Gillean

User Group: Members
Join date: 24-May-2005
Last activity: 20-Sep-2023
Posts: 277

Post History

Post: #227792
Topic: How to... merge 2 single layer dvd discs onto 1 dual layer disc ?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227792/action/topic#227792
Time: 20-Jul-2006 11:16 PM

Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
Would it be possible to do something like this with an ol' flipper disc, like WB's The Man Who Would Be King? Just wondering.

Yep. Double-sided discs are basically just two regular discs stuck together.

[edit]Totally missed the point of your question originally![/edit]

Post: #227789
Topic: Quicktime .mov to mpeg2?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227789/action/topic#227789
Time: 20-Jul-2006 11:05 PM

Just read my post again...

Can't believe I forgot DVD Studio Pro! Haven't tried VisualHub, but it might be able to too.

MPEG Streamclip for OS X and XP should also be able to do it; if it can't it would at least get it into another format another program could convert to MPEG2.

Post: #227786
Topic: mp3 player recommendations
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227786/action/topic#227786
Time: 20-Jul-2006 10:46 PM

Originally posted by: Bossk
Yeah, I tried Handbrake Lite and, for whatever reason, it wouldn't import the audio. I don't know if it was a communication error between the final result of the HL conversion to the iTunes import function or if it was truly stripped out. Another time, it wouldn't recognize the video file for conversion and that video file was actually created by its big brother, HandBrake, when it imported off a DVD

Bossk, Handbrake Lite and Instant Handbrake (the one I mentioned) are two different programs by two different dev teams. Instant Handbrake is a new program by the same team behind Handbrake, whereas Handbrake Lite is a 'horribly-mangled abomination of HandBrake' (haha, I love that programer's own description!) by the iSquint team. So Instant is the 'true' little brother of Handbrake and should work just as well (though it sounds like it might be a bit slow at the moment due to its recent development).

Post: #227537
Topic: **Winners posted** Sluggo's Summer Photoshop PiF Contest
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227537/action/topic#227537
Time: 20-Jul-2006 3:08 AM

Originally posted by: TheCassidy
@ Sluggo - sounds like good times man. How many entries per person are allowed? Thanks!

Originally posted by: Sluggo
I suppose one could enter as many times as one wants, but no one will be able to win more than once. I'm not going to peek here until after the contest is over so I can judge all of them at once. PM me with questions if you have 'em.

Post: #227505
Topic: mp3 player recommendations
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/227505/action/topic#227505
Time: 20-Jul-2006 12:12 AM

Originally posted by: Bossk
Handbrake! That's what it is.

Then I convert to iPod video using iSquint. Actually, iSquint seems to be able to convert quite a few video file types to iPod ready format.
I'm not the best person to be giving advice as I have neither a video iPod or a PSP and have never used iSquint, but have you tried Instant Handbrake? It is another version of Handbrake that spits out appropriately sized videos for the iPod (and PSP).

Originally posted by: Bossk
These are both Mac programs for sure, but I think at least Handbrake is PC-format as well.

Yep, Handbrake started its life as a BeOS program and was ported to Mac OS X and Linux. A Windows version is in the works.

Originally posted by: ReverendBeastly
I reccomend against iPods for two reasons:

1) Use of iTunes, a bloated and unnecessary program, is required.

2) You can't transfer things back onto a computer after you've transferred them to your iPod. You can delete the tracks from your iPod, yes, but you can't transfer them to your computer.

Both of these issues can be gotten around using various iTunes surrogate programs, but they're also issues that can be avoided if you go with another product, and you'd also probably be saving yourself $50 in the process.

You seem to be partly contradicting yourself here; you say iTunes is necessary, but this can be gotten around by using other programs (most media players now feature iPod connectivity, so it is possible whatever you already use is capable of it)? I'm not sure how this is a problem, unless you mean that you prefer just dragging your files straight to your player through your file browser. I find that most people prefer the opposite to you. I'm not saying your way is wrong, but both methods should be mentioned in any recommendations given so the person can figure out what way they would prefer. While for certain applications I much prefer the full manual control of file movement, in the case of hundreds of music files I much prefer the usage of iTunes-like programs for sorting and exporting of the data. I think the only time this is ever a problem is when people have a large portion of their audio files tagged poorly, which I couldn't stand!

As for the second problem, this is only true from within iTunes itself due to music piracy concerns. You do NOT need other programs to transfer your files off the iPod though, all it is is a hard drive so any file browser is more than capable of moving the files off it. You just need to unhide the folders, something REALLY easy to do in Windows as it is a general Explorer option (and due to their very nature, anyone likely wanting to transfer files off it usually has this option checked by default!) and just 'standard easy' in Mac and Linux (via a simple Terminal command, for Linux users this would generally be their default too).

