Jonno

This may be a discussion for the technical forum, but how do people generally deal with 480i Blu-ray material in terms of IVTC? I still can't tell if film-originated material is hard or soft telecined in conversion to h.264 - the avisynth scripts I usually use for MPEG-2 certainly don't seem to work as expected.

Incidentally, it's a pity 23.976fps 480p was never included in the BD spec, particularly given most players will handle it anyway. It would have made this sort of thing so much easier...

I just had a browse through Cinemageddon and all their copies are 16:9 DVD or HDTV rips. Where were the 4:3 stills you mention sourced? I guess if there weren't TV screenings, you might find a fullscreen VHS tape - Ebay turns up a couple of copies in Italy, at least.

Have you compared the cropping on the scope trailer(s)?

The branched Blade Runner disc is identical in the newer set (as is the Final Cut) - it's just the workprint that received the AVC re-encode since it was being compiled together with the SD special features on one disc.

I checked anyway and those settings are identical. What other branched discs are there to look at? I'll have a look through my collection.

Perhaps I asked the wrong question about the m2ts files. The excess 11 seconds might not be black, but rather redundant footage, e.g. does clip B begin with the last 11 seconds of clip A?

That would suggest it's a standard of some sort; though whether it's a standard for the entire industry, the BD spec, or just that authoring house remains to be seen.

I hope it's possible with different amounts - I can't think of many commercially-sourced assets that will provide 11 seconds of slack unless they've been specifically prepared with branching in mind.

That's a point, actually - do those m2ts files have an 11 second black leader at the front?

Yes, that makes sense - I guess the player's buffer cues up the incoming clip in parallel a few seconds in advance before making the switch. Like a TV studio :)

Yes, this is really interesting stuff. I frequently use BD playlists to append extra material onto the front (and sometimes end) of existing streams, since it seems daft to re-encode an entire movie for the sake of a short logo replacement or added trailer reel.

I've used the playlist merge function in MultiAVCHD until now, but it's not a smooth enough switch to use for anything but a black and silent transition. BDedit might well give the solution, as long as I can match the asset properties.

RU.08, where does the 11.650 number come from? Is it simply a standard 'leader' length for branching clips?

towne32 said:

I'm merely pondering what sort of new dimension this community will have in a year. It's going to happen, we just don't know in what way. It's absolutely incredible that we're going to have new Star Wars in five months. But I also find it incredible that at some point later, VII is going to be a part of the Star Wars catalogue and history. It's real and it will be treated as such. For better or worse. For work of art or raw material.

Fair enough - it may well be a different story after December. It just seems a strange culture we're in where the discussion doesn't revolve around the brand new film coming our way, but rather what we can do to 'fix' it once it's in our hands.

New Star Wars should be special enough on its own, as that lovely comic-con reel demonstrates (for me, anyway).

towne32 said: Oh well, I assume plenty of people around these parts will be doing their own fan color corrections of it no matter what. It would be amazing if the film itself ends up being good enough that we (mostly) all prefer watching it without editing scenes/plot/etc.

 I find it troubling that the film isn't even finished yet and folks are already contemplating their own personal revisions.

Can you not enjoy the primary experience of seeing brand new Star Wars without treating it like so much raw material to be reshaped to your whim?

It's hard to imagine why the studio would have replaced one anachronistic movie clip with another, unless rights issues were involved at the time.

If Warner execs didn't appreciate Lucas' (utterly beautiful) irony, they would have simply cut the sequence altogether.

Went to see the first film at the Royal Albert Hall yesterday, accompanied by a live orchestra. A terrific presentation, and editorially interesting - it had an overture and intermission (the entr'acte was from BttF III), along with additional scoring for some previously music-less sections.

The picture was DCP, naturally.

jedimasterobiwan said:

mallrats 35mm film print restoration needed because blu ray has dnr and edge enhancement.

chasing amy 35mm or 16mm i don't know because it said the print released in theaters was the 35mm blow up. print needed because of blu ray has dnr don't know if it had edge enhancement done.

jay and silent bob strike back 35mm print restoration needed because the blu ray looks like a dvd upscale.

