logo Sign In

RU.08

User Group
Members
Join date
5-May-2011
Last activity
18-Mar-2024
Posts
1,361

Post History

Post
#1580437
Topic
Jurassic Park Theatrical Recreation Project (JPTRP)
Time

Please check your DM because I sent you the audio for that scan. It’s the speech bubble at the top of the page next to your avatar image.

It is not Team Negative One’s scan. They were given it to work on but they never made the release from which you got it. I won’t go into the internal details, but it was an English language print and the restored scan you have had both optical audio and cinema DTS synced to it already in English. Somebody removed it and uploaded it with foreign audio. I’ve sent you a link to the audio so you can download it and sync it.

That said, the scan is old. It was done in 2014. The newer scans will blow that one out of the water in terms of quality.

Post
#1580399
Topic
Jurassic Park Theatrical Recreation Project (JPTRP)
Time

JRSSCPRKFAN said:

A new year, a new Jurassic Park Scan! This Jurassic Park scan will be a free for all scan, meaning that anybody and everybody can watch it for free! It uses the new Jurassic Park audio in perfect sync with a (muted) french scan. Experience the colors, grain, and open matte of the original Jurassic Park as seen in theaters in 1993.

I don’t mean to burst your bubble, but you don’t have a French scan. What you have is this scan with the English audio removed and the French audio synced by someone and uploaded somewhere. I’d have to check how the scan was paid for, but the guy that loaned the print for the scan doesn’t mind if you have a copy so if you want the original Prores just say and we may be able to give it to you.

That said, the colours are not right at all because the scanner used had limited dynamic range. No amount of colour correction will make it as good as the newer scans that are currently being done or worked on. It’s not actually a 4K scan either, it’s Bayer UHD … which is fine for 1080p finishing, but there’s a lot of detail lost. Don’t get me wrong, for 2015 the quality was acceptable.

Anyway, I remember someone uploading the scan somewhere with French audio synced a few years ago (a French blog I think), so I’m 99% sure that’s what you have.

Post
#1554898
Topic
Why Did Return Of The Pug (Puggo’s 16mm Preservation of Return Of The Jedi) get taken down?
Time

timdiggerm said:

Or Disney finally told the IA to take it down. Or the IA is upping their enforcement in light of their recent lawsuit issues.

The Internet Archives themselves has a strict proactive anti-piracy policy. The lawsuits were their own fault for not loaning 1:1 copies, had they just done that the lawsuits would have ended in their favour.

Post
#1549757
Topic
1968 Planet of the Apes 35mm scan possible project
Time

imsorrydave2448 said:

I’ve seen much worse, and I’m far more worried about the quality of the actual film itself than the color fade. Also I’ve never seen a full print of the original Planet of the Apes. Only people selling an incomplete version with a few reels, and other Planet of the Apes films. Do you have an archived link to the sale of that print?

It may be too badly faded for the color to recover even with the best possible scan. Even the best scanners in the world cannot cannot get full color separation because it’s just not possible with today’s technology. This is what the spectrum looks like with unfaded film:

Once that yellow peak has faded below magenta it can’t come back, not at the moment anyway and quite possibly never.

Lots of faded films can still scan though and recover good color, it just all depends on the extent of the fade.

And yes I can show you the ad send me a private message.

Post
#1549538
Topic
1968 Planet of the Apes 35mm scan possible project
Time

There is no way that a print that badly faded is worth $1,000 even if it’s in otherwise perfect condition. The last faded one I saw come up for sale was priced at $125 plus postage (from the US).

Send me a PM I’d be interested to know where you got quotes from and what you were quoted. 😉 With scanning price and quality does not always go together…

Post
#1545467
Topic
Original Jurassic Park Trilogy 35mm Preservation Project
Time

DarthWasabbi said:

Burnt bridges on purpose because that place was toxic, and vile. There’s a reason why I deleted every damn message there, and bounced the fuck out. You’ll never know.
Good riddance.

Toxic and vile?

It is not. I won’t stand for you slagging off my server. It’s got a good, positive vibe and it’s been for the most part attracting good people. There’s a reason you don’t see me spamming and promoting it everywhere - people who are interested find their way there and I don’t want just random people joining for the wrong reasons.

I had no ill wishes against you AdmiralNoodles. That said you decided to purposefully burn your bridges and that’s on you. You should own up to your own behaviour and apologise. I actually apologised to TGR97/Wedge over your behaviour so please take some personal responsibility of your own and make your own apology.

