logo Sign In

Laserman

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

Post History

Post
#247359
Topic
Info: Anyone Got A Spare 1300 Bucks? Star Wars 16mm on ebay...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247359/action/topic#247359
Time
Originally posted by: Karyudo
Originally posted by: iRantanplan
NTSC has 480 lines dude.


No, it doesn't (dude...). It has 525. And how many does it have the other way (vertical columns)? Hmm? That's right: not exactly defined in the analog domain. Which is why a broadcast camera is free to quote 700: it has a frequency response that gives 700 resolvable vertical lines in that direction, with 525 defined horizontal scan lines. Even lowly VHS has 525 scan lines. It has to: that's how NTSC works!

A broadcast camera claiming 700 lines is possibly analog, and certainly SD.



Well kind of - erm - dudes.

NTSC is a 525 line format, but only 484 of those lines are *active* lines. i.e. only 484 or less are used to display the picture. The remaining 41 lines are used for synchronisation, the vertical retrace and stuff like subtitles or closed captioning (or whatever it is called inb the US).

The cameras that put out a so called 700 lines do not do so via NTSC, they can't as NTSC is stuck at 525 lines, they can theoritcally output that many lines via RGB but what are you going to capture them with. Basically it just means you get a well defined 480 or so lines of picture, they are still very much SD.

There were plans for a 625 line NTSC system at one stage, but they never eventuated.
Post
#247096
Topic
Are the PAL GOUT DVDs upscaled from the NTSC masters?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247096/action/topic#247096
Time
I guess this is the quote from George that put me in my current cynical frame of mind.

"It's just the original versions, as they were. We didn't do anything to it at all. But we're not sure how many people want that. Now we'll find out whether they really wanted the original or whether they wanted the improved versions. It'll all come out in the end."


Hmmm....





I guess I can see how truly horrible the OUT really was now by looking at these GOUT DVDs.

I've seen the error of my ways and have realised I really wanted the improved versions all along.
Post
#247085
Topic
Are the PAL GOUT DVDs upscaled from the NTSC masters?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247085/action/topic#247085
Time
Moth3r, like I said, I'm taking a punt on the film grain issue, but to me it looks like oversharpening. It could have been added later, but it looks consistent with the laserdiscs, and I can't see why they would bother to grain it up to that extent on purpose. It seems like a lot of work for no obvious reason.
You can't really then soften away the grain as the sharpening process has caused the grain to be emphasised over the top of existing detail.

THX, I have no hard evidence that the pressing master was used, but it certainly looks like it. I have seen parts of a LD master tape that is higher quality than the GOUT, so unless they deliberatley dumbed it down then they have used the D2 pressing master. A good D2 master doesn't really suffer from dot crawl, and dot crawl is easily fixed where it does occur, I'd put money on the GOUT coming from D2. (but I don't know of course - could be wrong).

I'd be surprised if the DVNR was done during the telecine process, there is usually a rough grade done during the process, but I was sure I'd read that there was a separate more extensive colour correction done to Faces/DC release, which would point to a master existing other than the one used.

THX, as to why they would do this - who knows. Could be they wanted to keep the colour correction done, but I am getting a sneaky feeling it was more a case of the D2 masters were handy, and it was quick cheap and easy to do it this way. My more cynical thoughts are that it would ensure that the GOUT continued to look very inferior to the 2004 DVDs, helping to make people see the 2004 release as the 'best' and vindicating all of the usual arguments (that the 1977 release was really pretty awful and only the re-release and additions to the film have made it truly great).
The cheap, easy and not worried about high quality statement is probably just me feeling cynical, but the failure to be bothered to release a *real* PAL version (when a master is available) and not going anamorphic tends to make me feel that way. The money and time argument just doesn't wash, there have been some very crappy films get at least an anamorphic release.

Moth3r, yep you could try to fix the few horrible jaggy frames by doing that in AVISynth, the offset will be random, but it is usually only a frame or two in a given scene that has the problem.

Boris, if you can't extrapolate that because the PAL THX laserdiscs have a ton more detail (and raw lines of resolution) than the NTSC laserdiscs,(and that even a *capture and re-encode* of the PAL laserdisc outperforms the NTSC gout in some scenes) then that the PAL master would have more detail than the NTSC master, then nothing else I can say will change your mind.

No-one except Lucasfilm knows what they did on this release and why - we can all make informed guesses, but the end result is that the PAL release is an awful upscale with VBlur and that both the PAL and the NTSC version are letterboxed and full of sub-par DVNR and excessive grain, sharpening and halos.

