OMEN-_-

Hey, I've got a question for you guys.

Do you think its better with these dual layer blu-ray releases to max out the image quality and only include the dts-hd audio or to sacrifice a bit of the image quality to add normal dts audio tracks or dolby 5.1 tracks etc.?

I'm asking because right now I'm maxing out the video bitrates so there's no free space left on the blu-ray after adding the DTS-HD audio. Is that a problem for any people here, to only have the dts-hd audio? I don't have a dts-hd surround sound system but my tv doesn't have any problems playing the dts-hd audio through its speakers, so is there really any reason to add other inferior audio tracks and waste space needlessly?

DoomBot said:

I'm glad to hear your on your way to completing them all.

It must take along time to re-encode a blu-ray movie close to 20 hours maybe? Not sure what software you use is it Adobe Premiere or Vegas Pro?

 

Well i'm still looking forward to this massive release of movies Omen. More so the original trilogy and Lord of the Rings.

Depends really but when i'm doing only colour regrading with the settings set at highest quality with the program I use, a normal length film of say 2 hours takes around 16 hours for my computer to reencode. That gives me pretty much identical image quality to the blu-ray, at least as far as my eyes pixel-peeping on a 30 inch monitor can tell.

That said, encoding the Phantom Menace required a lot more time than that but I don't want to scare you guys haha

As for what program I use, it's my little secret (mostly because I don't want Dark Jedi, Harmy and other editors here taking the piss) but its neither of those two you mentioned, I tried changing to Vegas Pro recently and it seemed way too complicated for me. I haven't tried Adobe Premiere but I'm guessing its also very complicated with a steep learning curve. I know these two are meant to be the benchmarks in colour grading/editing/effects but I'm very satisfied with the quality i'm able to get with what I use. I'm a simple guy so I like to keep things simple. :)

Funcha said:

I've been forgetting to ask, what have you been using for video for original theatrical scenes not represented in the special edition? Uprezzed gout or rotoscoping in elements? Thinking of the original transition in Mos Eisley replaced with the bad Jabba scene in the SE specifically.

For the Mos Eisley transition, neither of those two options, I just implemented a left to right soft wipe between the two cuts much like the other wipes found in the film, fits very nicely and doesn't draw attention to itself. The only scene that comes to mind where I have no choice but to use the GOUT is Lapti Nek, which I will be definately including.

Just a little update guys, I haven't had much free time this week to put towards this project but I have managed to finish reencoding and improving the Phantom Menace blu-ray transfer, so that's six films now done, leaving me with only the original trilogy with little bits here and there to finish off.

You_Too said:

That movie should be entered in Guinness book of world records for the most excessive use of DNR ever.

It certainly is a very fine specimin of DNR.

I've never seen anything quite like it and that includes very strong showings from Padme and Qui Gon in TPM.

Just to add my tupence i'd like to say that I kind of agree with what vbangle said in post 703 with regards to this thread. The words 'spamming' and 'broken record' have certainly crossed my mind numerous times in the past.

What's with constantly spamming in consecutive posts about a blog that's not even a part of this forum? Why not just stick to sending PMs to people that you think might be interested and leave it at that?

The demands that people comment in your blog or get culled is also over the top and totally unnecessary IMO. I agree 100% with what Harmy and Dark_Jedi said about this, you shouldn't be trying to force people to comment, that's just counterproductive.

Having my own SW project that I'm working on here, I can sympathise and understand perfectly you wanting more feedback from people, I certainly like hearing back from people, it helps keep me motivated, but forcing the issue doesn't help anyone and just breeds resentment IMO.

Like Dark_Jedi said, I think you should just relax and do the project for yourself more than anything, not for the attention or approval of others. When you post new progress in your blog, I'm sure that people will post their thoughts without you forcing their hand.

haha, I found it! For all those not yet fully aware of the evils of DNR, here's the Arnie screenshot from the predator ultimate edition that I was talking about earlier with You_Too:

http://www.darkrealmfox.com/film_reviews/wp-content/images/predator_ultimate_pics/predator_7.jpg?9d7bd4

Stinky-Dinkins said:

dlvh said:

Harmy's version 1.0 doesn't have this greenish tint in it, and looks much better. I am attempting to show a comparison screenshot.

 

 

The second shot's grading does definitely seem off in comparison..

I used to bug Harmy constantly about his version 1.0 being too yellow IMO but at christmas I had a change of heart about how to colour grade the original trilogy and came to a gradual acceptance that the trilogy is meant to be more yellow than i'd been previously thought.

