Encore, Encore Plex and Encore On Demand(!) all have Safari 3000 this month.
I don’t know if HD is an option or what.
Anyway this is a movie I very much love, and is not in print anywhere. Is anyone capable of doing a capture of some sort for me? Willing to trade goods or services…
I haven't seen all the extras yet. The first is the same as the one that aired with the show, there is a new second one and then some Smeg Ups (or is it Outs), and deleted content. The whole second disc is extras.
The Lister sneeze-ironing is only trimmed in that before he starts talking about tomatoes he tosses it in the air only once (instead of twice), and one line of Rimmer's rant afterwards about him planning it is trimmed.
The cuts are subtle and seem pointless. When Cat goes on about being caught by the giant testicle he original complaint about his clothes and hair being ruined. In the new cut only his clothes.
I could understand cutting some of the mugging of the camera or really useless jokes, but that's not really how it came out (in my opinion).
Since most people seem to agree it was needed, I don't know why they didn't dub in a laugh track. Mind you I don't usually like having them tell me when to laugh, it's just that the show feels really sterile and quiet (the CG making that worse).
So the DVD release of the new Red Dwarf series has turned out to be almost as much of a disappointment as the show itself.
It contains 2 different cuts: the TV version and a “Director’s Cut”.
The DC has the advantage of DD5.1 (the TV cut is DD2.0 only), a longer ending credit crawl and a new tacked on “The End” being typed on a typewriter.
Unfortunately, for some reason they thought that cutting some gags here and there and general tightening of scenes would improve things.
I probably liked this more than most (based on comments I’ve read), and to be fair they would have needed to cut half the show if they wanted to remove gags that didn’t work.
So basically your choices are watching an abridged edition in DD5.1, or watch a longer version with all the opening and closing credits and 2.0 sound.
I don’t think a fan edit removing additional content would solve the biggest problems (no Rob Grant, no laugh track, no Holly the computer and in your face CG work). Still I wouldn’t mind seeing an ubercut as a single film.
I guess I’m just curious if anyone is taking this on or not. It’d be pretty hard to sync the 5.1 track to the TV cut (lots of small one or two second trims here and there). I just would like to see a single movie-like cut that has ALL the content… maybe even adding a deleted scene from the second disc.
Just a thought.
I don't think anyone is arguing against color correcting this, just the need to remove CG.
I agree. As long as they didn't add Jar-Jar Binks or something, I'm okay with it.
The CG is generally well done in KotCS.
@g-force, I think the reason DJ was able to use GradFun2DBmod without a problem is because he encoded to lossless first. Sounds like you are sending this right to your mpeg2 encoder.
You could try going to lossless as well. It would definitely save you time later if you are doing multipass encoding.
@g-force - As I previously said, I had problems using GradFun2DBmod. The script previews ok, but causes errors with CCE (for me anyway).
GradFunkMirror produces almost identical results without the problem.
Do you really hear a difference between 384k 2.0 and 448k 2.0?
Considering that 384-448kbps is most commonly divided among six channels instead of two, I doubt more than 1% of the population could distiguish between them.
Interestingly I discovered another type of PAL video today.
A DVD extra I was converting was originally 24p, but converted to 25i by adding 1 duplicate frame per second and then interlacing.
I won't be adding it to the guide since it was a bit of a mess and I don't know how often they actually pop up like this.
My script was:
telecide(guide=2).fdecimate(rate=23.976)
It's not perfect, there were some interlace artifacts left behind, but I can't think of a better way to do it.
Han's hand does look much better with the deband filter. Assuming you didn't make any other changes since your previous screenshots of it, I'd say that filter is doing its job.
Here's what I've thought about and learned since the last post.
I don't remember what source you're using, but I would THINK DD2.0 tracks or similar lack lower end frequencies (because they intend you to use a .1 channel for anything really low.)
I can't prove what the cut off is because I don't have access to an official DD 2.0 soundtrack of SW.
My RtW preservation uses PCM from a laserdisc rip. Here is a frequency analysis of ANH:
As you can see there is definitely low frequency there.
