Sign In

ScruffyNerfHerder

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
26-Jul-2012
Last activity
22-Jun-2018
Posts
144

Post History

Post
#1218738
Topic
Phantom Menace '99 - HD Theatrical Version by Chewielewis
Time

ChewieLewis, your datamoshing results look good. Do you have the latest version of Photoshop? The reason I ask is because I took your Coruscant frames into PS CC 2018 and ran the Shake Reduction filter on it and I think it made your image even better. The only issue is that it does create some weird artifacts on some edges, but if it’s only used for a few frames, it’s not too hard to make a Layer Mask and paint out the artifacts. That, plus using maybe less than full opacity of the Shake Reduction layer might help.

If you’re interested, send me a Private Message. I can either tell you how to run the filter, or since I’m a CC subscriber, I can do the process for you. Just a thought; you don’t have to take me up on it. Either way, keep up the good work. 😃

Post
#1214066
Topic
4k77 released
Time

Hi all,
I have had great luck playing the 4K version on my Sony UBP-X800 4K Blu-ray player via a portable hard drive into its front USB port. The DTS-HD Master Audio tracks worked perfectly on my surround sound receiver. It also plays just fine on my iMac via MPV player. So if anyone is having problems playing the video, you might want to try these methods. 😃

Post
#1207183
Topic
Aladdin 35mm (Released)
Time

little-endian said:

ScruffyNerfHerder said:
My point was that a near-field mix is created to sound better in a home. That’s all. 😃

Well, but you also put an assumption that the LaserDisc audio would have a near-field mix created to sound better at home.

And just in case I gave that impression unintendedly: I don’t know it any better for sure, so I am not claiming to know the truth here, just trying to get a discussion going to find it out.

Because from what I see and hear, and judging by the dynamics, the LaserDisc PCM track doesn’t feel like some compromised near-field mix to me so I would be interest why you guys apprently think so.

Fair enough. I’m actually not sure if the LD is a near-field mix or not. Someone earlier said it was, so I assumed that was correct. Either way, you’re right, it does sound great.

Post
#1207178
Topic
Movie Preservation and Home Media: An Opinion
Time

Williarob said:

As far as modern films go I really don’t see any reason why the Bluray should look any different to the DCP sent to theaters, though if I had to guess, I would say that it is because the studios are probably handling the bluray releases entirely unsupervised by the directors. I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that the studios just take the DCP, apply a blanket yellow, teal, or teal and orange LUT to it, then apply some standard Edge enhancement and DNR and call it done. That way it looks like all the other modern blurays.

While I definitely agree, there are some technical limitations that prevent a Blu-ray from looking exactly like the DCP. First is the color space, which is Rec.709 (Blu-ray) vs P3 (DCP); P3 is quite a bit bigger and has colors that Rec.709 simply cannot replicate. Of course I wish that they’d try a bit harder! (Incidentally, UHD Blu-rays can be in the P3 color space, so they can look pretty much identical to the DCP.) Also, DCP can support up to 12 bits of color vs. only 8 on Blu-ray. That can lead to banding. (UHD Blu-rays can support up to 10 bits, which is still a pretty big leap.) There are a few other differences, like DCP having 4:4:4 color vs 4:2:0 chroma subsampling for Blu-ray etc.

For what it’s worth, I know that you know all of this stuff, Williarob, so please don’t think this is a critique/rebuttal or anything. I’ve enjoyed your contributions to the site quite a bit. I just wanted to provide a bit more technical information for anyone else reading this thread. 😃

Post
#1205472
Topic
Aladdin 35mm (Released)
Time

I was simply trying to answer someone’s question about the terms near-field and far-field mix. My point was that a near-field mix is created to sound better in a home. That’s all. 😃

little-endian said:

ScruffyNerfHerder said:

Basically, as I understand it, a near-field mix is a remix of the theatrical audio for home theater. Near field because you’re near the speakers in a home theater, and in a far-field mix (i.e. a commercial theater) you aren’t. So, the Laserdisc audio is redone to sound better in a home, whereas the original optical track sounds better in a movie theater.

Thus I’d rather assume that it was in fact the LD audio which was originally created as the cinema master back then and not vice-versa. If they would have adjusted it to sound “good” on home theaters afterwards, normally that would have meant a reduction of dynamic range, not an increase as many nowadays low-end soundbar stuff (or worse) actually sound better with higher compressed sources. And given that it the mass market, no surprises here. However, the LaserDisc would predate that loudness-war era anyway so I wonder where the “near-field mix theory” comes from.

