Sign In

The Dark One

User Group
Members
Join date
27-Feb-2005
Last activity
24-Dec-2005
Posts
79

Post History

Post
#96387
Topic
STAR WARS: the alt.binaries.starwars thread
Time
Hey gang,

Once I finish up the GKar set (I'm on RoTJ to re-start tonight) I plan on posting bh001 and bh002 to a.b.starwars. For info check out the "babyhum" thread...they are both very good additions to your collections.

If you have any requests for SW DVDs...you can make them here. I have a fairly decent Star Wars collection...and if I have them I'll oblige. My sorta' current list of SW DVDs is available via PM.

Soon we may have another helping to post the SW DVDs on a.b.starwars too.


Henceforth, I'll keep OT.com up to speed with what I'm posting on a.b.starwars in this forum.



Yours until the despised jedi are wiped out,
D.O.
Post
#96315
Topic
The Official babyhum Release Thread
Time
Hi Baby Hum,

First off, your documentaries are awesome! I just watched bh002 and what can I say? "Wow!" These documentaries are quite simply invaluable. I'm so glad that you are taking the time and effort to share these with the rest of us.

Anyways, I'm a regular poster of Star Wars goodies on usenet. If at all possible I like to get the creator's permission when I can before I post anything. Therefore, I am asking your permission to post bh001 and bh002 on alt.binaries.starwars.

I always include all .nfo files and full descriptions with everything that I post. Credit is always given.

Thanks in advance.


D.O.
Post
#95601
Topic
The Official babyhum Release Thread
Time
Hi there Babyhum Vader,

This is so cool. I got this on DVD about 2 months ago and shared a few copies. Well, the quality was hot garbage so I ran it through some filters and slapped on a menu and sent off a few more copies. I'm very interested in seeing the quality of your version. Capping it off digital broadcast versus VHS-to-DVD and all the noise that entails. Once again, my hat is off to you.

The interview is actually quite fascinating.

BH releases another rare gem!

D.O.
Post
#95595
Topic
Letterboxed Widescreen vs. Anamorphic Widescreen Discussion
Time
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi
"if someone were to purchase 16mm prints of the original trilogy, actually take it to a film lab and digitally restore it, and then release it to us in anamorphic widescreen on a DVD, that would be the neatest thing.

One of us ought to do that. "


It's been discussed, but you've no idea how expensive and time-consuming it is. BIG time!


If only Kevin Smith would help us out on that.


D.O.

Post
#95423
Topic
Letterboxed Widescreen vs. Anamorphic Widescreen Discussion
Time
First off, great thread Moth3r!

Originally posted by: RichKS

A friend recently bought a brand new 32" Sony WEGA flat CRT and I set it up for her (she basically said "My husband knows about plumbing and stuff, Rich, you know about this TVs, can you set this up for me?"). It replaced an old Philips 28" widescreen that she'd had for 5 years. I set it all up with RGB and the picture from her DVD player was amazing. When she plugged in her Sky+ (TiVo) and started watching that. Suddenly you could see all the compression and jaggies from the recorder that you just couldn't see on the Philips. I had to turn the sharpness down on the set so that it blurred the jaggies and they "disappeared".

First off, before I start blabbering on...I'm in "NTSC land" (although I do have region-free PAL-compatible DVD players for my viewing pleasure) and this is the info on my set: Sony KP-43HT20 43" Rear Projection HDTV Monitor

I see these digital 'artifacts' especially bad when I'm watching "analog" TV through my digital cable box (comcast - US cable provider). I can't watch sports on my HDTV unless its an HD broadcast because the compression is so distracting. On the 32" 4:3 TV (a bit more than a year old) I don't see any of these 'artifacts' at all...the same broadcasts look clear and relatively crisp.