You need to do some basic research - modern studio films shot on 16mm / super 16, whether for budgetary or aesthetic reasons, are still destined for 35mm release prints. Looking for 'proper'* 16mm prints of these films is a fairly futile exercise, indeed I doubt they even exist (except, perhaps, in Kevin Smith's garage).

*It occurs to me that there might have been a 16mm aftermarket for some titles - Derann, club or school screenings etc. But those would still have taken the print route of the 35mm, i.e. ON > IP > 35mm IN > 16mm reduction print. Do correct me on this point if I've missed a step, folks.

Aluminium's right - layer breaks on BD-R DLs are no problem at all. There no longer needs to be a conscious decision about the layer break position - I regularly burn ~25GB video files to BD-Rs (usually as part of a playlist with other items) and the data simply flows onto the second layer when the break point is arrived at. Likewise, playback should be seamless - BD player buffers are much more effective (as, I suspect, are the laser mechanisms).

Of course, the real issue (as you suggest yourself) is compatibility: you need a good burner, good burning app, good discs AND a friendly player at the receiving end. Still, let's not let caution stand in the way of a quality product...

BuddhaMaster said:

Let me throw an analogy in here. If a ugly girl uses makeup just like a beautiful girl, they will both look similar but the former girl will look beautiful in an artificial way.

 Casual misogyny: the strongest tool in any argument.

For the love of God, please lock this thread.

Damn, sorry to hear that.

The widescreen THX VHS tapes might have been an alternative source, were I not already fairly sure that those were plastered (WB were really ramping up on that in the 90s).

There even seem to be a couple of copies on Ebay atm. Good luck!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/There-Was-A-Crooked-Man-Widescreen-Laserdisc-Buy-6-for-free-shipping-/131438816693?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item1e9a5d2db5

http://www.ebay.com/itm/There-Was-A-Crooked-Man-NEW-SEALED-Laserdisc-LD-Kirk-Douglas-/231546682690?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item35e941fd42

According to CLG, this film used the same version:

http://www.lddb.com/laserdisc/09293/11270/There-Was-a-Crooked-Man-%281970%29

Other than that you're probably looking at some sort of colour adjustment (e.g. on Dirty Harry's blue background logo).

I'm sure he'll take that into account. 10 years ago.

edit: Also, what Leonardo said...

The man was hurtin', cut him some slack.

I quite like the colour in Alien Resurrection - could someone please do an edit which removes the rest of the film?

Mostly 1. He was enormously conflicted at that point, and just didn't need to deal with another disappointment right then.

Does anyone have - or have access to - the 1995 release of Meteor (1979)?

http://www.lddb.com/laserdisc/06052/ID2842OR/Meteor-%281979%29

The recent BD release is mono only, but the laser was mastered from a (fairly uncommon) stereo print.

kk650 said:

Jonno said:

makinbiscuits said:

Jonno said:

makinbiscuits said:so this is now my definitive edition of Alien.

 Careful now.

 I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to imply.

kk650 doesn't like it when you refer to a release as 'definitive' - if you're referring to someone else's work, at least.

No reason for you to know about all that though, sorry for confusing you.

Its called showing respect for the hard work of others Jonno. If somebody called any of my work 'the definitive version' of a film I would be the first to ask them not to do that because I feel it is disrespectful to other releasers. I am satisfied with the quality of my releases without having to belittle other releases by considering mine 'the definitive version' of a film.

If you want to post about my releases in this thread, you are welcome to. If you insist on posting off topic and dredging up old disagreements not relevant to these releases in order to start arguments, do us all a favour and move along.

If you were so secure in the quality of your own work, you wouldn't presume to tell other people what words they're allowed to use in discussions about projects that have absolutely nothing to do with you.

My comments are as on-topic now as yours were then. But for the sake of those who appreciate your efforts, I will indeed move along - perhaps you'll allow those other discussions to continue unmolested in turn.

makinbiscuits said:

Jonno said:

makinbiscuits said:so this is now my definitive edition of Alien.

 Careful now.

 I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to imply.

kk650 doesn't like it when you refer to a release as 'definitive' - if you're referring to someone else's work, at least.

No reason for you to know about all that though, sorry for confusing you.