I just had a look at how this shot looks with my most recent colour grading and it looks exactly like his version 1.0 now. Go figure.

You_Too said:

Interesting. And it's also weird how bright all shots are. Even ANH looks much less crushed in the shadow detail.

I found one shot with a lot of compression artefacts though: http://ninfo.eu/wp-content/gallery/StarWars/Episode.4/StarWars.Episode.4.39.jpg

So all of them can't be from a digital intermediate.

Maybe some kind of pre-release promo discs?

Perhaps. I'm pretty sure that TPM and AOTC are from slightly unedited digital intermediates though, there are definately screencaps from both those films that don't fit any releases. Seems only the Prequel Trilogy screencaps are taken from HQ digital intermediates, which would make sense because they are so recent and the last two were shot digitally.

Those Star Wars shots just look like they were taken straight of the 2004 lowry masters (they have the same fake looking frozen grain) that are brightened and have reduced contrast relative to the blu-rays, nothing special there IMO. I'm pretty sure the blu-rays have all that shadow detail as well if you brighten them and reduce contrast. The blu-ray releases look exactly the same image quality wise. I would love to see LF in future do a proper 2k or even 4k master of the star wars original trilogy, I think it would add a lovely 'filmic' feel to these films from all the natural film grain that would appear.

Okay, quick update on the HQ phantom menace screencaps of origins unknown. I was looking around on for more of those HQ TPM screencaps and came across this site: http://ninfo.eu/category/star-wars/

It has all the previous TPM screencaps from fanpop and a lot more, including screencaps from episode 2, 3 and 4. The AOTC screencaps are also much more detailed than the DNRed AOTC blu-ray so I did a little bit of investigating, trying to match up the screencaps to the blu-ray/hdtv transfers.

What I found pretty much seals it for me. Some of these screencaps are impossible to match with the blu-ray or hdtv transfers because they seem to be taken from longer cuts of the same shots. What this leads me to believe is that these are taken from an unedited (or at least less edited) digital intermediate, making it impossible that they are from an actual blu-ray release somewhere. Damn.

You_Too said:

OMEN!-_-! said:

Is that a rhetorical question you're asking there You_Too? Do you know what the source is?

No, I have no idea. I'm just wondering what the source is, if now both the blu-ray and the 3D version has the DNR.

Yeah, me too.

As I said before, they could be promotional shots for the 3d phantom menace cinema release, only the screencaps have got the black bars on the top and bottom included, suggesting they are actual screencaps from a hd encode formatted in the correct ratio for blu-ray.

You_Too said:

Yeah, and those screencaps are overexposed and the black level is higher than zero. I wonder what the source is?

True but that can be fairly easily fixed IMO. The detail scrubbed away by the blu-ray is there for the most part which is what matters most. Is that a rhetorical question you're asking there You_Too? Do you know what the source is?

You_Too said:

Unfortunately, the mainstream doesn't care about it. Many people seem to think it looks good when all detail in a picture is smudged. Sad but true.

I remember when reading about Predator ultimate hunter edition on blu-ray. (You probably know it's one of the worst cases.) One customer on a site here in sweden wrote "The DNR is in my opinion a fantastic solution which I would love to see in more movies/releases."

Yeah, I remember the whole business with the predator ultimate edition. God, that picture of arnie with his cigar at the beginning of the film that was going round was absolutely awful, like a waxwork from Madame Tussauds. I had never seen anything quite like it again until I saw Liam Neeson and Natalie Portman in some scenes of The Phantom Menace blu-ray, just as bad as Arnie was. Absolutely awful. So much for LF three levels of QC.

As for that comment from the customer on the swedish site, one can only shake ones head. Really leaves you speechless.

You_Too said:

OMEN!-_-! said:

Talking of the DNRed TPM blu-ray transfer, I was looking on google and came across what look like screencaps here: http://www.fanpop.com/spots/star-wars-the-phantom-menace/images/27341708/title/phantom-menace-screencaps-screencap .The quality of these look nice and filmic, with clearly noticable grain.

Except this shot: http://images5.fanpop.com/image/photos/27300000/Phantom-Menace-screencaps-star-wars-the-phantom-menace-27341714-1280-720.jpg

That's some heavy DNR and EE all over the place.

ha ha, true, there is some DNR, but its looks much better than the massively DNRed blu-ray transfer, believe me. I can see fine grain and extra detail in basically all those shots that just isn't there on the blu-ray.

