logo Sign In

Moth3r

User Group
Members
Join date
26-Oct-2004
Last activity
16-Jul-2017
Posts
4,892

Post History

Post
#249032
Topic
Info: 2006 GOUT DVD using 'Faces' PCM Sound?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/249032/action/topic#249032
Time
Originally posted by: chuck88
The only issue that I ran into was that I had to add a 1 second delay to Belbucus' DC PCM soundtrack in order to sync it up when reauthoring the movie with DVDLab Pro.
... Originally posted by: dumb_kid
... I did have to add 1.018s delay to sync it up with my rip of the video stream though.
...
Just to corroborate these two posts; from a quick look at the waveforms I estimated the delay to be about 1.020s.

I didn't think you could specifiy a delay for PCM audio in DVDLab Pro, but it has been a while since I used it.
Post
#247848
Topic
OUT: PAL or NTSC?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247848/action/topic#247848
Time
Originally posted by: ThunderPeel2001
Originally posted by: Moth3r
I said it may be the case, and although there are many different factors to take into account, it will be true in some cases. (One example, if you own an LCD TV with 960x540 native resolution).

So in very rare cases, then?
Like I said, just one example - I could just have well have said a DLP projector. But think about this; if you calibrate your DVD player and CRT TV with the PAL version of Digital Video Essentials, then play an NTSC disc, can you be sure that the geometry, brightness, contrast, etc. is going to be optimal?

I don't know for sure, but I suspect that CRT TVs sold in PAL countries have shadow masks/phosphors optimized for ~576 scanlines. I've quite often seen complaints levelled at NTSC - from PAL owners - about scanlines appearing too widely spaced. But I'm prepared to be proven wrong on this one.

Originally posted by: ThunderPeel2001
Considering my old Sony KV32FX60 (which was made in Sept 1999!) handles it perfectly, I would have thought all semi-decent make TVs would by now!
You have a point. The TV that happily accepts NTSC 3.58 is a Toshiba. The ones that won't are Bush, Grundig, Mitsubishi...



Post
#247789
Topic
OUT: PAL or NTSC?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247789/action/topic#247789
Time
Originally posted by: ThunderPeel2001
[quote]I imagine it's because hardware bought in the UK may be optimized or calibrated for playback of PAL material.[/quote]

Sorry, but that's not true and people shouldn't be passing around such information like it is (I've seen it on this forum before). I said it may be the case, and although there are many different factors to take into account, it will be true in some cases. (One example, if you own an LCD TV with 960x540 native resolution).

Originally posted by: ThunderPeel2001
In the US it's difficult to find a TV which handles PAL playback, or at least it was when I lived there a few years back. It was far from standard in the US, but in PAL terroritories it's a different story.

As long as a TV is specified to output NTSC or PAL, it will do, and it has nothing to do with its geographical location! All modern PAL TVs handle a 'pure' NTSC signal, just like a US TV does. Plus, any decent DVD player should be able to output it, too. If you're using something like an XBox 360 then you're stuck using PAL-60 instead, but that's about it. Actually, after trying out six TVs bought in the UK within the past 5 years, only one will handle pure NTSC (i.e. NTSC 3.58). The others will only give a colour picture with NTSC 4.43 or PAL-60. Although, this is not normally an issue because RGB SCART is the most commonly used connection (the colour information is kept seperate and never sees a PAL or NTSC encoder).

Originally posted by: ThunderPeel2001
Sorry to sound harsh, I appreciate that your knowledge of Region 2 is probably limited, but trust me, there's no ambiguous "optimized or calibrated for playback of PAL material".
I live in the UK.

Originally posted by: ThunderPeel2001
Something that SHOULD affect someone's buying decision, and DOES actually exist, is NTSC's 3:2 Pulldown issue and PAL's 4% audio speedup (although I imagine nearly everything is pitch corrected these days), and they both come down to personal preference.
Pitch correction can cause digital stepping, so is only rarely applied to PAL releases (only when the director requests it).


Post
#247747
Topic
Are the PAL GOUT DVDs upscaled from the NTSC masters?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247747/action/topic#247747
Time
Originally posted by: Karyudo
... anyone who has viewed a PAL copy of the same 1995 THX release can tell you that it is definitely different from the NTSC version. And it is better in most areas. You're right that it has its flaws -- most notably more dust and crap in the picture -- but it does have more resolution, more detail, and no ghosting.
Apart from the burn marks and the line dropouts, I'd say that the PAL laserdisc actually has less dirt and fewer scratches than the DC, but it does have the same level of DVNR artefacts (ghosting).
Post
#246695
Topic
Are the PAL GOUT DVDs upscaled from the NTSC masters?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246695/action/topic#246695
Time
Originally posted by: Laserman
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. Damn, I was relying on you to back mverta up on this one!