Here is what you claimed:

This project seems dead in the water, and the project host ran off with the funds.
Nothing new, nothing lost.

  1. The project lead is here. 2. One of the scanner’s representatives is here. Both HERE on OT and over on my Discord. 3. One of the Moderators of OT knows the scanner rep that I’m talking about and has many years of relationship. Same with me I know and trust this man. So claiming that there’s fraud is outrageous. TGR97 Has done nothing wrong. Scanning can take longer than expected, it’s happened MANY times before it’ll happen many times in the future. Case in point I thought I had a scanner for a print a couple of months ago, but he had retired suddenly without my knowledge and turned the business over to someone else.

TGR97’s scanner will only scan if the results are perfect, that’s why it’s taking a while it has nothing whatsoever to do with what you claim.

Post
#1542206
Topic
Toy Story (1995)– 4K 35mm Scan [WIP– Donations Still Needed!!]
Time

AwesomeJ said:

Agreed, however, when you compare both the Laserdisc and the DVD, if you overlay them both over each other in a side by side comparison (something I did in iMovie as a test), the laserdisc goes out of sync with the DVD very quickly. So yes you are right, the film was not “slowed down” or “sped up”. The film just gained and lost some frames in some shots on the film out. So yeah, it was rendered frame by frame for standard 24fps projection, its just that when Pixar were processing the film for celluloid, the Avid Video Composer caused the movie to gain and lose a frame in all of the shots.

That’s not how it works, the digital format doesn’t have a frame rate. You render it out to a series of images which has no frame rate, it’s just 0000001.dpx, 0000002.dpx, 0000003.dpx and so-on, there’s no way for it to gain or lose frames in that process. The printer doesn’t know about frame rates, or for that matter audio - all it knows is that it prints frame after frame to a negative that then gets processed, and then a colour-timed interpositive is made later to strike prints from. The DVD and Laserdisc won’t be a definitive source, they are many reasons they may not have the same frame counts as they may have been edited on tape (they probably were) we’re talking about editing together a 10 reel movie, potentially adding subtitles or text over the image especially for 4x3 where credits or other text may be cropped out, potentially doing a scene-by-scene colour correction and editing it back together as well. Plus I don’t know what print they used when they made them, for all we know there were random lab splices in it that had to be removed physically, or it had other repairs made with frames removed.

Post
#1542007
Topic
Toy Story (1995)– 4K 35mm Scan [WIP– Donations Still Needed!!]
Time

AwesomeJ said:

Considering the movie was rendered out at 23.97 fps (my source is Craig Good, who was the Supervising Layout artist for the film), the scanned film is most likely going to be the former frame rate.

I don’t know what you mean by that? Toy Story is 24fps it doesn’t matter how it was rendered in the computer before film-out. An example might be if you run a camera at 120fps for slow-motion footage, it was captured at 120fps but the film is 24fps.

Post
#1539911
Topic
Toy Story (1995)– 4K 35mm Scan [WIP– Donations Still Needed!!]
Time

AwesomeJ said:

I have some screencaps of a laserdisc copy that I color corrected a while back, so I don’t know if this is 100% accurate to the original theatrical presentation but I hope these help when the thing is finally scanned:

Laserdiscs are colorcorrected for the living room by the telecine operator, aka the colorist, like this:

Telecine - a brief guide.

So basically it has its own colortiming. The telecine prints are more expensive to make than projection prints, although they’re usually 16mm not 35mm, and they’re printed low-contrast so that they can be transferred for broadcast and/or home video (you can also transfer off the interpos or a dupe negative as those are also low-contrast film that will transfer acceptably on a telecine). For a bright film like Toy Story it may not look too different, but for films with many dark/night scenes those in particular will look nothing like how they look theatrically. Beauty and the Beast for example is really ruined by the home video colortiming. BATB is an example of a film that probably shouldn’t have been released to home video, but we are where we are and today everything now goes to home video eventually. Certain decisions are even made for both home video and broadcast at the time of filming, for example in Hollywood they shoot alternate scenes for broadcast where they know that something will have to be censored for US domestic TV.