Take this shot for example: http://images5.fanpop.com/image/photos/27300000/Phantom-Menace-screencaps-star-wars-the-phantom-menace-27341683-1280-720.jpg

There isn't a frame like this with that fine grain and detail in all the blu-ray. I'm not a big fan of the colour grading of a lot of the screencaps though, too green, that would definately need to be corrected IMHO.

Hey Cobra, I currently taking a break from the original trilogy and trying to improve the incredibly DNRed Phantom Menace transfer from the blu-ray. Unlike AOTC, The Phantom Menace german hdtv stream doesn't help at all to improve the transfer. While it has a lot more grain than the blu-ray and therefore looks more like 'film', its not fine grain but very coarse, the details and colours are very soft and blurry and its filled with spots and dirt everywhere. Of course, theres also the fact that the german hdtv has been massively cropped relative to the blu-ray.

I have found a very interesting way to get more detail out of the TPM blu-ray transfer but the encoding really is taking an AGE (this is on a powerful workstation I built only a few months ago), which is to be expected I suppose because I'm trying to create detail out of nothing and am therefore setting all the encoding settings to maximum quality to try to suck out as much detail as I can. I'm pretty pleased with the results i'm getting (a clear improvement on the blu-ray transfer IMHO) but its going to take a few more days to encode the whole film.

Talking of the DNRed TPM blu-ray transfer, I was looking on google and came across what look like screencaps here: http://www.fanpop.com/spots/star-wars-the-phantom-menace/images/27341708/title/phantom-menace-screencaps-screencap .The quality of these look nice and filmic, with clearly noticable grain. They were uploaded two months ago. Does anybody know whether these screencaps are taken from a blu-ray version of the film in another country that i'm not aware of or are they just part of the promotional material of the 3D release of The Phantom Menace in the cinemas?

Incidently, from what I have read, it seems the cinema transfer is identical to the blu-ray and has been DNRed to high heaven. I'd imagine that that DNR must be pretty painful to watch all enlarged on the cinema screen, especially in 3D...

Getting back to your second question though, i'll be releasing these one at a time as I get each one uploaded. The first will be the LOTR films in order (mostly due to it having been released first on blu-ray and FOTR EE being the film that needed its transfer modified the most), then the Original Trilogy in order and lastly the Prequel Trilogy in order.

Harmy said:

You realize you can't just use any existing tracks as they are, right? Any sound you'll decide to include, you'll have to edit the same way you'll edit the video. So for example, when you keep the SE additions in Mos Eisley but cut the slapstick, you won't be able to use either any original mix, nor any SE mix. I'm just saying this because to this day I still don't get sound editing myself, it seems really difficult.

Hey Harmy, thanks for the heads up, yeah I do realise, i've done the audio editing for the original trilogy with all these changes before (excluding all the extra blu-ray changes of course). Around the start of last year, before the blu-rays were announced, I created audio tracks for the original trilogy, using the sky hdtv streams as the video source, mixing the SE 2004 dvd audio tracks with the GOUT audio tracks.

Its quite tricky at first to make it fairly seamless at the cut points but once you get the hang of it, there are a few tricks you can use and its actually a lot easier than video editing and colour correcting IMHO and FAR less time consuming. I'm actually really looking forward to the audio editing part of this project.

hairy_hen, I meant no offense, the parts from your mixes that i've heard are great. You did a fantastic job with those 70mm mixes. I was just honestly answering DoomBot's question. I don't want to mislead people into believing that i'll automatically be using your mixes and creating false expectations.

Unlike Harmy I'm not trying to make a 100% accurate theatrical recreation of the original trilogy, so how it sounded when it came out in the theatre and recreating that on blu-ray is not my main concern.

I'll just listen to both the GOUT audio tracks and your mixes, see which appeals to me more and use that one (the most emphasis will be put on how the score sounds on each) . Hell, i've left around 6GB for audio on each film so I probably could even include both with lossless pcm audio if I wanted to.

And like everybody here hairy_hen, I must say that i'm very much looking forward to hearing your new lossless tracks. Hopefully you'll have them finished soon enough that they would be available to put them on these OT blu-rays.

DoomBot said:

How's the audio part going on this project? Are you  still making a different soundtrack than the blu-ray?

 

So you worked on Attack of the clones and revenge of the sith i had no idea?

What kinds of changes are you making or is it only regrading? If there's a forum just direct me there if you want.

