Harmy

Um, sorry, what am I not supposed to forget about that?

I think it may have been intentional.

Chewtobacca’s NTSC DVD5 is now available through tehp.

Video: NTSC DVD-5
Audio: AC-3 5.1 at 448kbps (hairy_hen’s latest mix)
GOUT chapter-stops

Thanks as always, Chewtobacca!

Colson said:

mumbles_ said:

I noticed a bit of an anomaly (it may have been in the original version and I just didn’t notice it) at 00:02:58 to 00:03:06 you can see white Storm Troopers(?) walking across the Death Star (I assume they’re building it). There is a light box around them until they stop walking at 00:03:06. I don’t recall if this was in the original version or not and if so I just didn’t notice it before. I realize it’s a little late to be pointing this out so I’m going to assume it’s supposed to be there.

If it’s what I’m thinking it is, that’s a matte line. It was in the original, removed from the Special Editions (because it was unintentional but largely unavoidable in the original), and restored for the Despecialized Edition.

Actually it’s a matte box and the shot is unchanged from the BD, where it was in turn unchanged from the original version (as evidenced by the presence of matte boxes).

But I’ve never actually noticed those little guys before. Cool little detail!

g-force said:

REPORT-ROTJ-v2.5
00:14:26 Especially on the top left, when the subtitles start, there is all of a sudden static grain and a jump
That’s there in the print - I suppose it’s something to do with the subtitle compositing, because the change occurs on the exact frame the subtitle comes on and there’s another, less noticeable one on the frame it disappears.

00:27:17 Rancor’s arm on the right side of the screen looks artifacty and blurry

I don’t see it - it is less in focus than the well-lit foreground elements but I don’t see any artifacts. Either way, it’s unchanged from the BD.

00:30:25 sail barge color flickers

Those are compositing artifacts inherent to the shot - it flickers as the mate-box of the smaller ship moves over it.

00:36:24 blurry stars/ships

Again, I don’t see that at all - the ships seem perfectly sharp and the stars only become blurry when the camera starts moving due to motion blur. And again - straight from the BD.

01:44:37 Emperor color doesn’t match previous shot, unlike JSC which is more consistent from previous shot.

Yeah, I guess this one is not quite consistent but the colors had to be adjusted to make the lightsabers look right.

But, WOW! 5 minor issues, You’ve really outdone yourself Harmy!

-G

Thanks! 😃

I’m definitely taking a break but not a long one - my optimistic estimate is that ESB v2.5 could be done in like a month.

I don’t know but it is there on the BD - looks like color-channel misalignment.

EDIT: Interesting - on the LPP print, the same fringing seems to be visible, only there it is light blue and more diffused.

No, it’s frozen grain from the DNR and the moving grain is what they added on top.

towne32 said:

Laserschwert said:

I’ve got a question regarding the ROTJ-Grindhouse: Why exactly is it the best option to leave missing frames black, instead of just holding the previous frame? I’m pretty sure a little stutter would be less distracting than a blackout…

I agree with that. If it’s only a couple frames, I’m actually a fan of slowing down a few of the adjacent frames and frameblending, but I realize that’s controversial (you end up with fewer total pure frames, but it views better).

It’s not only a couple of frames, so holding over previous frames would introduce the image freezing very noticeably. And interpolating frames could work for low motion shots but the point of a Grindhouse release is that it’s pure with no alterations - And when working on a cleaned version, rather than introducing an alteration like that, it would proabably be purer to just replace the shots with the BD, if they were not altered.

Despecialized Edition happened 😉

You guys are misusing the word anamorphic - anamorphic 1080p would be 1440x1080 (with black bars in case of 2.35:1 movies), which would then be stretched to 16:9 for viewing.

And using computer for movie playback has the advantage that unlike in a BD player, you can do whatever you want with the image during playback and MPC-HC is one of the best programs for it - youc can zoom it in or out in small increments [num1] [num9], stretch/unstretch the aspect ratio in small increments[num4],[num6],[num8],[num2] shift the image up or down [ctrl]+[num8],[ctrl]+[num2] and left or right [ctrl]+[num4],[ctrl]+[num6].
And in MPC, it’s the easiest thing in the world to get rid of the black bars on a movie like this - just right click the image > video frame > touch to the windows from outside and it will zoom in so as to snap the sides of the video to the left and right edges of the window or the screen in fullscreen mode.

I use MPC-HC with MadVR too but I use Lanczos 4 taps with anti-ringing filter and debanding. Is NNEDI3 a lot better?

Yeah, that’s a problem with the source.

I think it’s the other way around - it’s Despecialized with Grindhouse colors - I haven’t seem this myself, but it seems kinda ridiculous, considering how bad the colors of Grindhouse ESB are.