To say it is disappointing is an understatement.



Post
#246644
Topic
Are the PAL GOUT DVDs upscaled from the NTSC masters?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246644/action/topic#246644
Time
Think about what you are saying.

We went with the NTSC laserdiscs and the X0 only because the PAL laserdisc players are awful. They are very noisy and difficult to get a clean signal from - much like cheap NTSC laserdisc players.
There never was a PAL equivalent of the X0 laserdisc player. If there was I never would have considered the NTSC discs at all.

But with Lucasfilm we are talking master tapes so players etc. don't come into the equation.

As I said the fact that Moth3r's transfers look better in places than the GOUT even though via his (or any) transfer the PAL master tape has been effectively transferred to a laserdisc pressing master disc, then put to laserdisc, then put in a (relatively to the X0) crappy player, then captured on a consumer level cheap capture card, then recompressed to DVD and it *still* comes out better in places than the GOUT which hasn't been through those trials, that is proof that the PAL masters are better than the NTSC masters. Think about it for a minute or three.

Not to poo on Moth3r's transfer in any way at all, he did a great job and has my eternal respect, (and his transfer will have more detail in some scenes than the X0 transfer as well) but the generational losses mean that the PAL master would look considerably better than any 'straight' transfer to PAL via the route one has to take to do it from laserdisc.
Post
#246632
Topic
Are the PAL GOUT DVDs upscaled from the NTSC masters?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246632/action/topic#246632
Time
Absolutely not, look at the NTSC laserdiscs vs the PAL laserdiscs if you want to compare.

The fact that even compared to the NTSC master tape that the PAL laserdisc transfers (with three generational losses - tape to LD to capture card to recompress to DVD) still have more detail than the GOUT in some scenes categorically means that the PAL master has more detail than the NTSC one.
Post
#246619
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246619/action/topic#246619
Time
Originally posted by: TheCassidy
Originally posted by: Zion
Well if you like, you can tell him that we're never EVER going to be selling our DVDs. That would just be plain stupid.


So when tons of the X0's show up on Ebay, selling for a profit are you guys gonna step back, raise your hands and say "Not our fault?"

It is going to matter to LFL how, who and where the sellers got their product. But seeing as how you guys are the smartest kids on the block and seem to have your stuff together, I'm sure you've covered your back end already...


Just as a general statement if *anything* I did ever ended up on ebay I'd spend my days and nights making sure they were reported and removed.
I spend a few hours a week reporting all kinds of scammers on ebay anyway.

I'm not going to speculate on hypothetical scenarios though, I started the X0 project as a preservation effort, and I'm sure it will continue to be that.

It has certainly lead to the discovery and preservation of all sorts of SW material along the way as well.

If George would release a restored OUT, rather than effectively a re-release of the laserdiscs, then there wouldn't be any need for a preservation effort.
Post
#246605
Topic
Are the PAL GOUT DVDs upscaled from the NTSC masters?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246605/action/topic#246605
Time
I've taken a look at the grain on the GOUT for ANH and it is consistent with the film stocks used, so I'd take a punt and say it was present on the master.

The problem is threefold.

1) They have used the pressing master instead of the telecine master.

2) They have used the NTSC pressing master.

3) They have used the post 'noise/dirt reduction' master.

The reason the pressing master is a problem is that laserdisc is notoriously 'soft' and so were the televisions of the day.
So when making an LD pressing master it was not at all unusual to crank up the sharpness and do some edge enhancement as well, in the hope that the laserdisc would then look more detailed.

When using it to master a DVD the problem is that the sharpening and EE used is of course old technology and has the side effect of causing edge ringing and making the grain jump out at you and punch you in the face. Some DVD players also have sharpening 'built in' and many people have the sharpening function on their TV cranked to 100 as well. This combination makes the grain near unwatchable. Turn off any player and TV sharpening and it gets a little better, but is still too much.

Using the NTSC pressing master brings a few problems with it, most of which are just due to the very low resolution of letterbox NTSC, and the over zealous sharpening routines. Jaggies are completely unavoidable when you have less than 280 lines to work with and if you then sharpen it further.

There also appears to be some 'field wobble' in the NTSC telecine process. This can happen if the telecine device uses a field based (interlaced) camera instead of a progressive scan one (non interlaced). This can also happen for other reasons, but this is one possible cause.
What can happen is the film frame can move slightly inbetween the capture of field one and field two, which means the fields end up out of alignment slightly.
This is definately the case with the star destroyer (that the fields are misaligned - the cause of the misalignment is up for debate), and it can be fixed somewhat by selecting out each field and moving one field in relation to the other by a sub-pixel adjustment to get them back in alignment.
It is a technique we used on the X0, the final shot of the star destroyer is much improved.