For the theatrical prints the way it works is that the interpositive is colortimed and then when theatrical prints are struck the printer is fully calibrated for the film and the print is struck reel-by-reel. So for example if you’re printing 200 prints you print 200x reel 1 and then 200x reel 2 and so-on. Some prints will be intentionally printed 2 stops brighter and those are Drive-In prints (prints for outdoor projection). The interpos is struck off the original negative or off a dupe negative, in this case the original negative would have been a digital film-out (there may be more than one “original negative” if they made more than one film-out). Now the resolution Toy Story was outputted to wasn’t 2048x1556 so I don’t know if they upscaled it for the printer, or window-boxed it and then did an optical enlargement off the o-neg - either is possible and we should see if there was any attempt at “filmizing” it when it’s scanned.

Post
#1539625
Topic
Toy Story (1995)– 4K 35mm Scan [WIP– Donations Still Needed!!]
Time

TonyWDA said:

I never meant to cause any confusion. Until now, I had no idea about ScanStation’s software extraction option. Good to know.

The software audio extraction is pretty good, and better than AEO Light. But not all ScanStations have it, it was initially developed for the ScanStation Personal I think, for full ScanStations I think you just have to get support to enable it if they set it up for hardware-only optical audio (which requires the support contract to be paid and up-to-date). The professionals usually set up something dedicated to optical audio though.

zerocool said:
Did projectors have toslink/spdif out back in the day to allow for this?

I’m not a projectionist.

Post
#1539457
Topic
Toy Story (1995)– 4K 35mm Scan [WIP– Donations Still Needed!!]
Time

Catsyz said:

The print on the eBay listing does seem to have a Dolby Digital track in between the sprocket holes. But I agree that it would easier to use the laserdisc audio.

We don’t know if it will run or not yet though. It could quite literally be worn out now, Toy Story was a big hit and each print will have had hundreds of shows. If it still works you can record it off a projector.

Post
#1539435
Topic
Toy Story (1995)– 4K 35mm Scan [WIP– Donations Still Needed!!]
Time

TonyWDA said:

Yeah, it’s quite the hot topic in audio engineering circles. In this context, having as many audio options as possible is always best when all is said and done. It’s less convenient to get the Dolby 5.1 on the print preserved, but a lot easier to get the analog stereo track digitized using AEO Light— especially if the raw scan resolution is well past 2K. That would only be necessary if the scanner couldn’t (or simply didn’t) capture the analog audio along with the image scan or the sound on the capture was too hissy; unfortunately, LaserGraphics ScanStation units are kind of notorious for that. But all things in due time; I’m sure TristAndShout64 will cross that bridge when he gets to it.

Please don’t confuse Trist. ScanStations have two ways to transfer audio, the hissy hardware reader or software extraction that works better than AEO Light. But if you want the best optical audio transfer I can also get that at an additional expense. There’s no guarantee the SRD will play - it might, but it might not.

Post
#1534579
Topic
Toy Story on 35mm (Exciting news!)
Time

Yep the print is here right now sitting in my house, I should have a good option that can do the scan for Trist’s project. The film was already packaged for postage in what the seller called a “film box” and I can quite confidently say it would very likely have been quite damaged in transit. When we send it to Trist in the US it’ll be packaged more professionally and will cost a lot more.

Post
#1516887
Topic
Lord of the Rings 35mm (FOTR/TTT/ROTK/FOTREXT released)
Time

When a film is professionally scanned in 16-bit color as DPX image files, every single frame weighs in at 100 MB. With upwards of 175,000 frames in each film, a complete scan requires about 21 TB of storage (42 TB if you want a backup copy! And then you need at least another 21 TB of space to work on it – over $1000 just in hard drives is therefore required for every film). Having the film cleaned prior to scanning costs another $870 (plus about $75 shipping each way) and then the scanning costs between $2000 and $15,000, depending on where you send it.

Now, I would very much like some information for the scanning process of these films and whether or not they where cleaned up. Cheers!

I don’t know where you’re pulling all those prices from and numbers from, but they’re not accurate anymore (or they at least are not representative of competitive commercial rates and storage options). The price of cleaning varies wildly depending on where you go, and your weirdly specific price of $870 would equate to .054/ft if we’re talking 178 minutes of 35mm 4-perf. I know where to go for a much better rate than that.

Yes if you’re scanning 6K DPX 16-bit it’s over 100 MB per frame (around 125MB per frame I think), but that should not be necessary unless you’re dealing with very badly faded film. Backups should go on LTO-7 or LTO-8 tape (or even LTO-9 now) not on Hard Drives.

Feel free to join my Discord friend.