Here's a close up below 200Hz:
Now here's the deal, boosting the lower end is still not a good idea. In fact the LFE is suppose to be mixed 10db lower in volume. (Home theaters are calibrated to play the LFE track back 10db louder to compensate.)
Modern stereos have Pro Logic II or better. If the frequencies are there, it will use them. DPL2 upmixes properly to 5.1. The work is done for you.
That's also the problem. Not everyone has DPL2 in their equipment. Older Pro Logic means 4.0 surround upmixes.
So what do you do if you don't want to use the space on a DVD for PCM or assume that everyone has DPLII or better? Transcode it yourself.
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=83384 is a great guide (though a bit out of date since ffdshow can now output directly to an ac3 file).
I was going to provide a sample of how this works, but I've got PowerDVD problems (which is the what I was using in the chain to encode the DPLII).
I'm confused. From what I've read, all you seem to be doing is boosting the lower frequencies of the current mix by however many decibels (3 I think).
That's not a LFE track. LFE is low frequency effects, not just the low frequencies louder. Many people already have their home theaters configured so that frequencies below a certain number of Hz gets routed to their subwoofer.
This is because a lot of the F/R/RS/LS/C speakers in home theater setups don't have good articulation of the low frequencies and the subwoofer is asked to do the job of a normal woofer. (That is, LFE does not equal Subwoofer). Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with this since bass is largely non-directional.
True LFE are frequencies usually below 40-50Hz (though they can start as high as 80-120Hz for smoother transition from the other speakers frequencies). The audio tracks you are working with should not contain frequencies this low because home equipment is not expected to be able to articulate it. (I haven't checked, the laserdisc PCM data MAY contain frequencies this low, but I wouldn't count on it.)
Your current method is only overdriving the current normal low frequencies. You can do this at home by going into your tuner and increasing the volume of your subwoofer relative to the rest of your speakers. (Some subwoofers even have a separate volume knob right on them.)
In fact, your current method runs the risk of causing clipping (volumes so louder the peaks are flattened and crappy sounding).
The best way to do make an LFE track would probably be to strip the LFE track from the official 5.1 mix and sync it to the mix you'd like to use.
Another idea, while it's more theoretical at this point, would be to find frequencies below 80-100hz, and copy them to a new track then pitch-shift them down about 25Hz.
I don't know how it would sound, but it's an interesting idea.
Otherwise, I'd strongly recommend against your method.
Ok, this is more a minirant than a comment.
fft3dfilter is awesome. I probably couldn't live without it. Still comparisons of before and after show it really does its thing for removing noise.
What I don't understand about it is that in motion it makes it look like the camera lens is dirty. Besides softening the picture, you get a soft pattern that looks a bit like film grain but doesn't change pattern from frame to frame.
I'm not sure I can explain it better. It's a strange artifact, but I've seen it time and time again. Does anyone know what I'm talking about?
Davnes007 said:bkev said:Yes... but where can we find this new version?
cough, cough...pirate bay...cough, cough.
Not that I can find.
Edit: Found it on Isohunt.
Since you aren't making any changes in play speed, subs are a piece of piss.
Rip them from the original DVD using PGCDemux. It'll give you all the files in .SUP format.
Do the intermediate muxing of your new video, audio and subtitle files in MuxMan (not many authoring programs can handle .SUP format).
Then of course use VobBlanker to drop your new muxed content back onto the original disc.
--
For x264 files try AutoMKV or MeGUI.
--
Those screenshots are not of the same frame, so comparison is a bit difficult, but, I don't see anything that looks like the work of a deband filter. Have you checked the cantina scene? The screenshot you had before of Han's hand has banding.
I wouldn't mind seeing before/after debanding filter screenshots.
Yup. VobBlanker.
Part VIII, Step 3 of my PAL2NTSC guide should give you a quick How-To for VobBlanker.
Just skip the part where you change the video attributes from PAL to NTSC. That's only need when converting.
I dunno. I've always remembered the colors as being particularly vibrant in theaters (originally).
