PDB said:
So the 82 and 92 are pretty consistent, Jonno? White Ash scene?
More or less. Presenting the exciting saga of Ash's head:
(Please note that most of these are from raw captures - they haven't been processed in any way, but hopefully get the point across).
StarThoughts said:
Regarding the audio: Did the AC-3 LD have a Dolby Surround version of the Sensurround test track, or was it the same mix from the CAV box set (which I think was the 35 millimeter Dolby Stereo)?
Both the AC-3 and the PCM mixdown on that disc are the same mix, i.e. the 'Sensurround' version. I'm fairly certain that the CAV disc's mix is the standard Dolby Stereo - like the Star Wars mixes, the home video versions may have been slightly tweaked, but all the tapes and discs from 1982 to 1992 sound fundamentally the same.
Good to see Andrea aboard! I've been doing a few captures of the laserdiscs in my collection (a 1982 PAL disc, the 1992 Collector's set and the 1995 THX AC-3). It appears that some of the more contentious shots in the 1995 (the Mother room, Ash's head) are exclusive to that release; since they appear to reflect original 35mm print timing, perhaps the THX disc was a conscious effort to represent an authentic theatrical look (as well as sound)?
I wonder if there was anyone back in 1977 whining about 'excessive f***ing wipes'.
It's a stylistic device. If that spoils a film for you, it's probably time to reassess your critical priorities.
Genuine question to/re. Adywan though; has he actually used his skills to tell his own stories at any point? I wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of broader film/media training in the background there.
SilverWook said:
I think CGI may have finally come of age. I got emotionally invested in a trigger happy raccoon and a talking tree this summer.
Pfft. The state of the art this year was with the chimps.
Just a thought, has the file size for Star Wars crept above 4GB?
By Default, HandBrake outputs MP4 files with 32-bit chunk offset atoms (stco). This means that if the file grows above 4GB, it will be rendered useless.
Enabling this option [large file size] will force HandBrake to use 64-bit chunk offset atoms (co64), however some devices do not support this.
(from https://trac.handbrake.fr/wiki/SupportFAQ)
As well you should be! Good to see you back here, Maxim. Any more projects in the pipeline?
I'm still feeling my way through Illustrator, slowly but surely. Thanks again for those early tips!
I don't know how PDB feels about it (this being his thread and all), but I'm finding those gifs a complete waste of space. Please get rid so we can use this thread for some actual contributions.
I hope you don't mind my giving this a shot, PDB, but that Ripley shot was bothering me and I thought I might have a go at diagnosing the problem.
I hauled out Premiere's channel mixer (a filter that's probably been there since version 1!) to see if I could deal with the red a bit, and the results are surprisingly effective.
Here are the settings I used; a boost of the red channel, and restoration of some greens back to reds and blues:
I'm sure there are tools that can achieve this with a great deal more finesse (a visual histogram would solve a lot of guesswork) but it's good to see that the colour information can be recovered.
Edit: forgot to mention, I also tweaked the levels to bring them more in line with the contrasty look of the 35mm. I guess that's another personal taste thing - I can see why some would prefer to keep as much detail as possible, but it's another area where the BD (having been scanned from the o-neg if I'm not mistaken) differs from the original look.
A great start, PDB. I have yet to do my own laserdisc capture to compare with (I have the 1992 collector's edition here, which should serve well enough) but here are a few preliminary observations (based on more scrutiny of the book's frame blowups):
Planet exteriors: if anything, the 'new' colouring seems more accurate - judging from the book, this stuff was shot with a very cool blue filter (towards turquoise). I wouldn't change those.
Ash's bubble: should be very neutral: not blue, but not purple either. Just dial it back until the grey panels lose all the blue colouration.
Ripley: I can see why this shot was so problematic! The trick will be to take out the teal and rosy up the skin tones without giving the whole shot a pink/purple cast. The shadows (particularly her hair) should remain black, rather than reddish-black. Hopefully there aren't too many challenging shots like this.