What can't be so easily transfered is the certain meta-data from the iPod's database. This includes file play counts and ratings, neither of which I personally use; your usual tags are still included in the files themselves. If the database info actually was needed then this is what all those iPod ripper programs are for.

[edit]I should read what I write before posting![/edit]

[edit2]After all that I forgot to post a reason why an iPod may be a better option than a slightly cheaper competitor! Because of the mass saturation of the market there are literally hundreds of accessories for the various iPods (possibly thousands, I know last year there were 1000 officially licensed accessories). So if you need any accessories (cases, car audio systems, chargers, remotes, lanyards, straps, etc) then there will likely be many easily accessable options for you. All the competition gives you a variety of options and decent prices. Whereas if you buy a slightly cheaper competitor you generally will only find generic accessories that won't perfectly fit your model or more expensive specific accessories from the player's own manufacturor. In the end you may find yourself spending more than the iPod.

If you aren't in a rush then wait a couple of weeks. It is quite likely a new bunch of iPods will be released in mid-August with price drops (due to parts all getting cheaper now). This will also affect the prices of the current models, which may already be cheaper at some stores due to their impending DOOM! I bought my iPod just before a model change and ended up saving a heap over the previous week's prices.[/edit2]

Post: #226179
Topic: Good News
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/226179/action/topic#226179
Time: 13-Jul-2006 11:26 PM

Yeah, no conversion necessary. As well as DVD player software, other media players like VLC and Media Player Classic all play DVD folders (and often disk images) just fine.

[edit]I'm too slow at posting! Ingo Sucks, it sounds like you needed to upgrade the specs of your computer more than you needed a DVD burner![/edit]

By the way, Lightscribe isn't exactly new and I don't think it is that fascinating, but I can't argue that! There are rumours of a full colour version on the horizon, now that would be more interesting.

Post: #225571
Topic: Star Wars DVD Covers
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/225571/action/topic#225571
Time: 11-Jul-2006 12:50 AM

Originally posted by: calamari
I hope I am using the correct term when I say rotoscoping. If not, someone please correct me (and tell me what the correct term is)!

Since you asked nicely I'll correct you.

Rotoscoping isn't the correct term, rotoscoping is the process of tracing movement on film frame by frame. For example, lightsabers are rotoscoped, an special effects artist paints a glow over the plain stick the actor swings around frame by frame (though digital rotoscoping allows you to occasionally skip frames). The term originally only applied to tracing live footage for animated cartoons; A Scanner Darkly is a recent example of a full film done this way.

I doubt there is a specific term to describe what your after, I can only think of Logo Extraction.

Post: #225550
Topic: Which Mac to get?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/225550/action/topic#225550
Time: 10-Jul-2006 10:21 PM

Originally posted by: Marvolo
I own nothing associated with a Mac.

I didn't actually mean Mac specific equipment and software. If you have a decent monitor you probably wouldn't want an iMac. If you have a heap of Windows software then you likely wouldn't want to buy a PowerMac just yet. If you have a USB or wireless keyboard, mouse and a monitor a Mac mini may be more appealing. That sort of thing.

Anyway, if you wan't to get into serious editing you have three options really. If you don't have a decent monitor and don't need too much power then an iMac would be a good option. If you want a portable solution then a MacBook Pro is comparable spec-wise, but obviously a laptop. Probably max out the RAM on both those options (just don't buy it through Apple, markup is quite high); Mac's handle RAM allocation quite well, but it is always nice to have a fair bit and it isn't that expensive an upgrade. If you wan't to get into heavy compositing and either have a couple of decent displays or are willing to buy them, etc, then you'll really want the 'power of a PowerMac'. The current model hasn't been upgraded to Intel processors yet so you can't dual boot Windows or virtualise it at a decent speed, but it is still the fastest Mac available. If you aren't in a rush then I recommend waiting a couple of months for the new Intel PowerMac/Mac Pro for even a bit more speed and compatability with future apps (when they stop making Universal Binaries in a couple of years).

By the way, if you wan't to get the Final Cut Suite then this year I recommend you hop on eBay and buy a cheap copy of Final Cut Pro 4 or 5 (Retail or Academic, doesn't matter) and then send it in for the crossgrade to the full Universal suite. Should end up being quite a lot cheaper than just buying it new, though you won't have physical manuals (they are all in searchable PDF form on the discs though).