The use of the post 'dirt reduction' master adds insult to injury with the ghosting, smearing and loss of detail.

As for which one I would buy, I bought the PAL GOUT of ANH, and after taking a look at it posted it to George along with a letter stating my disappointment at how the PAL territories have been treated with this release. (Didn't mention the whole laserdisc thing, just that a PAL upscale from an NTSC master was an unaccetably cheap way to treat fans when a PAL master existed.)

I have ordered the NTSC version but it hasn't arrived yet.

So I haven't sighted the NTSC version yet, but the PAL version was obviously an upscale, and if you wanted to have a PAL anamorphic version for your own personal viewing pleasure it makes more sense to get the NTSC version, upscale it to PAL anamorphic, run it through combustion's grain reduction along the way, and pop the PCM audio track or the 5.1 track on there to your preference.

It is not surprising that the PAL laserdiscs have more detail in places than the NTSC upscaled GOUT, you are starting off with a lot more lines of resolution and what appears to be a lighter dirt reduction treatment. You have the generational loss with laserdisc (which
Post
#244038
Topic
Info: 2006 GOUT DVD using 'Faces' PCM Sound?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244038/action/topic#244038
Time
Could be a few reasons.
They may have compressed the PAL version more, they may not have bothered to IVTC when they made the DVD of the NTSC version and wasted a whole heap of space storing the 'extra' interlaced frames, could be other audio tracks, could be anything. I haven't seen the US version so can't really say.

I am amazed at the level of laziness/contempt shown to the PAL regions, a rescale of the NTSC version when they have a PAL master is really unforgivable. I sent mine back with a 'note'.
We often get the rough end of the pineapple in PAL-Land with less extras and so on, but an uprez of an NTSC disc, that is non-anamporphic to start with, that is just pathetic.
Sure the end result isn't totally horrible, but it is way below what a straight PAL transfer would have been. It is like they are *trying* to be bastages about it.
Post
#243090
Topic
Info Wanted: Anyone Planning on making Anamorphic versions using 2006 OUT DVDs?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/243090/action/topic#243090
Time
48 flickers like a bastage, 72Hz is fast enough not to see flicker.

No, unfortunately if a 1080i50Hz program is recorded it will *not* playback on a loit of US HDTVs.
Also the HD-DVD players will not play any 50Hz material even if the region is region1. You cannot get the current Toshiba HD-DVD players to playback anything except NTSC HD, it cannot process any 50Hz material regardless of how it is flagged. It also cannot playback at any refresh rate other than 60Hz, even when all the movies are stored on the disc at effectively 24P, so you get your Judder.

D-Theatre and HD-VHS players will not playback 50Hz material or record it.

Blu-Ray haven't made their mind up yet.

So unfortunately HD is much of the same, 50Hz sped up audio for PAL countries and 60Hz Judder fests with correct audio for the US and Japan.
Interlaced 1080i (not progressive, and can't be made so as the two fields are temporaly different) video for live broadcast material in 50Hz or 60Hz depending on your country. It really is a shambles.

The only place you can do it all is on the PC
Post
#243038
Topic
Info Wanted: Anyone Planning on making Anamorphic versions using 2006 OUT DVDs?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/243038/action/topic#243038
Time
Unfortunately there is PAL and NTSC effectively in the HD world.

HD transmissions in Australia are 1080i 50Hz or 720P 50Hz, with SD at 576p 50Hz.

Film based stuff is *effectively* progressive here even in 1080i as each frame is just represented by the two fields, and they speed the 24fps film up to 25fps for PAL HD transmission.

In the US, 1080i is 60Hz, which means they still do the "bloody awful pulldown juddery interlaced abortion mess" [technical term] to make 24 go into 30.

They missed the chance to move everyone to 72Hz worldwide and bypass all of this crap.

Live transmissions like sports are true interlaced 1080i, by this I mean the two fields are not half of one progressive frame, so you can't convert it to progressive and retain the resolution.

Film based material in the USA is still stored on HD-DVD and Bluray discs as 24fps and the players turn it into the juddery mess that is 60Hz, exactly the same as DVD where if the material came from film it is nearly always stored as 24fps on the DVD.