Many retail DVDs also have these 'artifacts' also. They aren't anywhere near as distracting but I am able to see some "blockiness", especially in darker scenes. Most of the newer retail DVDs I've picked up, for example Hellboy, League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen (snore), and Saw (a total piece of s**t movie, but a good transfer) don't have these 'digital artifacts'...is this due to better compression algorithms or the fact that they are quite possibly purely digital movies?

OFF TOPIC N00b-style: One final question are there any higher-quality, attainable sources for the OT than laserdisc?


With an anamorphic encode though, I have the choice of how much I want to "unsharpen" the picture, just like I can decide how much I want to drink when I go out on the pull


Heh...well put.


D.O.
Post
#95421
Topic
<strong>The &quot;EditDroid&quot; Trilogy DVD Info and Feedback Thread</strong> (Released)
Time
Thanks MeBe, it all makes sense now. I guess that I'm not quite "smarter than the average bear" when it comes to video formats.

I went ahead and set the DVD player on my 4:3 to 16:9 and lo and behold...the stretching distortion as described on the site you linked to.

So this has led me to another question...shouldn't all new transfers of the OT be in anamorphic seeing how the "powers-that-be" are pushing the 16:9 sets? Try finding a 4:3 set bigger than 32", they are almost as rare as 8-tracks nowadays.

Also, with the emergence of inexpensive DL DVD burners and media that is rapidly falling in price, wouldn't the preferred primary format for the new DL projects (fingers crossed) be 16:9 anamorphic? I'll put it this way, on my 32" 4:3 I can't see much difference between pretty much all of the better transfers, but on the 54" 16:9 the differences are very apparent.

Let me know if I'm off in left field somewhere, or if I'm heading in the right direction.

D.O.


EDIT: From here I'll move all of these questions to the "Letterboxed Widescreen vs. Anamorphic Widescreen Discussion" forum
Post
#95417
Topic
<strong>The &quot;EditDroid&quot; Trilogy DVD Info and Feedback Thread</strong> (Released)
Time
Originally posted by: Karyudo

In a word, no. Letterboxing takes up less space, because it's easy to compress black. It takes more bandwidth to encode anamorphic titles, because there's more actual picture information. The black bars are still there, but they're much narrower.


Interesting...and thanks for the answer. Forgive me for sounding like a novice, I'm just now beginning to work with video. I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this though. Let's say one has a 120 minute movie, it would actually take up less bandwidth to encode large bars on the top and bottom (letterboxed) as opposed to very narrow bars (anamorphic)? I understand that solid black is easy to compress, but how can there be more actual picture information on anamorphic format as opposed to letterboxed format? Is it simply that the resolution is that much finer on anamorphic?

D.O.


edit: It looks like MeBe answered my questions on the very next post.
Post
#95414
Topic
<strong>The &quot;EditDroid&quot; Trilogy DVD Info and Feedback Thread</strong> (Released)
Time
Originally posted by: RichKS

HDTV hasn't really caught on in the UK the same way it has in the US, mainly I suspect because digital PAL transmissions over an RGB Scart cable look damn fine. While I'm not saying that the RGB signal we get to our sets is better than HDTV, it's not enough worse to warrant changing.

Glad I was helpful!

Rich


The TV usually (and I stress usually) will auto-adjust itself to fit each video source. It actually only works perfect 100% of the time for HDTV but it's a nice feature.

I read on BBC news last month that HDTV is indeed going to begin rolling out in the UK later this year. I imagine that digital PAL is similar to EDTV (enhance definition) which is quite fine, but it does pale in comparison to HDTV. A good HD broadcast in the 1080(?) format is almost three-dimensional...it will blow you away. I can't even go to the cinema anymore (except for one night this May) because the video quality is so disappointing. HDTV does have the tendency to make one become spoiled.