See http://www.apple.com/universal/crossgrade/ for details on that deal.

Post: #225439
Topic: "A Long Time Ago..." font
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/225439/action/topic#225439
Time: 10-Jul-2006 8:18 AM

If you want it exactly like the OOT then you won't have any luck without just tracing a screenshot. Digitised fonts weren't used for the crawl and titles back then, so no fonts we have now are exactly the same. Being film no one could give you an exact colour value either.

News Gothic or Trade Gothic would have been used originally, both are close enough. The new crawls use Franklin Gothic (and a different blue).

Post: #225436
Topic: Quicktime .mov to mpeg2?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/225436/action/topic#225436
Time: 10-Jul-2006 8:03 AM

Windows, Mac or Unix solution?

I presume you're after a Windows solution, can't help there (or for Unix). Probably a few solutions on the Mac, but all I can think of at the moment is Compressor.

Post: #225434
Topic: Which Mac to get?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/225434/action/topic#225434
Time: 10-Jul-2006 7:57 AM

Advice? Don't type Mac all in caps, it is wrong and Apple fans and grammar nazis hate it!

We can't really give you any advice as to which model you should get since you haven't given us any details as to your budget what you want to use it for, where you want to use it and what equipment and software you already own.

Post: #225055
Topic: Mysterious Cities Of Gold - PAL Project. * Cancelled * (with lots of info)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/225055/action/topic#225055
Time: 8-Jul-2006 2:22 AM

CW sent me a review disc of the WIP from last year. It looked great and very professional.

The menu system is definitely one of the best looking I've seen on a fan-made disc, gets you in the MCOG mood right away! I never noticed any video that looked like it was from an alternate source or any time the audio was out (of course the english dub is never completely in sync with the animation, but it just adds to the nostalgic charm).

Can't wait for the set to be finalised!

Post: #224263
Topic: Info Wanted & Help: looking for... Spider-Man original trailer (& WTC question)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/224263/action/topic#224263
Time: 4-Jul-2006 5:39 AM

Originally posted by: boris
And, did the original unreleased edit (before they removed the WTC) ever get circulated anywhere?

They never removed the WTC from the movie (it is seen numerous times, even in CG shots that would have been real easy to modify had they felt the need); that teaser trailer was simply that, a teaser trailer. None of the scenes in it were ever in the movie cut or in the shooting script. For more info see last month's Spider-man 9/11 thread.

Post: #224261
Topic: Waterworld ABC Cut? A ton of info - see McFly's posts for details (Released)
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/224261/action/topic#224261
Time: 4-Jul-2006 5:27 AM

I received my copy a couple of weeks ago, ended up being Mitch's discs, so not an alternate version like I first presumed!

I was going to edit the discs for myself and some people I know, so if anyone here wants a copy of Mitch's transfer and my DVD menu and cover then I guess I'll torrent it.

Here's some details on the transfer that I haven't seen posted yet. This is the Encore screening (uncensored and no ads) with the ABC ending (Everest, not present in other versions) edited in, so it is actually the 'Extra-Extended Edition'.

NTSC and Fullscreen since that was the only way the extended cuts have been shown.

Post: #219845
Topic: Info Wanted: James Bond Edits
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/219845/action/topic#219845
Time: 18-Jun-2006 9:36 PM

Originally posted by: skyjedi2005
I want to see the real casino royale that was made for t.v. not the spoof film or the remake coming soon with a bad choice for bond.

Ah yes, the 'real' Casino Royale featuring American secret agent Jimmy Bond and his fellow agents of Combined Intelligence!

Craig seems fine in all the Bond footage I've seen, but I presume you've seen more as I've really been unable to come to a proper conclusion after only seeing a few seconds worth in the teaser.

Originally posted by: Troy
the 1983 rouge Bond

Some relative of the Scarlet Pimpernel?

Post: #219082
Topic: Idea: Spider-man - Pre-9/11 cut & No-organics cut
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/219082/action/topic#219082
Time: 16-Jun-2006 5:18 AM

I only ever saw that teaser before the Towers attack, but even back then I was fairly positive none of it was going to be in the movie; as caligulathegod mentioned, I presumed it was shot only for the teaser.

I've just done a bit of a search for you though, none of the usual info sources even suggest it was deleted from the movie (suprisingly in IMDB's cases, where 'truth shouldn't get in the way of a good story'!). I searched for a shooting script, but the closest I found was a draft from 2000. I scanned all the way through that, the story seemed pretty similar to the final film (the big difference was Doc Ock featured extensively), but no mention of any bank robberies, escape helicopters, or catching anything between two towers of any kind. There is a scene where Spidey webs a helicopter, but that was to save himself and MJ from hitting the water below.

