logo Sign In

Moth3r

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

Post History

Post
#138706
Topic
My 1997' SE laserdisc transfer set - including extras.... (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/138706/action/topic#138706
Time
Screenshots from Dark Jedi's DC transfer have been added HERE.

As you can see, it's a good letterboxed transfer with a level of detail comparable to the EditDroid and TR47 versions. Tonality is good, although perhaps white level is a little too low (shot 4). Colours are maybe a little oversaturated (shot 2), altough this is my own opinion, others may disagree. As with the TR47 version, there are some visible artefacts caused by DV chroma subsampling (shot 3).

This transfer has not been IVTCed, and is therefore encoded as 29.97 fps. Nothing fundamentally wrong with that, but a more efficient encode could have been obtained using IVTC and a 23.976 framerate.
Post
#138335
Topic
Feedback Wanted: for my ANH dvd test clip
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/138335/action/topic#138335
Time
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
Then why is it that when I deinterlace in virtualdub the fields are blended together making a blurred progressive frame if the video is already progressive? Because a field blend deinterlacing filter is a "destructive" deinterlacer, intended for deinterlacing video that is truly interlaced - such as camcorder footage.

Originally posted by: Arnie.d
This is not true. If PAL is progressive already why can it be deinterlaced? Deinterlacing means making it progressive. PAL can be interlaced or progressive. I have lots of PAL interlaced dvds. Almost every camcorder films interlaced.
OK, captures from TV or a camcorder - i.e. from a video source - will be truly interlaced. If you want to deinterlace, e.g. for viewing on a PC, you must use a destructive deinterlacing filter on it.

However, PAL video from a film source is created with 2:2 pulldown - that it, the first two fields come from the first frame, the next 2 from the second, and so on. Assuming the capture card is working correctly, every 2 fields should make the original full frame in your AVI.

On the odd occasion when something is not working correctly, to de-interlace a PAL film-sourced capture you should use a non-destructive deinterlacing filter such as this one. Basically you can consider this as IVTC for PAL.

Originally posted by: Arnie.d
Is there a program that can test if an avi is interlaced or progressive
Yup, it's called virtualdub. Load the file, and examine frames with motion. If you see combing, then the video is interlaced.
Post
#138140
Topic
Feedback Wanted: for my ANH dvd test clip
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/138140/action/topic#138140
Time
Hmmm, maybe I'm wrong about then.

Or maybe it's because the output from the Canopus, being a DV capture device, is bottom-field-first interlaced?

Anyway, try encoding with "top field first" checked, offset line set to 0, but this time make sure that "progressive frame" is checked.

(Just noticed that my disc is encoded as bff, but no-one has mentioned any problems. Probably it doesn't matter for progressive video).
Post
#138114
Topic
.: The X0 Project Discussion Thread :. (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/138114/action/topic#138114
Time
So - is there any merit in a capture from one of the older laserdiscs, where this "dirt concealment" algorithm has not been applied, and trying to clean it up using 2005 processing techniques?

Makes more sense than taking the later transfer and trying to "undo" the algorithm to remove the motion trails.

However, I suspect the older laserdiscs suffer from other, more serious, defects in the transfer quality.
Post
#138111
Topic
Feedback Wanted: for my ANH dvd test clip
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/138111/action/topic#138111
Time
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
If I select "top field first" the video stutters heavily on my tv set.
What version of CCE are you using? I believe the correct settings are as follows:
2.50 you must uncheck "top field first",
2.67 you must set "offset line" to zero,
2.70 you must check "top field first" and set offset line to 0.

Finally downloaded part of your test clip; it looks very good - if you boost the contrast by around 45%.
Post
#138110
Topic
.: Citizen's NTSC DVD / PAL DVD / XviD project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/138110/action/topic#138110
Time
I suspected it might be the player itself.

Top of the range PAL players like the D925 and 2950 actually go quite cheap on eBay, you could end up paying £60 - £80 for a player that cost £800 when new. As someone who has bought three copies of the trilogy on laserdisc to get the best possible hybrid transfer, I'm surprised you haven't considered upgrading your player. Are you married?
Post
#138102
Topic
.: Citizen's NTSC DVD / PAL DVD / XviD project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/138102/action/topic#138102
Time
Citizen, hope you have a speedy recovery.

I've been impressed by your dedication to the OT preservation; it looks like you've produced one of the best transfers and you've certainly been working very hard. (You're trilogy will be out before I've finished ROTJ!)