 

 

The SW prequels will have the same dts-hd soundtrack as the blu-rays. The LOTR films again will have the same dts-hd tracks as the blu-rays. With the original trilogy however I'm definately not using the dts-hd of the blu-rays (too much emphasis on sound effects to the detriment of the music IMO)  I'm planning to use either Hairy_Hen's mixes or the GOUT audio tracks themselves, most likely the later because they are the original audio tracks.

As for what changes to AOTC, it has be edited to be the same as the theatrical release (the order of certain scenes were changed in the blu-ray to its detriment IMO). The transfer in general, the detail and colours, are much better than the blu-ray as well, due to using the hdtv streams as a source.

ROTS has had slight colour grading to get rid of the teal tint but apart from that, its pretty much the same as the blu-ray, which I felt was a very good transfer.

Thank you vbangle and DoomBot for your kind words. I just wish more people interested in this would provide feedback! Its gives me new ideas and keeps me motivated as well. I don't know how many lurkers there are following this project so if you guys could chime in with your thoughts, that would really help me out and motivate me to finish these and get them up asap.

No need to worry on the commitment front with regard to this project as well, so no more 'ifs' please with regards to these releases being released. These WILL be released because I haven't put the hours in that I have to not share what i've done. If I can't get a fast enough connection where I am to make it plausible, I WILL find another way, so have some faith people! :)

In terms of films, FOTR, TTT, ROTK, AOTC and ROTS are completely finished (at least until I change my mind about something again... Fingers crossed that won't happen, for the sake of my sanity).

The others have little bits here and there, mostly to do with lightsaber colour continuety (making Vader's lightsaber red again in all his scenes for example), that have to be finished. Unfortunately RL commitments keep me from pouring as much time as I would like into these projects. Also keep in mind that I have been working on 9 films concurrently, it takes a lot out of you. I can't imagine how Peter Jackson was able to shoot all three LOTR films in one go and keep everything straight in his head, absolutely amazing.

Darf Muffy said:

ROTJ's comparisons look very nice indeed there Omen, hope to see those stills in motion some day, lolz.

Patience, grasshopper. ;)

Interest in this SW project based of the amount of feedback has been very limited to say the least so when I am able to get these up, I'll be honest with you guys, the LOTR films will be at the top of the list, firstly because its the first project I worked on and FOTR EE is the real reason why I started this colour correcting business in the first place. Secondly and most importantly, Fellowship of the Ring Extended Edition is the only film out of the ones in question that REALLY NEEDED its transfer modified IMHO, all the others are colour changes or edits that the majority of people will not even notice/won't care about.

The way I got round this personally was to make the change between two colour grading settings more gradual on all the wipeouts, changing the colour slightly frame by frame, so its far less noticable. Perhaps Harmy could do the same thing?

Darf Muffy said:

:D very glad to hear your opting for BD-50 there mate this needs to be on the highest grade you can get and total agreement on those changes.

Did you get my PM I sent over Omen ?

Hey Darf,

Couldn't agree more about maintaining the highest quality. Have you checked out the Return of the Jedi comparisons? Like what you see?

Looking at those ESB comparisons I may have been playing it a bit safe with Empire Strikes Back so as not to blow out the highlights too much. I'll try regrading it tonight to closer match the levels of SW and ROTJ and see how it looks.

Sent you a PM just now.

Harmy said:

OMEN!-_-! said:

Harmy said:

OMEN!-_-! said:

Are you making these releases to be enjoyed by viewers or simply as a 100% accurate reference for future generations of what the theatrical print looked like when it came out in 1977? Optimally the answer would be both but if push came to shove, I would prioritise the former rather than the later and think you should do the same.

Maybe it's selfish of me but I am making these first and foremost to be enjoyed by me and second to be enjoyed by others that enjoy the same things I do. I enjoy watching films that look and feel like they were made when they were made and like they were shot on film. An occasional spec of dirt, burn mark, matte-line or colour inconsistency add to that feeling and enhance the experience for me.

Fair enough, I can definately see where you're coming from. I disagree about purposely keeping noticable imperfections in a film that you have the ability to remove but agree 100% about ultimately having to please yourself and no one else. Probably the only way to stay sane with a project of this sort of scope. I'll stay quiet now (at least for the time being hehe ;) ).

