No, it wasn't the 5 star set, it was an auction for the original DTS theatre discs for the SE's of all three films.
Dwarfs or dwarves: both forms are equally correct; generally dwarfs is used when referring to little people (e.g. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs) and dwarves when referring to the mythological creature (Tolkien uses this form in The Hobbit).
I noticed that ring too. Don't know how distracting it would be in the context of the bigger picture.
Pleased to hear you will be fixing that patch of sky I noticed back in Post 480!
TV's Frink said:
xhonzi said:
2. Not building a second Death Star would be like never buying a second car. Yes, the Rebels found a flaw and exploited it to destroy the Death Star. Yes, it must have cost trillions of space bucks, and the loss of life must have been a tremendous set back... But seriously... if the idea was this good in the first place, a little thing like having it destroyed on it's maiden voyage would not convince you the whole idea was flawed to begin with.
The Titanic would like a word with you.
The Britannic would like a word with you. Oh wait - that sank too...
I recently bought an Ewoks tape off eBay UK to have a look at. Expecting it to be a PAL UK release, when I received it I was surprised to find it was actually originally from Malaysia.
I've not had a chance to look at it yet, but I don't think it's going to help; I believe Malaysia uses the PAL system so it's likely to also have the same field-blended standards conversion problems.
Pay It Forward
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/The-originaltrilogy-com-acronym-buster/topic/6810/
Might want to check that link again - the story has been updated.
From what I've seen so far, the PAL versions are going to be a bitch to IVTC/deblend, so the Japanese tapes will probably end up producing the best results.
I've not given up investigating options for dealing with the PAL sources, because 1) there is no NTSC source for Great Heep, and 2) I don't want to admit defeat!
Back in May, Jay told me the next major update would be "late August".
Until then, you will have to use one of the workarounds, i.e. use a different browser, or switch to the plain text editor in the forum preferences.
raphael said:
Great, thanks for the links/information, Moth3r.
Someone has also pointed me toward:
'Star Wars Theatrical V3 DVD'
Posted by...........: Dark_Jedi
Any idea how this one differs from the others?
Check the summary at the link I posted; this is the version listed as GOUT V3 - dark_jedi.
GOUT is the acronym for "George's Original Unaltered Trilogy" - the official 2006 DVD release bonus discs that featured the theatrical versions.
Indeed, can anyone explain, in a nutshell, what the basic differences are between these various versions (to save trawling through many pages and potentially hundreds of posts!)
For example, the despecialised is 'not 100% authentic'- how does it differ?
Harmy's Despecialized Edition is not 100% authentic because it's a reconstruction of the theatrical version - many elements (title crawl, screen wipes, etc.) have been recreated (in HD). More explanation here.
Closest to the 1977 version - see this thread:
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/A-summary-of-GOUT-sourced-Custom-DVDs/topic/11517/
Highest quality image - but not necessarily 100% '77 authentic:
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Harmys-STAR-WARS-Despecialized-Edition-HD-AVCHD-DVD9-and-NTSC-DVD5-AVAILABLE-see-1st-post/topic/12713/
retartedted said:
Here is an untouched example of the NTSC tape. http://www.sendspace.com/file/nxlmqn
Do you know of any good methods for IVTC that don't make the footage choppy with Avisynth?
The only good methods I have found have been Virtualdub filters, and I would rather get the majority of the load done with Avisynth if possible.
But if push comes to shove I guess I could just use Virtualdubs IVTC.
For some reason, AviSynth was reading the file as bottom field first, when it should be TFF. Insert a AssumeTff() command in your script before the IVTC, and the frame order is correct.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/f6ev2h
This is just a quick manual IVTC using DoubleWeave().Pulldown(0,2); automatic methods such as decomb or TIVTC would be more appropriate if there are any cadence changes in the video.
(I've applied a levels tweak as well, this is my preference but of course YMMV)
Still works on mine; think it has the latest update.
It can be a bit picky about file extensions and capitalization. Try using AVCHDMe to check/fix the AVCHD structure.
retartedted said:
I have read time and time again on places like videohelp, doom9 and digitalfaq that if you have an originally interlaced source (VHS) and you plan on displaying it on an interlaced device (dvd + tv) then don't de-interlace.
This is good advice, as you say for interlaced sources.
However this material is not interlaced, it's telecined. For telecined sources it is preferable to IVTC, if you can.
danny_boy said:
If my understanding is correct---The original 35mm stereo audio track as it appears on the the 1982 VHS tape(and laserdisc)only has 3 audio channels(if you run it through dolby pro logic)---Left Center-Right.This was how dolby stereo tracks were encoded onto VHS linear stereo tapes prior to 1984-85.
Up to this point the surround (4th)channel was missing!
After 1984-85 new VHS Hifi stereo tracks were released to the public that could be decoded through Dolby pro logic that would reveal that 4rth channel (the surround track).
Not quite.
Dolby tracks (Dolby Stereo® on 35mm film prints, or Dolby Surround on home video formats) have always carried the four channels.