At least from what I’ve heard now, the optical track sounds like a decent attempt to reproduce the original master, however with all the limitations of these analog optical systems that time whereas the LD gives you the raw, dynamic deal.

Post
#1204015
Topic
What to do about 35mm Nitrate print c.1917?
Time

Cool find! Just be careful, as I’ve heard that nitrate film can spontaneously combust. Back in the old days, one of the major studios lost a ton of silent films due to that. It seems like that’s only likely to combust if the film is decomposing, but I’d take precautions just the same. See this link for info: https://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/technical_information/storage/storage_and_handing_of_processed_nitrate_film/default.htm#spont

Hope that helps! 😃

Post
#1199443
Topic
ALIEN 3
Time

Bluto said:

I can’t see any difference in either colour or contrast between the original and fixed footage from that YouTube clip, even with the slow motion footage. Am I missing something obvious between the two versions shown?

Bluto

Don’t worry, I thought the same thing at first! You’re really not missing anything because there’s practically nothing to miss. Basically the person just slightly changed the color of the xenomorph, and when I say slightly I mean slightly. It’s a VERY minor change. What really bugs me is that the uploader makes it sound like some profound fix. I was thinking that he/she would at least try and soften the matte lines, but nope!

Post
#1193969
Topic
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 - UHD IMAX Edit
Time

Hi railerswim,
Are you on a Mac perchance? The reason I ask is that Apple’s Final Cut Pro X just had an update that supports wide color gamut and HDR editing all the way through, including delivery in HLG or Dolby Vision. If you’re interested, or know someone who has a Mac, there’s some info at: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208229 It’s funny because I just watched a video on Youtube this afternoon that covered all of this. Hope that helps! 😃

Jedit: Ah! I see that you figured it out while I was typing. 😛

railerswim said:

I’m going to play around with some files tonight and see truly what Resolve and Premiere will accept. But I also need to make sure that the HDR metadata isn’t tossed in a conversion. Adobe Media Encoder hates raw H.265 wrapped in a MP4 or MKV container. Same with Resolve. I want to avoid Handbrake if I can because it’s a hog. I like ShanaEncoder but there isn’t much flexibility over the options, plus it tosses out some of the metadata as well.

My goal is to get this all back into an H.265 MKV with at least 10-bit HDR

Post
#1162427
Topic
Harmy's STAR WARS Despecialized Edition HD - V2.7 MKV IS OUT NOW
Time

Harmy said:

I hate to ask for donations, but I can’t currently afford to renew the license (I do the work for UPP as a freelancer and there wasn’t a lot of work these past three months and though there’s much more work now, after Christmas I could barely afford the rent), so if I want to continue working on Despecialized, I have to ask for donations for the software licenses. A yearly subscription to the whole Creative Cloud package is 725,85 € including tax - that’s about $900.

Hey Harmy, I don’t mean this to sound rude, but do you need to have the entire Creative Cloud? Personally, I have the Photography Plan, which is Photoshop and Lightroom, because I don’t need to edit complicated PDFs or make websites often, and I use Final Cut Pro X for video rather than Premiere.

Is it possible to just get by with the $19.99/month Single App plan (e.g. for just say After Effects), or do you need the whole package? Honest question; I don’t really know your workflow, and I’m just trying to be economical. Keep up the great work! 😃

Post
#1153655
Topic
The Force Awakens: 1.78:1 scenes in 2D?
Time

BobaJett said:

Well, im a day late and a dollar short on this thread, but I couldnt resist not giving my 2¢. My opinion of changing AR is 2 fold. First, I HATE IT!!!

Then you DEFINITELY don’t want to see Kong: Skull Island! I watched it last night via HBO streaming and the aspect ratio literally changed shot-to-shot for the entire film. It drove me nuts! Haha I don’t mind it if it’s for a scene here or there, as in TFA, but this was horribly distracting and amateurish.

Post
#1151864
Topic
Aladdin 35mm (Released)
Time

Superrayman3 said:
I’m not familiar with the terms near and far field however I can confirm both tracks are different mixes although both are very good quality in their own right.

Basically, as I understand it, a near-field mix is a remix of the theatrical audio for home theater. Near field because you’re near the speakers in a home theater, and in a far-field mix (i.e. a commercial theater) you aren’t. So, the Laserdisc audio is redone to sound better in a home, whereas the original optical track sounds better in a movie theater.

Hope that helps! 😃