In many ways your version will be superior to mine, however, here's a little constructive criticism:

http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/7530/moons0pz.png
(Left - Citizen, Right - Moth3r)

The left edge of this moon was the first thing I noticed when watching your XviD sample on a PC monitor. (The effect is more pronounced in the moving video than in a static image.) I would call it "edge tizziness" but I think that's an audio term. I don't know if this is caused by the multiple capture averaging, or if it's jitter or minor time base errors in the player.
Post
#137255
Topic
.: The X0 Project Discussion Thread :. (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/137255/action/topic#137255
Time
Originally posted by: Laserman
But anyway they will be different in that the PAL scene will be missing some of the picture, and will run at a different frame rate with the corresponding problem of everyone speaking as if they have had a very mild dose of Helium.
The audio on the UK VHS (and also I assume on the French Laserdisc boxed set with English audio) has been sped up with the pitch preserved, so the helium effect is no present.
Post
#137254
Topic
.: The X0 Project Discussion Thread :. (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/137254/action/topic#137254
Time
Originally posted by: Laserman
...
Also, the PAL versions are framed differently, with the PAL version cropped, so missing some picture. That means what is on screen may look better as you have extra resolution and a tighter frame, but it also means you are missing some of the picture completely , which isn't a good thing. If you have a TV with a lot of overscan, then you are really missing out bigtime. I think you may be overstating this issue. Decisions on framing were made by the telecine operators who did each transfer, just like if you saw the original films in the cinema, then the amount of picture you would have seen was based on the masking decisions made by the projectionist. "Missing out bigtime" would be comparable to the amount of image lost in watching a P&S transfer on a 4:3 TV!
Originally posted by: Laserman
...
If there was an X0 equivalent that could play PAL discs, then I would say the PAL transfer would outshine the NTSC transfer, but with the current PAL players available I'm expecting the result to be different. I've looked at the 925 and 2950 PAL players (both highly regarded) and in nearly every scene for ANH I prefer the X0 output once it has been processed.
If only...

Do you know anything about the Theta Voyager? I can't find much information, but from what I've read, it's an OEM combi player based on a Pioneer drive, from a small videophile manufacturer in the US. See here. Apparently it plays PAL laserdiscs and DVDs. LD performance is not up to the standard of the Japanese high-end X0/X9 players, but is comparable to the US high-end CLD-97. Still, even if I could find one for sale, I'm sure I wouldn't be able to afford it...
Post
#136566
Topic
Need Help with Capturing Problem "Tracking"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/136566/action/topic#136566
Time
It looks like head switching noise to me, although normally you would only see it affect ~10 lines at the bottom of the capture. Makes me think that this tape is not first generation, but a "copy of a copy". Have you tried other tapes, maybe better quality retail originals, and do you get the same noise?

I would hazard a guess that the reason you don't see this on your TV is that it occurs in the overscan region of the picture.

The solution is to crop the top of the picture, either during capture if your software allows it and your system is fast enough, or during post-processing.
Post
#133309
Topic
Info: Star Wars Executor Boxset VHS (1995)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/133309/action/topic#133309
Time
Originally posted by: Goose
...the difference between NTSC and PAL is quite noticeable- see Moth3r's transfers, for example. The difference between the DC set and the French laserdiscs cannot be fully attributed to the difference between the NTSC/PAL format - they are both from different masters, and whoever did the PAL transfer from the film print made a better job of it than his NTSC counterpart.

Doctor M & Citizen have shown that there is still a noticeable difference between an NTSC version direct from the DC transfers and an NTSC version converted from PAL.

Originally posted by: Observer
...what is so special about the rare french laserdisc english sountrack?
The set is not exactly rare, just very expensive. They are the only discs that contain the English soundtrack for the original trilogy at PAL speed in PCM form. (And they are still missing a few frames at the end of side 1 of ANH )
Post
#133114
Topic
How many passes?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/133114/action/topic#133114
Time
(Disussion continues from the review thread)
Originally posted by: bongloads
...the official Cinema Craft Encoder Manual DOES NOT SAY "image quality slightly improves each time encoding is repeated, but quality improvement reaches its limit at 3 ~ 4 times of encoding" (you probably pulled that from someone's extremely uninformed guide). Yes it does, in the manual for CCE-SP 2.50. And in Doom9's (extremely uninformed ) CCE FAQ it is stated that this also holds true for later versions. Of course it does.
Originally posted by: bongloads
But it DOES state that "image quality improves with each additional pass". Albeit a small increase in overall bitrate, it IS an increase.
Huh? Since when did an additional encoding pass increase the overall bitrate? The whole idea of carrying out multiple passes is to optimize the allocation of the available bits to where they are needed the most, at the expense of less complex parts of the video. The overall average bitrate remains the same. (Why I have to explain this to someone who claims to have extensive knowledge of encoding is beyond me.)

