlist
Time

What if the artists who do the still shots got frame-by-frame stills of a sequence, edited each still, then strung them together again with the film's audio? It would work


Except that it wouldn't ;) It's one thing do a nice mock like Angel seems to spend most of his waking life doing, but even if he did do the same great job on each of a sequence, there's no guarantee it'll work. You can be a few pixels out with a mask on a still and it will go unnoticed, but if that mask shifts by another few pixels on the next frame, even if it still looks great by itself, the motion-detection bit of your brain will light up like a Christmas tree. It's a constant back-and-forth - adjust frame 2 to match frame 1, then you'll need to adjust frame 3 to match frame 4, only to find you can't maintain that into frame 4, so you have to go back through the frames again...

Oh, the fun I had with the head-bonking Stormtrooper and the bad projection of Alderaan...

DE

Post
#397276
Topic
The Official babyhum Release Thread
Time

It depends on the content of the disc, and I'm not familiar with the rest of hum's work. If it's a documentary that was originally NTSC and (somehow) got converted to PAL and that was the source for the disc, I'd recommend converting back to NTSC rather than going up to HD, which would be using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Personally, I'd take a true original-PAL->NTSC conversion over a PAL->HD upscale.

The difference in picture resolution, which in HD has at least been more-or-less standardised to 720p or 1080i, was never much of a problem. The biggy is the frame rate, and we're still shooting and broadcasting in 25p/50i over here (it might be that movie channels are doing 23.976/24p, but I don't know). I think it'll be a long time before we see the back of PAL speedup (though at least some broadcasters/DVDs are now resampling the audio with minimal artifacts).

DE

Post
#397252
Topic
The Official babyhum Release Thread
Time

NTSC and PAL are SD analogue broadcast standards - it's mostly just convenience that has seen the abbreviations carry forward into digital systems.

We're still stuck with different broadcast frame rates in different countries, but European TVs have been coping with NTSC signals for years. Someone in another thread said the inverse isn't necessarily true, which is pretty stupid.

There's very little point doing a "PAL" conversion of an "NTSC" project, because a) it's hard to do well and b) we can all play NTSC anyway, even with quite an old CRT screen. And there's little point doing an HD up-conversion for the reasons I've already outlined above.

DE

Post
#397229
Topic
The Official babyhum Release Thread
Time

My advice is: don't. Let the display device scale the image. By upscaling to HD, you'll just increase the filesize massively and the end result is almost certanly not going to be as good as letting the TV do it (especially if it's a Samsung; sweet!).

If you must, and assuming your input is 720x480 NTSC DV, you'll want to crop to 704x480 (this eliminates the nominal analogue blanking area; don't worry if there are active pixels there, they were never meant to be seen). Then scale up to 1440x1080 and add borders to 1920x1080.

The important thing to note is that DV doesn't have square pixels, but HD does.

DE

Post
#397105
Topic
Info &amp; Ideas: ESB and ROTJ Wishlist
Time

Every flipped face, every flipped R2, every major flipped asymmetrical object sticks out like a sore thumb and takes the viewer out of the moment, especially in the modern age of repeat viewing on DVD etc.

Doing it creates so much visual jarring that anything that was hoped to be gained by doing it in first place is lost.


Maybe it's just me, but those things don't jump out at me. I'm a big Star Wars fan, but I almost pride myself on not actually knowing which way around the tubey thing and the flashy thing go on Artoo's head.

Would you flip this if it was the wrong way around? (e.g. if Sam had the strap over the other shoulder, or Frodo had a restraining bolt on the wrong arm)

http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/6066/frodosammarshesbig.jpg

DE

Post
#397050
Topic
Info &amp; Ideas: ESB and ROTJ Wishlist
Time

Bingowings said:


Going by the model details is this another flip shot corrected?
 


Just to reiterate one of my pet peeves, flipped shots are, almost always, flipped for a reason, whether that's continuity of motion or just an aesthetic choice by the director. If you must unflip a shot, please consider trying to unflip the elements of the shot that identify it as a flip, rather than just unflipping the shot whole.

DE

Post
#396796
Topic
Info &amp; Ideas: ESB and ROTJ Wishlist
Time

doubleofive said:


Here I thought whoever edits RotJ and wanted to fix the saber glow would have to do background replacement for every shot.  Now you say you can do it with filters, but you won't tell us HOW?!  This is a discovery of epic proportions!  You must share it, for the good of the Republic!


Yes, how did you remove those GREEN sabres? Those very, very GREEN sabres, which aren't RED or BLUE? ;)

David