Mavimao

Mkv, mp4 and avi are all containers. They are like envelopes if you will and inside these envelopes are Video files, sound files, subtitles files... AVIs were all the rage in the past for distributing pirated films, and you still find them in this format on torrent sites, but I've heard they are notoriously bad with multiplesoundtracks, soft subtitles.... Plus a lot of avi's use the xvid codec which is not as efficient as .264 IMO. So now there are really two competing containers: mp4 and mkv. Mp4 is used a lot in apple products - so the picture is usually always .264 with AAC soundtracks. Compatibility with media players is usually high. MKV has become the container of choice for recent torrents just because it's so flexible. You can throw whatever video codec and whatever audio codec and whatever subtitle codec and it'll stick. Of course this creates compatibility headaches for media players, but as long as you're using a .264 codec for the video and something common for the audio like ac-3 or mp3 (godforbid), it'll usually be ok.

TK421138 said:

Russ, take it however you will my friend. *chuckles* Yes I am now one of us which is pretty exciting because I've never been an "us" before. Back on the subject though, in Nero Burning ROM, should I burn a regular DVD or an AVCHD? what is the difference between the two? I would like it to play on standard DVD players (i.e. the old school ones my parent's still have) as well as the newer ones like I own (Blu-Ray etc).

 

Also, I was wondering what the quality of the DJ Trilogy is, 720? I know it upscales on Blu-Ray players but what is the actual quality? I can't begin to tell just by looking at the bitrate like you guys.

Well, since it cant' be IVTC'd, you'd be best keeping it as a 60i file as your finished product (something that can end up on a dvd for example). If you were wanting to make a file more compatible for computers (.avi .mkv .mp4 etc) you might want to use a decomb filter, which doesn't automatically get rid of even or odd fields throughout the whole film, but only gets rid of fields in certain shots that suffer from excessive combing. Best of both worlds!

Erikstormtrooper said:

Well, in English "Jedi" can be either singular or plural. So it's always been kind of vague.

In French, "of the" is translated to the singular masculin "du" and not the plurial "des". So "the Jedi" in this case is refering to just one person.

Le Retour du Jedi.

This is kind of blowing my mind how translators interpreted the title... Totally changes the meaning! Kinda cool, eh?

Here's how it is in French.

http://youtu.be/AIOwvY2SmBc?t=3m14s

Greedo speaks Huttese - but the subtitles are obviously not the theatrical originals.

PS: Harmy has mentioned that he is making the original Greedo footage available sans subtitles for those who would like to add their own.

I always find that typo so interesting because it's such a subtle yet glaring mistake (the word "pourrant" near the end which should be "pourront"). It's pronounced the same, but you'd think there would be more people spell checking this stuff.

Well they're not really a part of the original film since nearly all the IPs used for home video have them missing. IMO, they were added further down the IP chain.

Plus there's -1's print that is a spanish print...except for the opening title roll and the greedo scene, which are spliced English scenes. Whoever did this wanted English text.

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

Were different Greedo subs available in different languages too?  I never knew that.

Funny, they kinda use the same word in French for lightsabers as in Italian : "sabre laser", which translates to... Laser saber.

Doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

Like you said, "Sabre de lumière" in French just sounds funny and long.

The funny thing about the French dubbing of SW is that they went out of their way to change characters' names and the name of ships and other things to make them sound more "Frenchy" for the first film... And then decided to do a kind of 180 for Empire and made the translation more "literal". They even changed the dubbing actor for Darth Vader for the next two films. I personally hate D.V.'s voice in the first film (sounds flat and the voice effect they use sounds cheap) but other people disagree. You decide:

http://youtu.be/NUtRdVMqErY?t=4m12s

http://youtu.be/_m7JifBw0CM?t=6m27s

http://youtu.be/UQVV-IW2Vsc?t=42s

Well that's what dusting crops are... Spreading fertilizer or pesticides from a plane, but I guess Italian has a literal term for it and the translators didn't really understand the feel of the universe...

http://freepostermaker.com/uploads/saved_posters/free-poster-y0q2okecag-TEAMWORK.jpg

That spiderman bite thing is a great example of foreign languages having to work around puns.

Now what's really messed up is the French dubbing of Close Encounters of the Third Kind. If you remember, François Truffaut plays a French scientist who cannot speak English very well and they have to bring in a translator. Well in the French dubbing, they say he's the Spanish translator for the opening scene, but then somehow becomes Truffaut's right hand man, and they keep talking back and forth, completing sentences and questions for each oher, to other people they talk to, it's kinda weird.

(merged this comment with the one above)

Good info Moth3r!

Antcufaalb, judging by your question, you haven't fully understood what interlacing is. Interlacing basically refers to how televisions draw an image on older crt television and the artifacts that will show up when you play back TV based material (like VHS tapes) on computer monitors or HD TVs - which are PROGRESSIVE scan monitors.