My laserdisc rips were encoded with 3 passes. I couldn't tell any difference between pass 2 and pass 3, but I did use a relatively high bitrate. (Also bear in mind that encoding video originally from a laserdisc source is less demanding than the sharper, more detailed image from a digital source).

In the opinion of the Doom9 FAQ author, anything more than 3 passes is just a waste of time. The DVDR Releasing Standards state that if the final average bitrate is over 4000kbps then 5 passes are required.

It would seem that a 9-pass encode is an excessive waste of PC resources for no additional advantage. In my opinion, the average bitrate is 10 times more important than the number of passes you use - which is why my DVDs have 192kbps AC3 audio (which incidently is the bitrate recommended by Dolby labs for 2 channel audio) to make more room available for the video.
Post
#132919
Topic
***The Official FAN CREATED DVD Reviews and Feedback Thread***
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/132919/action/topic#132919
Time
Originally posted by: bongloads
I've seen people use an ungodly low 3 PASSES for their Star Wars LD backups!!!! - And if you've ever used CCE extensively before, you would know that the more computing time you put in, the better your backup will be.
And if you've ever read the fucking manual for CCE, you might have noticed the sentence that says "image quality slightly improves each time encoding is repeated, but quality improvement reaches its limit at 3 ~ 4 times of encoding".

:: Zion - can we move all these irrelevant posts to keep Rik's review thread on topic please?
Post
#131026
Topic
Fanboy's Official TERMINATOR 3: RISE OF THE MACHINES Fan Cut Thread (unfinished project)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/131026/action/topic#131026
Time
I'll add my thoughts to this thread, although I don't think they will help with the proposed edit, it might be interesting to discuss a different viewpoint.

The Terminator is one af my favourite films of the eighties. Although I think that T2 and T3 are both reasonably good action flicks, I don't think either are fitting sequels. Here's why:

- In the opening text in the original film, it says the final battle would not be fought in the future, it would be fought in the present. That's 1984 - not 1991 or 2003.

- Reese, talking about the nuclear war, says "a few years from now". To me that would suggest judgment day is 1987-1989. 1997 is over a decade away from 1984, more than "a few years".

- The Terminator is supposed to be an infiltration unit - difficult to spot. Surely then they should all look different, and not all look like Austrian bodybuilders? The one that appears in Reese's flashback (flashforward?) is a different actor, and in fact, I've read that Henrikson was to be orignally cast as the Terminator.

- The 800 series are new (in 2029), replacing the old 600 series that had rubber skin. If Skynet was defeated then, how could they go on to develop even newer T-1000s and T-Xs?

- After Reese went through, the humans were supposed to blow up the time travel facility. "It's just him, and me". So how did all these other Terminators get through?

- And if only living tissue, or a metal skeleton surrounded by living tissue, can time travel, how can these "liquid metal" terminators be sent back in time?

- If in the future they had some reprogrammed T-800s at their disposal, why did they send a human back to 1984? (Oh, and if you could just knock my mum up while you're there, that'd be good thanks).

- Arnie only had about 6 lines in the original film (not counting the bits where the Terminator was impersonating someone else) and it worked in his portrayal of a relentless unstoppable killing machine. I'm not really happy with the friendly chatty Terminator that appears in the other two films.

- Silberman being a criminal psychologist in the original, then being Sarah's doctor in T2 and seemingly unable to remember anything about Reese also doesn't really fit right.

The only fitting sequel I would have liked to have seen is the war against the machines, the tide turning in favour of the humans, and the the final victory with Reese being sent back in time. But then again, this is just my opinion (and I thought Temple of Doom was the best Indy film, so what do I know? )
Post
#130835
Topic
.: Moth3r's PAL DVD project :.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/130835/action/topic#130835
Time
The starfield needs more blue in it.
The border to the Star Wars logo should be thinner and plain white.
The equivalent (not a direct translation) text in English is:
"The copyright proprietor has licensed the picture contained in
this DVD for private home use only and prohibits any
other use, copying, reproduction or performance in public in
whole or in part."
C3P0's arm should be resting on top of R2D2.
In the UK, it was certificate "U" (a green triangle with a U inside), not "PG".
Although the laserdisc was made in France, my DVD wasn't!

(This is the kind of thing that Metallaxis had to put up with when he did the cover... )