Harmy

If I was, I would have done it when I started working on it :-) The PDE a DeEd situation was different; The DeEd originally started as a new version of PDE, where there were supposed to be only a few improvements and I only started a new thread for it when it became clear that the nature of the project has changed. DeEd V2.0 is essentially the same project with the same goals but with better technical quality. What I am considering though is to make the "official" release title of v2.0 Despecialized Edition - Remastered.

Yeah, I know that would be best for such comparison course. The problem is that within the DeEd, I dare say there isn't a single frame that has the same or even similar colours, brightness and contrast as the BD. And all this adds to the perception of detail, so simply sizing a BD image down to 720p and then back to 1080p up wouldn't give you the right idea on the amount of detail in DeEd v2.0. But still, here it is; left untouched BD 1080p, right the same screenshot downscaled to 720p and then saved, closed, opened again and upscaled back to 1080p:

negative1 said:

Harmy said:

The "fixed" frames look as if someone took a really badly compressed video (and I mean as compressed having a 2hrs long 1080p film compressed to less than 1GB) and sharpened the hell out of it. This kind of thing actually seems to affect most of the samples you post -1. What's up with that?

 

we need to keep the full uncompressed images,

and videos under wraps for now..

 

besides even that Greedo scene is 9Gigs or something HUGE.

there's no way i could post (or would even try) just for that.

when the final version is released, there won't be any of

those issues with it.

I'm sorry dude but are you being intentionally thick on this issue? I wasn't asking why you weren't posting uncompressed images and videos, I was asking why you're posting very very heavily compressed ones. The fact that one scene takes up 9GB in uncompressed is irrelevant, because you can compress the same scene to like 200MB or even less and it should still look perfectly decent. The quality you keep posting looks like you've compressed the scene that was 9GBs in uncompressed to 2MB.

I don't mean to be rude or anything, I'm just trying to understand why you keep posting these godawful images when it seems illogical.

Trust me, this isn't even near being the worst example :-)

I was just thinking about that the other day. Maybe Lucas, having caused so much inaccuracies in the prequels, could treat the prequels as a beginning of a new series and simply continue it with equally horrible new episodes IV, V and VI, which would complete his "original" vision of a cohesive six film saga and finally allow him to leave the original trilogy alone...

We'll see :-)

Anyway, to give you an idea of the amount of detail, here's a screenshot comparison between the DeEd v2.0 mkv encode and the actual Blu-Ray, the BD is at it's native resolution, the 720p DeEd screenshot has been simply resized to 1080p in photoshop:

Oh, yeah, I didn't notice that in his post, the BD will be 720p of course - same video track as the mkv. There is a certain amount of fine detail lost of course but considering that the resolution is about half (921600 pixels for a 720p frame and 2073600 pixels for a 1080p frame) the amount of detail lost is quite small - it has to be for the reasons mentioned by Stinky-Dinkins. It also helps the other sources blend better, since in 720p their resolution is met half way with that of the BD.

Yeah, watch out for it getting worse all the time! ;-)

Great news! This will be just as philosophically perfect a companion to my v2.0 as the previous one was to v1.0 :-)

That's correct :-)

Also, I got the 93 commentary from Krycek87, thanks :-) It only has the comments in a few places throughout the movie and otherwise there's no sound at all, so I took the 93 mix (it seemed the most appropriate choice, as it's from the same LD release) and filled the silence with it, only lowering it's volume to barely audible where there were the comments and made it into a 192Kbps AC3.

Everything is ready now, except for the audio tracks from hairy_hen, so I want to start uploading tomorrow.

So how's it coming? I really want to start uploading tomorrow! Can you please upload the level adjusted stereo and mono mix AC3s for me as well? Thank you.

I can't give you a more accurate answer than I already have but if the stakes were what you propose, I'd take that bet :-)

@i551: I'm not sure. It might be possible - as far as I know, unless there's seemless branching, the film is stored on the disc in one m2ts file, so it may theoretically be possible to simply remove it from the finished BD, upload what's left and then you'd remux the mkv to m2ts with TS Muxer, rename it to the same as what the video file was on the BD and add it into the stream folder on the BD. It would however have to be done very precisely what with all the audio and subtitle options planned and even then I couldn't guarantee that it would work.

@d_o_g (lol, nice initials): Could I actually have her drugged out of her mind instead? But joking aside, it is very very likely, though I still haven't finished watching the whole thing but since the glitch in the previous encode was in the source files and wasn't cause by the encoding, it's improbable that there should be any problems.