The GOUT poses a problem though, if using the NTSC LD pressing master as their source, then it will be BAPJIAM encoded already, so they need to either do an IVTC of it before putting it to DVD or (heaven forbid) just do a straight transfer as if it was an interlaced video source and waste a ton of DVD space encoding the mixed up frames.
The PAL versions should be straight 25fps (effectively progressive) either way.
Post
#241919
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/241919/action/topic#241919
Time
Originally posted by: casualimp
GOUT is a condition in which uric acid, a waste product that occurs naturally occurring within the body, rises above normal levels. Rather than being flushed by the kidneys and through the urine, as it normally is, it forms crystals and deposits in the joints. These deposits give rise to inflammation of the joints, causing pain, swelling, redness and tenderness of the area. Most typically the joint affected is that of the big toe, but gout can also affect the ankle, knee, foot, hand, wrist and elbow. Uric acid crystals may also form deposits in other areas such as under the skin or in other soft tissues, and in the kidney or urinary tract.

You might want to rethink that.


I know exactly what gout is, it is how the official release makes me feel treated as a fan, and how I will be referring to it from now on.
Post
#241902
Topic
Info Wanted: Anyone Planning on making Anamorphic versions using 2006 OUT DVDs?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/241902/action/topic#241902
Time
Hard to say as I would be doing it all on the mac, I'm not really an avisynth guru, I tend to work out how to do something on *Nix or OSX and then pass the conceptual procedure onto people who know the PC free stuff to achieve the same results.
There is an entire forum over at doom9 though with plenty of arguments over the best ways to do it, it is well worth a read and you could pick some methods and use a rewritable DVD and make a few sample til you get the best result for your particular telly.
I can't recommend what level of filtering to partake in until I get my hands on a GOUT set.
Post
#241890
Topic
In defence of the 2004 DVDs
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/241890/action/topic#241890
Time
The thing that riles me the most, is I really would have welcomed a technically fixed trilogy.
Just doing the comps digitally instead of optically, getting rid of the matte lines, colouring in the sabres where required and fixing bad jump cuts with the sabres and the dodgy camera shakes etc. Even removing the cardboard people at the end.

All of this I would have welcomed, it would have made the films far more watchable, but unchanged as far as the story, drama and overall look of the film were concerned. If anyone wanted to see the glitches as an example of how 70s technology was limiting, then the laserdiscs or a release of the OUT like we are now getting easily fills that role.

But dressing them up to be a late 90's style film is just jarring, (especially when so many of the crappy glitches aren't fixed anyway!) but even that would have been OK if a proper version of the OUT was released on DVD.

It is soooo frustrating that they claim it can't be done, when the actual amount of scenes that need to be put back in to satisfy 90% of fans is really small.
Could they really not put the original greedo scene back in? They had to restore those elements to create the new scene.
Could they really not just leave out the Jabba scene in ANH, or the rontos, or the hovering crapodroids around the stormtroopers.

Creating an 'almost' original release of ANH would be so so easy for them, it drives me nuts that they won't do it, and won't release the elements at a decent rez to allow others to do it.

I'm eagerly awaiting to see how the PAL release of the OUT comes out, but am determined that a glitch free version of ANH will be done, and if Lucasfilm won't step up to the plate....
Post
#241887
Topic
In defence of the 2004 DVDs
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/241887/action/topic#241887
Time
So he wanted the laser flashes to be colder as well?
The now two-tone blue 'full white screen' on the laser hits on the Tantive where it used to be 100% white seems a bit suspicious.

He either decided to go for a colder feel for the corridors, but then did it so horribly heavy handedly that he didn't give a rat's about the blue tint across that whole sequence including the space battle, or it wasn't meant to be blue. You can't have it both ways.
Post
#241886
Topic
Info Wanted: Anyone Planning on making Anamorphic versions using 2006 OUT DVDs?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/241886/action/topic#241886
Time
It isn't really a problem if done well, especially since the OUT should be able to easily be encoded at the maximum allowed bitrate - let us hope that Lucasfilm at least do that.

I have done this process many times and it always looks far better re-encoded than letting the TV do it. You don't get a lot of problems on the re-encode partially I think because you have resized and then processed the image, so the original blocks have now changed shape, had their edges less defined and moved position. So you don't get the typical problem of the exact same blocks being re-blocked if you know what I mean.

Anyway, don't take mt word for it, I haven't tried every TV out there, so try it yourself on any letterbox title and see how you go.

But doing it properly, it causes no offensive artifacting and gives a far superior viewing experience when I have done it in the past.

(Of course you could do a horrible job of the re-encode if not done properly!)