Both the teaser and posters were pulled from circulation due to the attack, but it doesn't sound like the incident affected the edit of the film, the Towers still feature in many scenes, many CGI that could have been easily edited to remove them, but the producers decided not to bother.

So there is no need to 're-insert' it, but if you still want to do a fanedit then you could of course add it to the film. By the way, there aren't really any deleted scenes on the DVD, so a fanedit would either just shorten the film or be a combination of the two released movies (or it would be something like 'Batman vs Spider-man'!).

Post: #219055
Topic: Lucasfilm to sell Physical Effects Unit
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/219055/action/topic#219055
Time: 16-Jun-2006 2:36 AM

Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
It's just like Disney closing down its traditional animation department. We're all being assimilated by computers.

Ironicly, Disney's traditional animation department may return due of the success of a CGI animation studio.

Better explain for those confused! Lasseter is now the head of Disney's animation department due to his success with Pixar, and it is Lasseter who really wants the traditional animation department resurrected.

Post: #218832
Topic: Nintendo Wii
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/218832/action/topic#218832
Time: 15-Jun-2006 8:20 AM

Originally posted by: theredbaron
Oh baby. I just checked the website and you're right - this is Australia wide - and the deposit is only $50! I'm sooo in!

Yeah, I hadn't actually pre-ordered it, I just knew because the news had hit the worldwide videogaming blogosphere a couple of days ago.

Post: #218830
Topic: Info & Help: No OOT preservation projects in Australia - help...
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/218830/action/topic#218830
Time: 15-Jun-2006 8:16 AM

I'm Australian and have had Moth3r's transfer for ages, I received that from a New Zealander, and if a New Zealander has had it for ages then surely thousands of Australians had it before then!

Due to my computer having died ten months or so ago (shortly after receiving the disc), I haven't been in the disc collecting scene for a fair while, so I'd be happy to trade discs with either of you for Moth3r's transfer. Just PM me with your email address so we can talk it over without the 25 PM limit bugging us.

Post: #218828
Topic: Star Wars DVD Covers
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/218828/action/topic#218828
Time: 15-Jun-2006 7:56 AM

Originally posted by: boris

Originally posted by: Marvolo
I said they were by ShuMai.

Interesting.. it looks very similar to Soulflare's...

That's because ShuMai's covers were a recreation from scratch of Soulflare's covers, removing elements ShuMai didn't like.

Soulflare's covers were in turn based off cerbero's artwork.

Post: #218784
Topic: Nintendo Wii
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/218784/action/topic#218784
Time: 15-Jun-2006 2:35 AM

Toys 'R' Us in Australia are taking pre-orders with the bonus of a free game (though no details about exactly what that means are known yet).

Post: #217887
Topic: Lando video
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/217887/action/topic#217887
Time: 12-Jun-2006 2:14 AM

Originally posted by: Yoda Is Your Father
That was funny, but a little long. Kinda lost it's value after a while.

Yeah, extending funny videos 'til they're no longer funny seems to be a common thing on the internet! I remember Farts in the Matrix was extended twice, but only the stuff in the first version was actually funny.

Post: #217660
Topic: Nintendo Wii
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/217660/action/topic#217660
Time: 10-Jun-2006 12:23 PM

Originally posted by: theredbaron
You know, I'm sort of hoping for Nintendo's sake that they won't be selling their consoles at a loss - I don't think they need to to keep it at a competitive price point.

I'm pretty sure Nintendo has never sold anything at a loss, they make a profit right from launch (well, on the physical hardware, obviously not R&D), it is almost one of their many 'rules'.

[edit]I should have done what I hate others not doing; read the thread before making a reply! All said previously![/edit]

It is funny that so many people (read Xbox and PS2 fanboys) predicted Nintendo were going to go leave the console business, like Sega, after the GameCube, but profit percentage-wise was so much greater than the rest, PS2 only a little over breaking even and Xbox with its eight billion dollar loss.

Post: #217638
Topic: Any Sugestions on A DVD Cover Program?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/217638/action/topic#217638
Time: 10-Jun-2006 8:14 AM

Originally posted by: Karyudo
I'll bet you professionals use Illustrator. Using Photoshop for that much text and other vector based stuff? I doubt it. Photoshop's good for amateur stuff, I suppose, but nothing beats a good vector graphics package.