I recorded Hellboy in HDTV on my DVR (probably the best HD transfer yet IMO) and compared it will the retail dual-layer DVD of Hellboy and the HDTV broadcast has so much more resolution it was almost shocking. I did one better, I compared the look of the film between my 4:3 and my 16:9 (running back and forth was a drag though) and I honestly didn't see a difference in aspect. It's hard to tell because you can actually see the 'lines' in the 4:3 TV whereas you really can't on the 16:9. The one fault may have been I have the retail DVD on the 4:3 and the HDTV broadcast on the 16:9.

This leads me to wonder, what does Lucas have in store for the saga when the next-gen of DVDs (blu-ray or HD-DVD) come out? Will he release a legacy set with both the newest incarnations of the films along with the original renditions or will we have to wait until his kids inherit the business?

One more thing, I did try to notice the difference between anamorphic and letterboxed and to tell you the truth I cannot see much of a difference on the TV at 16:9 zoom. Letterboxed have a slightly lighter black at top and bottom, but that's all that I can see with my untrained eyes.

Anyways, thanks for the info and advice Rich!


D.O.


Post
#95186
Topic
<strong>The &quot;EditDroid&quot; Trilogy DVD Info and Feedback Thread</strong> (Released)
Time
Originally posted by: RichKS
D.O, that sounds like a pretty damn cool setup to me.

Its nothing too spectacular, but I like it. HDTV is incredible to watch...sports are awesome in HD. I still don't have 5.1 set up yet with the set, budget restraints and all. I only told what my setup is so that others, like yourself, could see what I was talking about.

Just curious: What's the "full" zoom mode, as opposed to the "wide zoom"? Is this the usual thing where one is the 16:9 mode you use for anamorphic DVDs and videogames, while the other is a stretched and distorted image where the edges of the picture get squished out?

Exactly.

It's interesting that you don't have either 14:9 or what a lot of European TVs call "subtitle zoom". 14:9 is a halfway house between 4:3 and 16:9, kinda chops a bit off at the top and bottom and doesn't fill the screen all the way horizontally. We used to have a fair amount of stuff broadcast in that ratio, but that seems to have stopped now (at least, I don't see that because I have digital TV which is broadcast in 16:9). Subtitle Zoom is the same as 16:9 zoom, but the picture is moved up so that if you're watching a 2.85:1 letterbox DVD, the top of the picture is at the top of the screen and all the black is at the bottom. That way, if there are subs in the black, you get to see them. It's telling that the whole time I had a TV that did that, the only thing I ever watched on it that benefited from that was the original trilogy. Newer TVs appear to be able to mimic this by letting you move the 16:9 image up and down, which is how I watched the Phantom Edit DVD. Neither mode really gets a lot of use these days to be honest though.


I think that you just taught me something here. I don't have the 14:9, but I believe that I can actually move the image up to allow subtitles to appear. I must have brainfarted for not seeing the use in this before. Thanks!

As far as I can tell, what you're saying is that an anamorphic DVD viewed on the Widescreen mode is the same aspect ratio as a non-anamorphic DVD viewed in 16:9 zoom?

That's what I would expect.


Exactly. That why when folks ask if something is anamorphic or letterbox I have watch it on my computer. On the Sony I really can't tell the difference.

But do me a favour and try this, hopefully you'll see what I'm getting at:

1) Get any anamorphic DVD. Preferably a well mastered one (Hellboy for example)

2) With you DVD player set to 16:9 display mode, watch a couple of minutes of it in Widescreen mode, taking advantage of the anamorphic-ness (I'm assuming this is how you're usually watching anamorphic DVDs)

3) Stop the movie and set you DVD to think you only have a 4:3 display.

4) Start playing again, with the TV set to 16:9 zoom.

Tell me you genuinely don't see a difference?


I do have Hellboy and I will try that (the wife is watching a show right now or I would have done it already). I will get back to you on this.

First off, thanks for answering. I saw lots of people debating anamorphic versus letterboxed and I didn't see the difference myself. I just figured, and correct me if I'm wrong, that letterboxing would actually take up more disc space versus anamorphic. I mean, you have to encode the black bands at top and bottom...that must take up disc space, no?