(Edited to fix at least some of my Dyslexic typing)
Post
#241855
Topic
Info Wanted: Anyone Planning on making Anamorphic versions using 2006 OUT DVDs?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/241855/action/topic#241855
Time
Originally posted by: THX
Laserman, do you think the improved scaling will outbalance the increased artifacting from re-encoding?


Absolutely, the scalers in even fairly high end widescreen TVs are awful.

Think about it, effectively the TV set *is* doing an on-the-fly re-encode to zoom the letterbox image up to display correctly on a 16:9 screen. If you do the re-encode on the computer instead, then the TV just displays the image without further processing.

A realtime, 'mass market' process like in the TV is much more likely to suffer from artifacts than an offline process that is constantly honed by enthusiasts.
Post
#241662
Topic
Info Wanted: Anyone Planning on making Anamorphic versions using 2006 OUT DVDs?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/241662/action/topic#241662
Time
I'm glad the forum mods and owner are OK with it.
I'm not sure if it is only the US that prohibits the breaking of copy protection - in Australia you are not even allowed a 'fair use' policy, so it is illegal here to even make a backup copy of even an uprotected CD that you own!

Personally I think if you are the only person that is ever going to watch it, you can make your own version with as many Ronto's as you like, but of course, that isn't the view of the legal beagles.

The problem with the captures from the OUT shown so far is that they still have the damn trails
So I will be wanting something better...
Post
#241624
Topic
Info Wanted: Anyone Planning on making Anamorphic versions using 2006 OUT DVDs?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/241624/action/topic#241624
Time
Originally posted by: ESHBG
Originally posted by: Laserman
ESHBG - It depends what you mean by does it make the picture clearer.
If you have a widescreen TV then the picture will almost definately look better if you create an anamorphic version 'offline' and play that back on your widescreen TV.

The reason is that you can scale a picture well or poorly, or anywhere in between. A widescreen set has to scale a letterbox image to display it properly. This means it has to do it in realtime so it uses a (usually cheap) chipset to do that. The result is usually not that great.
If you use software to make an anamorphic version first, then you can use really good scaling algorithms that would be too complex to do in real time. This means that instead of the image being poorly scaled by the TV, you send it the already (properly) scaled image and so get a better picture.

This is why a lot of people with high end TVs, projectors etc. buy a lumagen, terranex or other high quality 'outboard scaler' because it does a much better job of scaling the input to the display's native resolution and Aspect Ratio than the TV itself is capable of.

If however you were watching in letterbox mode on a standard TV, then an anamorphic version created from the letterbox version may look about the same or actually worse - unless the original letterbox version was overly soft and gained some improvement from any other video processing you did to it during the conversion to anamorphic.

But in absolute terms straight scaling an image from letterbox to anamorphic doesn't automagically add in any lost detail, so doesn't make the picture clearer - but if you need to watch it on a widescreen TV then the image will almost certainly be clearer than watching the letterbox original, unless you use an equally as awful scaling algorithm as the one in your TV.

Thanks a lot for the info, Laserman, it is a HUGE help! Here is something I just said in another thread:

---Well this adds one more monkey wrench into things for me and now I have to see what will happen: I just found out that I CANNOT zoom in on my picture with my TV due to my setup. I just checked the manual and it clearly states that the only settings that can be used when the DVD player is hooked up via component (which mine is) are "Wide" and "4:3" (in addition to those options I have "Panorama", "Zoom1" and "Zoom2"; I was planning on using "Zoom1" to fill the screen more if need be).

Now I am DYING to see what happens when I pop these DVDs in! It seems rather silly for me to not use my component setup just to watch SW, zoom in and get an even crappier picture...

FYI I have a Samsung DLP (16X9 of course) and a DVD player that lets you choose a 16X9 option, so maybe this won't be that big of a deal...maybe my DVD and/or TV will scale the picture as best it can?!?---

So what happens then? Will my TV and/or DVD player scale the letterboxed image to fill more of the screen or will it keep it the same, with rather large black bars on the top/bottom (vs. anamorphic)? I guess I'll just have to wait and see...

Man, I sure wish this release was anamorphic! Then I wouldn't have to worry about any of this crap!


If you DLP TV is a hidef model, ideally you would want to scale it to the native resolution of your TV and play it back via a PC or other player that can playback HD files at a particular resolution. It will be a big improvement.

Also for anyone with a HDTV, it is worth looking at a decent 'outboard' scaler if you have non-hd sources, even a simple scaling DVD player like the Momitsu range can be a big improvement over the TVs internal scaler.