logo Sign In

Laserman

User Group
Members
Join date
11-May-2004
Last activity
6-Sep-2007
Posts
903

Post History

Post
#252620
Topic
The originaltrilogy.com acronym buster
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/252620/action/topic#252620
Time
Originally posted by: Karyudo
And if I did assume it had an English pronunciation? "Tel-schwa-sign". French pronunciation with a missing e-acute? "Tel-schwa-seen-ay".

Never in a million years would my first inclination be "tellisini", since that's just kooky. Correct, perhaps, but goofy as all hell. Who pronounces a final "ine" as "ini"?


Everyone if it is taken from part of a word and not a 'final' ine.
That is kinda my point, it is a combination word taken from two other words, so you would keep the way it was pronounced in the original word, rather than applying new pronunciation rules to it.

For example if you had a new technical term that used the "tele" part as the end of the word instead of the start, you wouldn't suddenly pronounce it "teal" or "teel", to do so would be to lose the meaning of the word when heard. (if you know what I mean)
Post
#252393
Topic
Info: Auto-correction from SE colours to GOUT colours (lots of information)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/252393/action/topic#252393
Time
Originally posted by: superrune
A small update folks!

Whole parts of the image are shaking completely independent of other parts - like some crazy jellovision technology! I guess this must be because this version has applied a noise-suppression-averaging algorithm to the film - before stabilizing the thing. The result is that the bright parts are wobbling about, while the darker parts stays somewhat calm... I take back what I said about the tracking, Laserman. This wobble calls for desperate measures indeed.

Yeah, it is an insane amount of movement, I've had to multipoint track just about every scene I've worked on, and that is *after* a basic stabilisation pass.
Originally posted by: superrune

And then it seems like the film is interpolated or upscaled in some weird way:

Yeah, they upscaled the PAL version from the NTSC letterbox tape, I still can't believe they crapped on the PAL territories like that, especially when they created a separate PAL master for the laserdisc releases. The PAL version consequently has a bunch of awful scaling artifacts.

Originally posted by: superrune
Look at the bright edge on Vaders chest armour, and the bright edge on his right (to the viewer) chin. It's almost like the film has been de-interlaced of sorts? Is this something that is PAL-only, or is this present in the NTSC version as well?


I'm still unsure why this occurred on the NTSC laserdiscs (and of course the GOUT). I've seen it happen with field based telecine systems, the film moves slightly in the gate inbetween the first field being captured and the second, causing a misalignment of sorts that looks a lot like this effect.


Post
#251875
Topic
The originaltrilogy.com acronym buster
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251875/action/topic#251875
Time
Originally posted by: Karyudo
Originally posted by: THX
Those who are supporting that pronunciation have only read the term.


Right you are. But that's why I say it's an "obvious" pronunciation: if three people who have only ever read the term have come up with the same pronunciation independently, then it's probably for a reason. It's not because each of those three people is mental and doesn't know how to pronounce anything.

It's going to be tough, but I'm resigned to the fact that I've gotta change. Despite the fact I still think there's lots of good reasons it could/should be "tel-schwa-seen"...


I put it down to people who are on insanity peppers and go to the sign-ma or the seen-ma to watch their movies, and go sailing on their yatcheds
i.e. They are looking at the straight spelling rather than the root of the word to come up with tel-schwa-seen.

How come my upside down e came out as a question mark *after* I posted the message, it showed as an upside down e when I typed it in. Hmmm... I sense a disturbance in the schwartz.

Post
#251688
Topic
The originaltrilogy.com acronym buster
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251688/action/topic#251688
Time
I can't account for Canadian tone deafness, but unlike most English terms, industry terms (especially obscure industries) tend to have a lot of consistency in pronunciation, probably because it isn't open to the sort of evolution of words that happens with wide exposure.

So if you invent a term, you get to set the pronunciation, RANK /CINTEL ( Rank was a british company) invented the telecine in the late 30s, (kinescopes were used before that) so probably the name came from an Englishman which would explain the telly part.

As for using the pronunciation of the last syllable as 'seen' it is far too close to 'scene' for me, tell a scene would probably cause endless 'who's on first' type discussions.

Whatever way you slice it, like most industry terms (and unlike most common language) there is a correct pronunciation and it seems consistent between English speaking countries.

Now who is up for the correct way to pronounce kinescope?
Post
#251687
Topic
Info: Auto-correction from SE colours to GOUT colours (lots of information)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251687/action/topic#251687
Time
I'll be fixing every glitch that I notice for my own version, the 'group' second version (i.e. what is being worked on now) definately is getting garbage mattes etc. removed, (i.e. anything that is definately, unquestionably an error and not intentional) but no decision yet on sabre fixes and other more contentious fixes.

We aren't planning to touch the GOUT at this time.
Post
#251648
Topic
The originaltrilogy.com acronym buster
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251648/action/topic#251648
Time
I have worked with telecine guys in the UK, the US, New Zealand and Australia and it is always tellysinny, or the close variant tellasinny. Don't know about France.