Well, that's the thing though, how far does a noticeable imperfection go? Is it a matte line, is it a bad rubber mask, is it a spaceport consisting of only two streets lacking digital dinosaurs or an unconvincing model shot? Lucas had the ability to remove all those things that were imperfections in his eyes and he did it and that's why we're all here. There are many people who see grain as an imperfection. It's just not that easy.

Everything you mentioned there I see as technological limitations of the time and not imperfections. GL felt the need to 'update' them but they were great as they were and didn't stop Star Wars being the massive hit it was.

Colour inconsistencies are imperfections though because they take you out of the reality of the film's world, irrespective of whether it was shot in 1977 or 2012. The laws of light haven't changed since the 1970s, the lighting in the same location can't change dramatically from one shot to another unless a new light source is clearly introduced and shown in the film, our brain won't accept it and will not be able to suspend disbelief, kicking us out of the carefully crafted world that the filmmakers have created for us as viewers to immerse ourselves in.

Burn marks are also imperfections IMHO because they are not part of the film itself but something that gets added later in production so it has no place in the film because it reminds the viewer of the fact that the film is exactly that, 'a film', rather than what the filmmakers intend, that you forget that you're watching a film and that it's instead like you're looking through a window into another world you never knew existed, just as real as this one.

I'll shut up now.

Harmy said:

OMEN!-_-! said:

Are you making these releases to be enjoyed by viewers or simply as a 100% accurate reference for future generations of what the theatrical print looked like when it came out in 1977? Optimally the answer would be both but if push came to shove, I would prioritise the former rather than the later and think you should do the same.

Maybe it's selfish of me but I am making these first and foremost to be enjoyed by me and second to be enjoyed by others that enjoy the same things I do. I enjoy watching films that look and feel like they were made when they were made and like they were shot on film. An occasional spec of dirt, burn mark, matte-line or colour inconsistency add to that feeling and enhance the experience for me.

Fair enough, I can definately see where you're coming from. I disagree about purposely keeping noticable imperfections in a film that you have the ability to remove but agree 100% about ultimately having to please yourself and no one else. Probably the only way to stay sane with a project of this sort of scope. I'll stay quiet now (at least for the time being hehe ;) ).

Harmy said:

Yeah, I know there's a little bit cropped there, but it's pretty negligible. As to the colours, the green tint is actually still quite moderate compared to the actual IB print. And the original was wildly inconsistent as well.

Fair enough. I personally find that these inconsistencies take me out of the film, irrespective of whether it was part of the original theatrical print or not, a bit like the burn mark in one of your your previous clips that also took me out of the film (i'm glad you decided to remove it, you made the right choice IMHO).

The most important thing of all to me is not to be taken out of the film, so I would remove anything that causes that, no questions asked. If I was you, I would remove any colour inconsistencies/burn marks etc. When original theatrical print accuracy starts to detract from the film's enjoyment, I think that a tiny bit of that accuracy should to be sacrificed to keep that enjoyment for viewers as high as possible, because when all is said and done, Star Wars is a film, entertainment that should be enjoyed as much as possible by its viewers. Nothing should stand in the way of that. Nothing.

These films are meant to be enjoyable escapism at its very best, sacrificing that to be so 'accurate' seems counterproductive to me. Are you making these releases to be enjoyed by viewers or simply as a 100% accurate reference for future generations of what the theatrical print looked like when it came out in 1977? Optimally the answer would be both but if push came to shove, I would prioritise the former rather than the later and think you should do the same.

Here's another example of colour inconsistency on the workprint that takes me out of the film. I have checked this scene on the blu-ray and my regraded version and while the lighting is slightly inconsistent, it is very much within acceptable limits of colour continuety. Your workprint is not IMHO:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/107159

It is of course your project so its your call. You know my position so I will say no more on the matter.

Harmy, I just checked out this latest workprint (big file!). I love the beginning bit with the tantive IV being chased by the star destroyer and the starfield looks very cool. The way you've restored the lasers to their former glory is pretty amazing.

However, when it switches to the interior bit of the tantive, there are a few colour inconsistencies IMO, switching from the first shot of the droids with an orange feel to a green feel and back and forth a few times. I've posted a comparison below of one of the more obvious examples of what I mean:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/107151

Overall the workprint looks too green to me in many places as well but if that's how the original print looks and the colours are finalised then there's nothing left to say I suppose.

Anyway, another thing I noticed was that the bottom of the frame on the workprint seems to be cropped a bit relative to the blu-ray. Just letting you know in case it wasn't intentional and you cropped the bottom off a bit by mistake while encoding.