When I made my preservation set, I tweaked the saturation based on some of the 'final' screenshots posted by the X0 project (since they had access to better materials for color matching). The colors used by X0 were fairly bright.
Edit: Btw, played around with DeBand filters the other day (on a different project). GradFun2DBMod yielded nice results when previewed, but caused an error with CCE. GradFunkMirror's results looked almost exactly the same, but without CCE problems.
I'd really recommend you all give it a try. It does some nice things for making banded video look less cartoony.
That's assuming the banding issue still exists.
Now if we could just figure a way to kill the temporal smoothing.
There's a tool in DVD Lab Pro that lets you change the AR as well.
So you did. From what I've read in other places, temporal sharpening is generally a bad idea (and why there aren't actually any filters around that do it).
From good old DVNR smear on the GOUT.
OMG. Really? That smearing is on the original?
Edit: It's probably a question for the geniuses (genii?) at Doom9, but is there such a thing as a filter that removes artifacts from temporal smoothing? I wonder if unfilter(), LimitedSharpenFaster() or similar shapening software might work.
My $.02. To be fair, I've read pages 1-6 and 20-21.
There's some amazing work going on here, but I wanted to comment a bit (ok a lot).
Noise reduction: There is some serious degrain/denoise/fft3dfiltering going on. It seems like you are guilty of scrubbing all the film grain with the noise. Have you considered implementing an addgrain filter at the end?
I'm assuming you all are being careful not to lose too much detail with the noise. It can often be hard to tell from stills. The clips Dark Jedi posted don't seem to have lost too much image.
Interlace artifacts: When the GOUTs first came out and the first scripts for clean up were being discussed, filters for the interlace artifacts were heatedly debated. I don't see anything being used on them here. (Or did I miss it.)
Subtitles: I'm surprised no-one is talking forced softsubs. It gives you the ability to generate separate letterboxed and widescreen subs so positioning is optimum for either 16x9 or 4x3 TVs.
Burned in subs seem a bit dated is all.
Sharpening: Different sharpening algorithms can improve different features of an image. For any given filter you can only go so far before ringing or edge enhancement artifacts become an issue. I've found that MSharpen used mildly in conjunction with fft3dfilter's sharpen provides a nice balance. Here's some other sharpen filter ideas: http://www.aquilinestudios.org/avsfilters/sharpeners.html
Banding: Fft3dfilter use can result in color banding or posterization. I'm definitely seeing some of that in the stills and clips (look at the close up of Han's hand). The best answer is to either back off of fft3dfilter or use a deband filter. http://avisynth.org/mediawiki/External_filters#Debanding
Sample clip: In the still below, the silhouetted figure walking in the background leaves trails. Trippy and an artifact of agressive temporal noise filtering.
Other stuff: I don't know if it was answered, but DGIndex's iDCT algorithm decides how the mpeg video is decode for frame-serving. Simple MMX (XviD) is commonly recommended because it is relatively accurate and very fast.
In modern processors, I don't rally see any difference in decoding speed. For this project where quality is king, I would recommend using "IEEE-1180 Reference", because that's exactly what it is: the reference algorithm for decoding (at the expense of speed).
I really should read the rest of this thread so I can annoy you all more.
EyeShotFirst said:Histeria said:Agree with the above (perhaps "LOCAL HERO TO WED" would be more like an actual headline). It acts as a nice segue into the next scene, and is snappy enough to read in the brief shot.
BTW, I see Frank Marshall has just confirmed Indy 5 is at the development stage.
Hopefully there will be less fan-editing to do on this one. ;)
HHHMMMM!!!!! according to George Lucas he is gonna pass sean connery's torch to harisson ford for this one. So Indy will call mutt junior whilst still being badass. I could see it working but I dont need another INDY movie. They ended at Last Crusade for me.
Why must GL poison the memory of everything from my youth?
The problem with the scenes with the text over them is that it'd be hard to remove. Logo removal filters would be noticeable and cropping is out of the question because of the low quality.
I dunno. I might try it anyway, but that would mean getting the Special Edition (which I currently do not have) just for a couple of extra scenes that may or may not be worth the effort.
Is the text croppable?