Dallas and Lambert in the airlock, Ash in the airlock bay: look terrific. Perhaps just look at that Ash profile again, which is way too hot at the moment.
Of course my reference has its own limitations, so you should judge what you're happiest with. But good progress overall!
Which tools are you using, PDB? Do you have something with an automated matching function, or are you doing it more by eye/histogram?
Andrea's BD grab of the Ash scene, regraded with a simple 'match colour' in Photoshop (and a bit of levels work):
It's surprising just how different the look is between these versions. I too wonder what happened - a corrected mistake, or second thoughts over a stylistic decision?
Ok, here are some more pics. That laserdisc colouring is looking more and more like the real deal.
(Only a partial frame for Brett, unfortunately - the book does occasionally crop shots).
The 5.1 / 4.1 from the 1999 DVD is a weak upmix of the Dolby Digital 4.0 (see the comments I linked to in post 17). Its only real worth is to completists, I can't imagine anyone preferring it over the others.
If hairy_hen is correct, and the 4.1 from the BD is in fact the true theatrical 70mm, it's much more important to include; it's a pretty robust track if memory serves.
I'll see about getting some more reference pics from the book up later.
Ok, see what you think of this:
The scan colours were a little off to begin with, so I've adjusted them by eye to match the book. Look at the warmth of the 'grey' ceiling panels - very much in keeping with the LD tones.
I've no idea how useful this is for 35mm, but this Doom9 thread has a bunch of ideas for Avisynth film restoration (admittedly assuming you're using 8mm, but perhaps some techniques are transferable).
StarThoughts said:
I am pretty sure that the AC-3 track on Alien is a straight transfer of the 70mm mix and not a new mix. It was a selling point on the LD when it came out — granted, there wouldn't be split-surrounds, but the front separation (which was quite significant in this movie), discrete surround and dedicated bass channel would have made it worthwhile.
Not arguing with that - the qualities of the Alien track are well established - we're talking about the Aliens mix right now.
On that point though, I've just gone back to Alien briefly and found these comments about the mix from the old thread:
It seems that Alien's 6-track mix did have split surrounds, and a close look at the AC-3 version would seem to bear this out (there's not a wild difference between the two rear channels, but it's there). I wonder why those lists didn't pick up on that? Anyway, Aliens is likely to be a great deal more straightforward due to its vintage (not many soundtracks were pushing the technical envelope at this point in time).
That's a fair argument, though there's also the possibility that they might have upmixed the Dolby Stereo rather than sourcing and digitising the 6-track... I don't know what the approach was in the early days of AC-3.
I'll see what I can do about the book stills. Do you want to work up a list of problematic scenes, and I'll dig out the relevant images?
PDB said:
Do you have that book Jonno? If so can you maybe send me a couple of pics from it. It looks like a good guide for this project. Especially, the problem areas. I'm not only looking for the coloring but the dark/contrast. I assume the skin tones are warm like the LD and not pale like in the DVDs and BDs?
I do have it, but I'm not sure if scanning it is a great idea - for one, I don't want to add another generation into the mix unless absolutely necessary (I can't guarantee my scanner is 100% accurate) and, to be honest, I don't want to put its 35-year-old spine through any trauma! I'm sure you'll be able to pick up your own copy for a few quid/bucks/Republic credits, just check the Amazon link for sellers (they often come up on Ebay too).
The Alien 70mm is a pretty great mix. Very bass heavy. I don't know if the AC-3 on Aliens is the 70mm mix. The Alien LD is very specific about it being the 70mm but no mention the Aliens LD. That doesn't mean that it isn't either. Old LD sometimes had the 70mm mix without indicating it, like the AC-3 LD of Die Hard. Anyone know if Aliens was split surround?
Here are a couple of lists of 70mm films with split surrounds:
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=7418527&postcount=35
http://www.in70mm.com/library/process/dolby/ (where 'SS' denotes split surrounds)
Aliens doesn't appear on either list, so like Alien it would appear to have been a 4.1 mix. Since the actual content would likely have been comparable to that of the Dolby Stereo mix (staggered releases weren't such a factor this far into the 1980s), only presented in discrete channels, the laserdisc's 5.1 AC-3 is very likely to approximate it. I wonder if our Italian friend would be prepared to work his magic again?