And yes, the colors of v2.5 (and all the following versions) will stay largely the same as v2.0. 😃

I think the '97 is clearly an uncorrected scan.

EGOvoruhk said:

CatBus said:

Harmy’s always tried to make his encodes Blu-ray compliant in the past. I suspect the creation on non-compliant streams will be left to the re-encoders out there.

Then how about a request for a proper full sized Blu-ray image, or a “master” sized MKV, like TN1 is planning? That way encoders could encode from a proper source, rather than a re-encode. I don’t mind encoding it myself, but an encode of an encode is never good

If your 2.35:1 TV doesn’t have a function to zoom in letterboxed video, so that it fits exactly I’d be very surprised, because that would be incredibly stupid, since all 2.35:1 Blu-Rays are released with black bars, and even all streamed media on iTunes, Netflix and Ultraflix and such have them AFAIK, so without this function there would be zero point to such a TV from the legally purchased media point of view.

Also, my master-file for the 1080p release would be somewhere around 300-400GB with my current AVI masters but since I’m planning to move to image sequences for master for v3.0, the master will probably be more like 1TB.
So I’m not likely to release that and anything else would already be a re-encode

Thanks, Althor, downloading from Spleen now - didn’t think to look there. Sorry about the fuss, Schorman. (Today seems to be my apologize to Schorman day 😄 ).

Thanks! Though it depends on what does after work tonight mean in your timezone 😉

Yes it does. I have only a handful of 35mm shots done at 1080p for Empire, so I can do v2.5 at 1080p in the manner described above, only render the movie at 720p for v2.5, so I wouldn’t need to replace the 35mm shots already done at 720p for v2,0 and then keep the 1080p timeline ready for v3.0.

I was also wondering - has anyone written AviSynth scripts to conform the BD to NTSC GOUT sync? That would make my work much easier! 😃

Hey guys! I was wondering if anyone could send me a high quality rip of the NTSC GOUT - for some reason, my GOUT disc is so scratched up that none of my drives will read it (I have no idea how this could have happened, I normally take very good care of my discs - I can’t remember if I ever lent it to anyone, but I think I must have), plus it’s PAL, so I’d have to re-sync it. I want to use it for my comparison gallery - I originally wanted to use the Grindhouse version I made but then I decided that for the sake of consistency with the galleries for the other two movies, I should use the GOUT and leave 35mm versions for the v3.0 comparisons.

Well, I don’t know - I’ve heard people say that they saw the SW movies in both 70mm and 35mm and 70mm was definitely better looking and it would seem to make sense, because even if you went through exactly the same process, except in the last step instead of 35mm film, you used 70mm film, which is undeniably able to hold more detail than 35mm, you should get more detail.
Does anyone know how exactly the 70mm blowups were made? What would make the most sense in terms of quality would be to do the blow-up directly from the ONeg, essentially getting a separate 70mm IP and then copying to 70mm IN and from there to 70mm prints - that would probably get you much much closer to the detail of the ONeg than a 35mm print but somehow I don’t think they did that.

joefavs said:

Watched this last night, and good lord does it look wonderful. All of the 35mm stuff is integrated so much more smoothly than it was on the workprint. Now I’m really hoping that debated SW 2.6 actually happens, because this near-GOUTless wonder is so far ahead of the other two.

Actually, instead of making a v2.6 SW, I’m thinking about making v3.0 a quick 1080p update for all three movies. Essentially, for color correction just upscaling the 720p masters and applying it as a chroma (color) layer over the 1080p BD and replacing the Despecialized shots with just quick 1080p 35mm cleanups and then making v4.0 the final polished versions with new color corrections and more careful cleanup and rotoscoping and stuff (for SW, this would basically be almost the same as working on v2.6 and for the other two, it should be a fairly fast process, since by that point I should have all the 35mm shots ready at 1080p anyway).

Oh, hey, schorman, I’m so sorry, I noticed I forgot to add you to the end credits - and you really deserved a credit! I used your HDTV stuff and I think some of the audio is sourced from your releases as well! I will definitely add your name next time! At least I didn’t forget to credit you in the NFOs.

As for the GOUT shot - I wonder if anyone can find it. But it will, of course, be revealed in the comparison gallery, once I finish it - though that’s gonna take a while; I’d already spent hours compiling it and yet I haven’t even started writing the labels!

I don’t think 70mm films had to go through an additional generation to make. Why would they? And what would be the point of making 70mm prints in the first place, if they didn’t have better detail?
I’m not saying a 70mm print would be like the holy grail or anything, because the other stuff, like cropping and severe fading are still a big minus, but the detail should be a little better.

Well, that shot is from the BD and it has not been recomposited, so I would assume so.

Damn. I wonder how many more problems we will discover with the NFOs - it’s always such a daunting task to prepare these releases. I think next time, the NFOs will just contain a link to a pastebin post that I can edit even after release.