If I can get the 1993 commentary, I'd like to include it. And I decided to include both the editdroid and belbucus iso score tracks.

Yeah, I hope I'll be able to do it all the way I want.

Anway, ww12345 offered his help with my musical thingy, so I should be all set for the Easter egg :-)

Thanks :-)

I'm not taking a breather at all, I'm studying for my final exams that take place on the 5th September and I definitely don't plan to start any work until after that :-)

And I don't really need to find bonus content as much as create it :-)

Here's the plan for the BD:

Animated Menu (similar to the sample I posted some time ago)

Same video for the main feature as the MKV

All the same soundtracks and subtitles as the MKV but the original three English mixes in lossless and maybe the 93 mix as well and maybe some of the other AC3s in higher bitrate.

A short making of video (HD)

A trailer (HD)

The v1.0 comparison gallery (the one on picasaweb)

New comparison gallery (comparing SE, GOUT, v1.0 and v2.0)

A video comparison of the despecialized shots (1080p) (comparing SE, GOUT, v1.0 and v2.0 - the above gallery will comprise of screenshots from this video)

At least one easter egg (I have something really fun in mind, though I could use help of someone with musical talent)

I'm open to other suggestions of course but I can't promise anything.

As you can see, it will take some time to finish the BD but it should be worth the wait :-)

Well, in this case, since the mkv encode is BD compliant and could therefore be remuxed to AVCHD or BD, the only difference is bitrate and container. In other words, the MKV will be twice the size (and quality) and will only be playable in some BD and DVD players (most modern BD players can play MKVs) but the AVCHD will be burnable to a DVD9 and playable in vast majority of BD players.

13.5GB and around 16GB with AC3 audio :-)

Yes :-)

The transfer itself did get done and uploaded but reportedly it still was what it was, a LD tranfer, albeit a really good one, so it would have been a nice update over the available transfers when the idea came to being, before the release of the GOUT that is.

@h_h: Whatever you say, pal, I'm really clueless in this area and lossless quality with smaller bitrate definitely sounds good. And if you can provide lossless files for the other two original mixes, that's great and I'll trust you that those will be sourced from the best available sources (I'm really interested in what will be your source for lossless 77 stereo?).

@Krycek87: Thanks mate :-)

The rendering is finished (average speed 0.77 fps, pretty horrible) and skimming through the test mkv mux, everything seems in order. I'll probably watch the whole thing later today (reluctantly I must say, as I'm quite tired of watching the film looking for mistakes) and as soon as I get the ac3 files from h_h, I'll be able to start the upload, so hopefully I will meet the 28th August release date :-)

Thread about the Abyss:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/The-Abyss/topic/14153/

That would be great. Thanks :-)

I was thinking if it would be possible to have PCM (or some sort of HD audio) for all three original mixes. I will probably have DTS-HD for the 70mm 6 track but what about the other two? I'm really ignorant when it comes to audio (all you need to do to understand the depth of my unforgivable ignorance is read my answer to the last part of this post). Obviously upmixing (or whatever the audio equivalent of upscaling is) entire mixes to PCM from lossy encodes would likely be a waste of space (I guess it would be kind of like re-encoding a 2GB 720p mkv to lossless avi without any other changes and releasing it that way), so there'd either have to be some direct hi-fi (I'm not even sure if that's the right term in the context) sources of the mixes or they'd have to be reconstructed from other hi-fi/lossless sources.

I have no idea what kind of sources there are for the 77 stereo mix or what the possibilities would be on recreating it from some existing lossless elements - like how different is the '93 LD track from it.

However I contacted Puggo and he confirmed that he still has the wav files of his capture of the monomix track from 16mm film, which I suppose would be more PCM worthy than a VHS TV recording capture (though the audio qulity of Belbucus' mix is suprisingly good considering the source). It would be great if one of our audio geniuses could take Puggo's and Belbucus' lossless files and use Puggo's as the main body of the mix and do some sort of cleanup (I'm not quite sure what the exact possibilities are but most videos on film restoration I've seen also mention soundtrack cleanup, so it is possible I guess) and use Belbucus' to patch up the places where there were splices or dropouts in the 16mm track.

Like I said (many times) before, I don't know the first thing about audio editing and audio in general, so I have no idea how difficult this may be and how much of a difference it would make compared to what we already have, but it sure would be cool to be able to put all the original mixes in lossless audio on the BD.

Awesome. It would be really cool if you could dig it up Moth3r! Thanks!