Secondly, I appreciate the trick that you showed me about moving the image up for subtitles. I completely forgot that the set is capable of that. D'oh!



D.O.

Post
#95084
Topic
Info Wanted: Screenshots from the original mono VHS
Time
How does one know that the VHS tape is the original? I mean, like if I wanted to see if I could fetch one up (flea markets, yard sales, ebay, etc...) Is there a UPC code, is there a particular cover, is there a copyright date, etc...?

I'd be interested in finding the original transfer myself and any tips on what to looks for would be very helpful.

D.O.
Post
#95034
Topic
<strong>The &quot;EditDroid&quot; Trilogy DVD Info and Feedback Thread</strong> (Released)
Time
I watched the EditDroid ANH again last night with a Sanyo progressive scan DVD player connected to a Sony 43" 16x9 NTSC HDTV info on the set here calibrated with Avia DVD Guide. The EditDroid image quality is very good. The blacks could be a touch blacker, but it is one of the best transfers I've seen yet.

Now, as far as anamorphic vs. letter-boxed, my TV allows 4 levels of zoom (16:9 zoom, 4:3, full, wide zoom). Anything 16x9 and/or anamorphic set to 16:9 zoom on the set produces the same aspect ratio. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see the difference in aspect ratio between this set and the gonzo set when both are set to 16:9 zoom.

I'm also able to watch PAL videos without any noticable 'distortion' using the 16:9 zoom and my region-free DVD player. When I watch PAL on my 4:3 set the image is 'crushed', but not on the 16:9.

Any info on whether my observations are correct or not?


D.O.
Post
#94945
Topic
<strong>The &quot;Farsight&quot; Trilogy DVD Info and Feedback Thread</strong> (Released)
Time
Originally posted by: Darth Mallwalker

Originally posted by: Laserman
So mallwalker, what is your favourite set currenlty? (Love that avatar)

Don't ask me -- I'm hardware-challenged !
My TV is 20" with only composite input using a generic cable that came with the $35 non-progressive player,
so I've got no idea which set has the sharpest picture.
I prefer Dr.Gonzo's colors, although my set is uncalibrated.
I like TR47's sound, but my stereo lacks ProLogic or any other surround flavor.
But the most important thing is I'm watching Star Wars at home, finally !
My Faces VHS Pan/Scan box (hey, it was a gift) is collecting dust
still in shrink-wrap because I never owned a VCR.
But now I can watch Star Wars at home !!!
Gonzo's set was my first, and still the one most frequently watched.

And the avatar I pinched from sifo-dyas....


A true fan!

Post
#94938
Topic
Thought on de-SE'ing the DVD
Time
Not sure if anyone's interested...but I'll be posting the GKAR SE trilogy on a.b.starwars in a bit more than a week. If you're looking for an 97 SE set to work on de-se'ing...this is the one. The quality is almost up there with the Reivax ANH and it's the entire trilogy.

btw...if anyone has the entire Reivax trilogy...PM me!

Anyways, I'll be posting 2 versions of "When Star Wars Ruled The World" (PAL and angrysun) and then I'm posting the gonzo OT...unless I get calls in here to do GKAR first.

Here's the specs (thx to Blaksvn):

The 1997 Special Edition Trilogy - The “GKar” Edition
- 3 DVDr’s
- Source - German DBS transfer
- Anamorphic Transfer

Tech Specs
- 3.71gigs, 3.68gigs, 4.29gigs
- Interactive Menus
- Video - 4-8 Mbps (average bitrate)
- Anamorphic Widescreen Enhanced for 16x9 Monitors
- Audio 1: German - Dolby Digital 5.1 (448 Kbps)
- Audio 2: English - Dolby Digital 5.0 (448 Kbps)
- Audio 3: English - Dolby Digital 2.0 (256 Kbps)



D.O.