For all the text and layout they'd most likely be using InDesign or Quark like the rest of the print professionals. Basically, what Karyudo and I are saying is that you don't only work in one program, but several. Artwork in Photoshop, logos and icons in Illustrator and layout placement, text and readying for press in InDesign. Oh, and departmental proofing in Acrobat.

If you really are keen on all this, then luckily the Academic price of all these programs is about the same as two separate. The whole Adobe Creative Suite 2 Premium is US$380 academic or $1,299 commercial. Photoshop by itself is $280 academic or $599 commercial. You can get a stripped down version called Photoshop Elements for $140 (this includes a video editor too).

As I mentioned earlier, The GIMP is totally free. It does all the general stuff fine, just missing some advance features that you'd likely never use for DVD covers. There's a couple of free Illustrator alternatives too, calamari mentioned Inkscape and I remember another, but can't remember the name (Google showed me no love either, wouldn't be surprised if it was Inkscape's previous name). There really is no reason to pirate software, well, unless you want to look like a jerk, then it works well.

Post: #217598
Topic: The Other side of the 30th Anniversary
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/217598/action/topic#217598
Time: 10-Jun-2006 2:59 AM

Originally posted by: Invader Jenny
I understand that movie makers are trying to get people back into the theater, but you know what? They've had to deal with that since the advent of VHS. Hey, here's an idea to get people back in the theater: MAKE BETTER MOVIES!! How about a movie with a plot for once? Or even better, likable characters!!

Rubbish! Making better movies will not bring people back to the theatre; an exclusive experience will. The reasons the theatre's are all dying are two-fold, I'll tackle one reason first; huge DVD sales.

These days anyone interested in movies, the same people who in the past when to the cinema a lot, now have their own home theatres. It is much more pleasant to sit at home on your nice soft couch, without crowds of people, while eating leftover lasagne. No annoying people whispering behind you, no parking frenzy, just an easy experience. You don't get the big screen, but all I'm hearing in this forum is size and presentation doesn't matter, only story. If that is so, better movies won't bring anyone out of their homes, it will just make their current experience better. The huge sales of DVDs showed that, while we all want better movies, the film industry isn't hurting due to poor output. It only shows that people think the hassles of theatre-going outweigh the exclusive benefits. So what do the theatres need to do to combat this perception? One thing is add more exclusive benefits!

This isn't the first time the theatres have had a problem like this, it also happened many years ago when a small box started appearing in lounge rooms. With this gadget people could now see movies in their homes, no need to drive all the way to the neighbouring suburb to watch them anymore, too much hassle. What did the theatre industry do to bring back some of their disappearing audiences? They started using a gimmick, something these people couldn't get at home. They introduced something they called 'Widescreen'.

A 'gimmick' called widescreen. Is there anyone here that now thinks widescreen is a gimmick? Anyone who thinks widescreen doesn't add to the movie experience? This didn't help movie makers produce better stories, but it did help audiences lose themselves in good movies, the landscape view was more natural, filled the eyes better as that is the way we view the world. I've heard that some of us here even view the world in three dimensions! Woah!

Shame on movie makers trying to create a more real experience for us! A good story presented with a near real experience is no better than a good story presented with handheld GI Joes! We can feel as great an attachment to the latter as the first! These are the shouts I'm hearing from this forum, it must be true!

Is story greater than presentation? Of course! It is way more important! I'm sure there will be many here now thinking about how all the time spent on this new technology could be spent writing better stories. But it isn't screenwriter Alan Smithee that is working on this technology, nor is engineer Craig Darrow writing the epic sagas.

In twenty years when everyone has 3D goggles at home will anyone think it is a gimmick? Widescreen now isn't. Colour now isn't. Sound now isn't. Am I going too extreme? Remember what Harry M. Warner said in 1927, the year before the first of the talkies; 'Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?!'.

3D was a gimmick. The old read and blue glasses didn't help create a more real experience as it created a distraction. The current movies out now no longer have that problem, but still has a big distraction, eye strain. This new method 'supposedly' eliminates that distraction due to the 3D levels being balanced by computers. Should we now be like the wise Harry Warner and scream 'gimmick'?

I said the reasons for theatre's current situation were two-fold. The second reason is entirely their fault; the cost of tickets and food and the loss of ushers to keep order. Neither of which have anything to do with the quality of movies.

Don't know why I bothered posting all that here, where in the same breath people can get out 'Story and characters are the ONLY thing that matt...WHAT?! No anamorphic and crystal clear picture?! How am I supposed to enjoy this film?!'.