Initial Dolby Surround decoders (c.1982) licensed for consumer use only decoded three channels - left, right and surround. It was the introduction of Dolby Pro Logic decoding (c.1987) that allowed consumers to also decode a separate centre channel.
More info here: http://www.dolby.co.uk/about/who-we-are/our-history/history-4.html
captainsolo said:
You can see if a simple cleaning with water or rubbing alcohol will work with vinyl surface noise.
Or try the PVA glue treatment:
Harmy said:
... this whole particular scene is pure turd in the GOUT, which I suspect may have to do with there being a lot of subtitles in that scene, so a different source was used for it:
The same IP source was used for the whole film. I don't think they chopped and changed sources for the laserdisc masters.
For ANH, the PAL master looks to be consistently better (in terms of having less DVNR applied) than the NTSC. It also appears to be from a different telecine session - colour timing, framing and certain dirt spots are all different.
For ESB, generally the NTSC master is better, except for the instances where bright lights are moving at speed which results in the weird artefacts seen in the Vader's lightsabre and the Millennium Falcon's engine. The noise reduction hardware probably had different settings for concealing light scratches and dark dirt spots.
We don't know at the moment what ROTJ is like.
We are also assuming that there are only two (THX) masters: the PAL masters used for the French, German and Spanish LDs and the NTSC masters used for the DC and Faces releases in the US and Japan.
msycamore said:
How do these look on the PAL THX Laserdiscs:
However, from the shot earlier:
msycamore said:
Some bad news... I wanted to use a median script in AviSynth for all the different LD-captures in order to remove all the random noise and dropouts etc. but it proved to be impossible to align them for some reason, the frame count differ slightly between them in different parts of the video (mostly just 1 frame difference) which I found weird, even between the three captures of the same LD. Could this have something to do with me IVTC'ing them before attempting this? (I've heard this shouldn't be a problem) or does it have something to do with how these LD's were captured in the first place?
Please help me out here if you have any idea what's causing this frame count difference.
It is quite normal for framecounts to be different between versions. However, three different captures of the same LD should line up frame-for-frame.
It may be caused by the IVTC process if you are using an automatic field-matching filter, that may give different results for the different captures. If so, do the multi-cap median before the IVTC stage.
It could also be caused by dropped frames in the capture. More common with VHS than LD, but I suppose could still be a possibility.
If you're using AviSynth, AvsPmod is good for lining up different files and finding where they differ. You can have three scripts open in three tabs and scan through the timeline of all 3 together.
Method:
29.97fps MPEG-2 source
-> decode
-> IVTC filter
-> re-encode
23.976 MPEG-2 output
Re-encoding a lossy source is never ideal, but keep in mind that encoding 23.976 progressive fps is more efficient than 29.97 hard-telecined fps (effectively, there'll be 20% fewer frames to encode). With a good MPEG-2 encoder, losses should be minimal.
No-one is insinuating that you tampered with the WAV files; hairy_hen is wondering if DialNorm was enabled when you encoded the DTS-HD audio (perhaps it is enabled by default in the encoder). If so, this might be the reason why the AC3 encode sounds louder.
If the MPEG2 stream is 23.976 encoded frames per second but with field repeat flags making the framerate up to 29.97, then yes you should be able to get the progressive frames output.
If, on the other hand, it is 29.97fps hard-telecined material, you will have to IVTC and re-compress.
The DGMPGDec manual explains this pretty well, but since you mention MOV I assume you're on a Mac?
As promised, here are the results of my scrutiny of images 4(b) (BT878 cap card) and 6(a) (LG DVD Recorder).
Firstly, the obvious differences - the DVD recorder faithfully includes the nominal analogue blanking regions (the black parts to the left and right of the image). This means that the aspect ratio is more accurate. If we assume that the test card is supposed to be a perfect circle, by my reckoning 4(b) has an aspect ratio error of 4.8%, while in 6(a) it is only 1.2%. It is of course possible to correct this, either by using the BT tweaker, or by capturing 704 x 576 then adding the NAB borders in post.
You should also be able to spot that the BT cap has more saturated colours. I didn't make any attempt to calibrate colours during the processing (only luma levels), but again this is not a big deal as it's something easily tweaked.
The comparison gets really interesting when you look at the images through a software waveform monitor. The LG recorder exhibits less noise in the luma midrange - the corresponding bars on the monitor are tighter, while the BT image has more line-to-line variability (zoom into the blue colour bar on 4(b) and you can see faint horizontal lines).
The LG image has more noise in the low and high ends of the luma range. There is a reason for this however - it is capturing a greater luma range than the BT card. The BT card tends to clamp the black and white areas, while the LG recorder captures and stores "super-black" and "super-white" luma values. Indeed, it manages to correctly capture the super-black strip in the PLUGE test pattern that appears earlier on the LD.
Looking forward to trying out the SAA7231 capture card.
There was a young guy named Dave,
Who dug up a whore from a grave.
She was mouldy and shitty,
With only one titty,
But think of the money he saved!