As to why, probably because tellysinny sounds like one word, and cannot be mistaken for two or three discreet words. (unlike Tell a Sinner, or Telly Sign, or Tell a Sign or Tell a Sin)
Also:
a) It kinda rhymes (telly, sinny)
b) The abbreviation of television (when not TV) was already "telly" as in 'turn the telly on', no one says 'turn the tell-uh' on.
But tellasinna sounds like Tell a Sinner which is confusing and the uh sound on the end is ugly.
c) Tellysign sounds like a sign of some description to hang on the telly. Tellysign also follows no rules any way, not many people say sign-ema for cinema.
d) I think most English countries pronounce the first syllable of cinema as (roughly) Sin.


Post
#251383
Topic
The originaltrilogy.com acronym buster
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251383/action/topic#251383
Time
Originally posted by: Karyudo
Can we really rely on the pronunciation of a continent that would pronounce bar "bah", and Sheila "sheeler"? You guys clearly have an Antipodes-wide problem with some sort of R-A dyslexia. How you can call what you speak 'English' is sometimes beyond me...

Maybe 'telecine' is one of those words (along with 'buoy', 'lieutenant', 'composite', 'Z', 'segue', 'dour' and the like) better left in print and never said out loud.


Who you calling dylsexic? Your tuque must be on too tight eh? Doon't tell me you are aboot to start a pronunciation argument between the colonies?

I guess you can say teleseen as often as you like in your hoose in Canadia ;D

BTW - How on earth do you pronounce bar in Canadia? Do you guys also order an ice cold bear when you want a drink?

Anyway , I checked - In Canadia it is pronounced telecin-eh?


Post
#251078
Topic
Star Wars prequel film noir (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251078/action/topic#251078
Time
I get where you are coming from, but can you be a Jedi and be corrupt without being eaten by the 'Dark Side'.

You could view it like the Church where they can teach one thing and be the polar opposite, but I'm not sure you can do that with 'the force' or can you?
I haven't really read any of the surrounding Star Wars mythology, so I'm not sure how that all works. Of course you can take it anywhere you want really.

But if the Jedi are actually corrupt then you do get a different dynamic, you get a film with no good guys, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but is more difficult
Post
#251075
Topic
Info: The preservation of technical flaws re the X0 project (aka Boris is DanielB)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251075/action/topic#251075
Time
Boris Wrote Let's get one thing straight - I don't care what you do with your edit ... I just don't understand why people think your edit is closer to the OUT than the OUT. We seem to be talking about different things.


You type a lot for someone who doesn't care

For some people the X0 project may be closer to the OUT they saw in cinemas than the GOUT is.

The GOUT is not the cinematic release. It is the home laserdisc version's master tape.
As said before the GOUT's colour is off compared to the film prints, it has DVNR artefacts that were not in the film prints causing a huge loss in detail, and a real distraction in quite a few scenes.
So...
1) A version matched back to film colours and removing those DVNR problems will be closer to what they saw in the cinema than the GOUT is.
That is just plain fact.

And then there are the people that for whatever reason never noticed the mattes, the glitches, the film damage and so forth when they saw it at the cinema. Maybe they were just too engrossed by the film, maybe they were too young or whatever.
For them a cleaned up glitch free version of the film will be closer to the cinematic release.
Now of course we are in the realm of philosophy: is experiencing a film the way you remembered it closer to reality?
Is recreating the experience faithfully more important than recreating the film exactly how it was?
It is going to be different for every single person. For some the ability to get lost in the film the way they did when they first saw it will be the most important thing, and that might mean fixing all the errors so they don't get pulled out of the movie.

You could argue this stuff till the cows come home, so I'm not going to get drawn into it as there is no answer, it is up to each individual.

But if you "just don't understand why people think your edit is closer to the OUT than the OUT" then nothing I can say can make you understand, but you may want to re-read point one.

Answers to your other questions are already in the threads.

Post
#251073
Topic
Info: The preservation of technical flaws re the X0 project (aka Boris is DanielB)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/251073/action/topic#251073
Time
Originally posted by: Laserman
Quick question.
If you don't agree with people going through a film and creating a fan edit or fixing glitches etc. what is your interest in visiting the "fan edits" forums?

I don't mean you shouldn't be here or anything, I just wonder what you visit these forums for personally?


Any real answer?
Post
#250899
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/250899/action/topic#250899
Time
I think it is Special Collectors Edition or Special Collection - I can't actually remember! It was only released in Japan and was hard to track down. It didn't get the DVNR THX treatment, so is noisy and has more film dirt and stuff, but a lot more detail.
The DC is for Definitive Collection or Definitive edition, the big black box set released in the US and Japan that has the smearing and ghosting issues, but looks cleaner.