I'm assuming the original VOB did not go out of sync at the same point? Is it out of sync for the rest of the film?
My only guess would be that there was an error in the audio file there, or an error in the extraction (did you try it more than once?). You might want to run the VOB through VOBrator, extract the audio as a WAV, and load the WAV into DVDLab Pro.
"(one that can turn DVD compliant video and audio into a DVD [VOB's + IFO's] without re-encoding like DVD Lab can)? "
Don't knock DVDLab Pro for this. I, for one, love the compliance checking. Keep in mind that you can for DVDLab Pro to *not* demux the files. You might want to try this, or even have DVDLab join the VOBs for you.
"he shouldnt be banned because of the way he feels."
He wasn't banned simply because of the way he felt about the various projects. He was banned because he was consistently going into those same projects and berating the posters for continuing their projects, or posting them in the Preservation forum.
It's one thing to make your feelings known - it's another to do so sereval times a week, for the sole purpose of shouting people out of a forum. DB wanted the forums run the way he wanted, and the LD transfers to be done the way he wanted, regardless of what anyone else wanted. His constant attacks, after several warnings, are what got him banned.
Well, there's apparently a fourth, then, because MF hasn't said anything about the Russian. I suggest anyone who wants more info about this head over to that site.
To my knowledge, the version without the timecode was created from the version with a timecode - i.e. they used a filter to de-logo the numbers and re-encoded it, so while less distracting, you now have an XVID that's been encoded twice.
And don't expect this thread to last much longer. Jay doesn't need the legal hassle.
I thought there was a link to Rowman's technique, but it was still off by one black frame. I'm guessing that's the best it's going to get.
"Can key frames be added without re-encoding?"
No, because the I frame is part of the coding. MPEG is a forward-encoding process, where the state of each frame is dependant on the frame(s) prior to it. This is why fast-reverse was such a pain in the butt on 1st generation DVD players. LD, on the other hand, excels at this, as each frame is independant.
In a nutshell, it would appear that the difference is "Finding more information", as opposed to "Creating more information." This makes me think of digital versus optical zoom on camcorders. Optical zoom allows you to see more true detail, while digital zoom interpolates exisiting information to create more detail.
I've just used Photoshop because I've been too lazy to switch to anything else, but as my DVD business grows, I might look elsewhere. That being said, a lot of my resizing has been with images, so we'll just have to see if there's really enough benefit to me. I also need to see if the labeling software that came with my Epson R300 will accept PNG files. If not, I'll just create a template in PS for now.
"Hey eBay is okay i got the Star Wars Exectutor Boxset for £20 and it was in good condition."
But the concern is someone taking that product, converting it to DVD, and reselling the DVD for two or three times as much much. That being said, converting from VHS to DVD is cheaper and easier than converting from LD to DVD, though the quality is inferior. Still, a person who doesn't know better might be lured by the title [i"Mastered from the "Executor Boxset", thinking it's some grand, high quality release, and forking over needless amounts of cash, when they can get a much better and cheaper version here.
It's a question of giving SW fans what they want without taking advantage of them.