Speak of the devil and he shall appear ;-)
Funnily enough I saw yet another iteration of Alien yesterday, a DCP which appeared similar - but not the same - to the BD colouring. It was quite pleasingly balanced, though perhaps still a little cool for some tastes.
Anyway, having seen this film theatrically three times in its original version (twice on celluloid), I personally favour the laserdisc colouring as the overall truest, albeit with the occasional wobbles. Perhaps a next step would be to obtain a copy of this book if you don't already have it:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Alien-Movie-Richard-J-Anobile/dp/0708816886
Subject to the limitations of the printed page, it gives a good flavour of what an original film print would have looked like (the short version is it's much like the laserdisc, only pushed slightly further towards green).
As far as versions go, I'm an original theatrical man all the way (for both films). It's your project of course, but that would be my suggested starting point, which could then extend to other versions.
Anyway, let me know if I can help in any way. I've no shortage of (otherwise) useless knowledge and opinion on this subject...
Have a look at ConvertXtoDVD. It may not be as flexible as you're hoping for, but it's about the most straightforward method of getting from MKV to DVD (not a very common requirement these days).
Not much information here, but one possibility is that you encoded into an .mp4 container without ticking the 'large file size' option (if you don't do this, a useable file will max out at 4GB).
Good point. I'd assumed that the function of crossover processing was to determine the appropriate frequencies from the main channels (particularly in matrixed mixes) to direct to the sub; it hadn't occurred to me that a discrete LFE channel might actually find its way to the mains to some degree.
I expect it's down to your setup - a decent set of mains could comfortably handle a share of the lower range if required, though that's not something I can personally claim at present (the idea of my little satellite speakers handling any kind of low frequency is pretty laughable!)
So how's your edit coming along? Have you mastered those pesky proffesional techniches?
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/How-To-Create-A-Proffesional-Smooth-Edit/topic/16571/
Thanks PDB :-)
There are lots of variables here. First off, a mix that's been specifically designed for a 5.1 scheme and then presented in a discrete channel format (5.1 AC-3 or DTS) will inevitably be more precise than a matrixed 2.0 mix which only had four effective channels to begin with. So for most films post-1992, the 5.1 is the way to go; no argument there.
The reason these laserdisc projects are underway is chiefly one of preservation: that 5.1 DTS-HD mix on your Temple of Doom Blu-ray is not how the film's state-of-the-art (in 1984) Dolby Stereo originally sounded, whereas the 2.0 stereo on the laserdisc is a great deal closer. When these modern surround mixes are made for older films, liberties are taken in an effort to modernise the sound, with rethought dialogue/effects/music levels and often altogether new content; even in a relatively tasteful mix, like those of the Indiana Jones films, the feel is wrong.
Add to that the compression factor: laserdiscs with digital sound present their authentic stereo mixes as uncompressed PCM, whereas 'basic' Dolby Digital and DTS crunch down the audio information drastically in order to achieve manageable data rates. I won't get into the whole debate over whether this loss of information is noticeable, I will simply say that I find PCM stereo tracks to have a presence and intensity often lacking in compressed tracks.
So in summary: what you lose in channel separation you gain in integrity - not only in data, but also in authenticity. 'Immersive' is a subjective term, but where older films are concerned I trust the original sound engineers to present the mix as it was intended to be heard, and they can often surprise you with their strength.
I can't answer your question about PLII - perhaps someone else here is more an expert on decoders. However it works, it's pretty impressive; it can actually use the phase difference in a basic stereo track (e.g. music) to derive a full 5.1 spread, so a 4-channel source (which already has a dedicated centre channel) is ample for fairly convincing results. I try it out from time to time, though often end up switching back to basic Pro Logic for authenticity's sake.