Remember those two words, INTERLACED and PROGRESSIVE. Basically two different methods for displaying an image on a screen. Interlaced is how older CRT tvs draw - and old camcorders/TV cameras record - an image. Progressive is how a film or a modern digital camera records an image and how a movie theatre or computer monitor or HDTV draws an image. These two methods are VERY different from each other.

So to quickly answer your question, when you IVTC you are reversing the telecine process. You are going from an interlaced image to a progressive image. A telecine is 24P -> 60i and an IVTC is 60i -> 24p. (I say 60i because a TV is not really 29.97 FRAMES per second. An old TV doesn't draw frames, it draws FIELDS in a "venetian blinds" zig zag manner 59.9 times a second, which is what causes that "zig zag" combing on a progressive display monitor)

Do not worry about deinterlacing your project AT ALL. In fact, when you are capturing, be sure your capture isn't deinterlacing it on the fly or you are going to lose fields and thus you will be losing frames.

Deinterlacing is an operation to remove combing and is ONLY useful for stuff that was SHOT on video (like home videos or Saved By The Bell) and then DISPLAYED on a progressive scan monitor like a computer or an HD TV. Of course, the problem is, like the article explains, how can you do this without losing resolution? This is actually a huge headache since we have over 60 years of video lying around (home videos, TV shows shot on video, concerts), and how do we preserve all of this in its fullest quality for the future where crt TVs - who naturally draw their image in an interlaced manner - won't exist anymore?

Yes, what Puggo is saying makes complete sense. It's much easier working with digital tools because we know the framerate will always be at a constant. When you're working with film projectors (especially ones built for home use), they tend to fluctuate between speeds. It's almost never at 24fps solid. Of course it's so minute we never notice (although sometimes the sound can give it away. Pianos for example sound warbled on 16mm optical).

Because Puggo captured the sound from a projector, he has to deal with all of those subtle dips and ups in speed, whereas his picture is pretty much locked solid at 23.9fps thanks to the capturing device.

Of course, he could have just pointed a camcorder at the wall and filmed the projection and the sound would have remained in sync... But the quality would have suffered immensely.

I *think* HH converted his 5.1 projects into dedicated stereo but he'd have to chime in here.

EDIT: nevermind, according to his topic

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Star-Wars-1977-70mm-sound-mix-recreation-stereo-and-51-versions-now-available/topic/11348/

He only did stereo conversions for A New Hope.

But hey, I totally understand not wanting to do 5.1. Good luck! I can't wait to see it!

[quote=msycamore]

In preparation for the '93 LD (GOUT) they went back to the 4-track master mix which was supplemented with bass from a sound effects master, the result is a fantastic Dolby Surround track which is largely authentic to the original 35mm stereo mix but with a much greater dynamic range and additional low frequency enhancement, one sound effect accompanying one of the crashing snowspeeders is oddly enough not present in this track though.

Ha! Sorry, I'm jetlagged and got confused with ROTJ. Not to mention the other craptastic posts I've been making lately. I meant to say 80 stereo mix.

Back to the topic, isn't there a lossless file somewhere? Who even made this in the first place? DJ?

In any case I think HH's purist mix would be awesome. Same as the stereo mix but with a lot of umph to it, but I would understand if people want the real deal and in the end it's Puggo's call.

I'm with you Joel. We already have the crackly, poppy mono 16mm optical track. Why should the alternate be another low-fi recording?

I'm down with having the original mono "grindhouse" track and a nice cleaned up digital track.

If I remember correctly, there's the 1980 original, the 85 remix (which isn't different content wise from the 80 mix, just sonically adjusted for homevideo), the 93 remix which is missing a landspeeder crash sound (I think...?) and finally hairy hen's 5.1 purist mix which I believe is the 93 mix with a few fixes to make it more like the 80 mix and a discreet channel added.

There's also a mix hairy hen did in which he changed a few cues to make them sound better. This is not a purist mix, but him fixing things that bothered him in the original mix.

My vote might be for the purist mix... A nice surround sound mix. Don't know how easy it would be to edit multi track audio...

Oh yeah, crap. Should read things more closely.

7FN said:

Cobra Kai said:
.

 

 

Only Raiders got the full restoration treatment alas. The upcoming blurays apparently use the 2003 HD transfers (used for the DVD sets), with a bit of digital tinkering, for TOD and TLC.

 

The Jaws restoration looks amazing from the HD clips I've seen. Ditto for Raiders too.

I know you did all you could do with Jedi, but it's a shame we can't find a higher quality source for all the missing footage - The Lapti Nek scene stands out a lot more than the space battle in ANH.

But I always loved your ingenious way of solving the cut away shot with Jabba.

Anyway, back to topic!

What about the 83 stereo mix on Harmy's project? It's synced to the gout and must be pretty complete.