I really have no knowledge about identifying such things, but I can appreciate that DVDs contain more detail than laserdiscs. However, if you apply a low-pass filter to the DVD image to "soften" it and make it equivalent to the laserdisc (cut off at 5.5 MHz?) then there still seems to be more grain on the DVDs.

Originally posted by: Laserman
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. I actually found your old post on this subject in the X0 thread, and I'm thinking it's probably quite an easy fix in AVISynth (upscaling, shifting then downscaling). Is the offset constant, or does it change?

However, I imagine the fix cannot be applied to the DVDs because the application of the vertical blur has complicated things.

Originally posted by: Laserman
The use of the post 'dirt reduction' master adds insult to injury with the ghosting, smearing and loss of detail.
Have you compared the DC with the PAL laserdiscs in this respect? Is it true that the artefacts are worse on the DC?

I didn't notice the effects on first watch of my ANH transfer, but since spotting it in TESB and reading some posts on here I now see it all the time (and immediatley noticed it on the DVD).

I put in my 1989 NTSC laserdisc last night (the one with the fixed "shrinking ratio") - I've had it a while and never viewed it - and it didn't look half bad! Got me wondering whether using a modern, motion-compensated noise reduction filter on this would produce a nicer looking transfer than the THX discs. Also seems to have more detail in dark areas, although this might be the result of a typical overbright video transfer.


Originally posted by: Laserman
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 ...
From the stills I've seen, the NTSC version is a touch sharper than the PAL (hardly noticeable, though). It also has black fringes down the sides, for some reason the PAL version doesn't.


Post
#246250
Topic
What's Original '77 and What's Not?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246250/action/topic#246250
Time
Originally posted by: Knightmessenger
After downloading the mono file, I got the dreaded "windows cannot open this type of file" message. The file type is unknown and windows does not recognize it. Can anyone help.
As Scruffy rightly states, this is a Dolby Digital (AC-3) audio file. If you have a software DVD player such as PowerDVD, then that should be able to play it (try right-click, Open With). Also, if you have PowerDVD installed then you should automatically have the correct filters installed to be able to play the file in Windows Media Player.

Other players, such as Media Player Classic, include a built-in AC3 audio decoder.
Post
#246244
Topic
What's Original '77 and What's Not?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246244/action/topic#246244
Time
The jury is still out over the crawl thing. On the one hand we have highly regarded film and video authorities such as Laserman and mverta who say they spotted its fakeness straight away. And then we have the little bits of evidence such as posted by boris that suggest it is real.

To be honest, it doesn't bother me one way or the other. I know this will probably seem like a travesty to some of you, but I prefer the 1981 version with Episode IV, A New Hope, because it retains the consistency with Empire and Jedi.
Post
#246237
Topic
What's Original '77 and What's Not?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246237/action/topic#246237
Time
Sound mixes (English) for the original ANH:

1. Original Theatrical 70mm 6-track mix
2. Original Theatrical 35mm Dolby Stereo
3. Original Theatrical mono mix
4. 1985 digitally remastered mix
5. 1993 THX-certified digitally remastered mix

The original 70mm and 35mm Dolby mixes are very similar - the 70mm obviously having a "weightier" presence, but there are a few spots where the effects mix differs noticeably.

The mono mix was redone from scratch, and features the addition of stormtrooper and C-3PO lines, additional sound effects, and different ADR (e.g. Beru's dialogue and Luke's "Blast it Wedge"). See The Starkiller's Guide.

The 1985 digitally remastered mix was based on the Dolby Stereo mix. Threepio's line from the mono mix was added, and it was mixed with a wider stereo image (possibly to address the overly conservative approach used in early Dolby Stereo mixes).

The 1993 mix, as found on the '06 DVDs, was supposedly a combination of the best elements of the original 3 mixes, but mostly based on a downmix of the 70mm version. Some of the effects from the mono mix were added in, but they forgot the additional stormtrooper and C-3PO lines. Some additional new material was also added - see this thread for a list of differences between the 70mm and the '93 mixes.