logo Sign In

Zion

User Group
Members
Join date
23-Sep-2004
Last activity
13-Jul-2025
Posts
1,995

Post History

Post
#244718
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244718/action/topic#244718
Time
Once ours gets released, I'm sure others will take it and use it in their fan edits or whatever. You really can't stop anyone from doing that, especially when none of us hold any rights to these films in the first place.

Hugs and kisses? That's kind of a stretch unless you think the ZERO is a letter O. Which some people still do I guess, unless they're just calling it XO to try and piss us off.
Post
#244564
Topic
Star Wars Limited Edition Screen Captures.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244564/action/topic#244564
Time
NTSC screenshots are up. Thanks to THX and 88keyz for their hard work.

Originally posted by: 88keyz
Looking at these screen captures and comparing them closely to the PAL screen caps that Zion has already posted on his frame comparison page it is clear to me that the NTSC release is sharper and contains less noise than the PAL release.

I don't know, looking at them side by side, it's hard to tell a difference. Where are you looking specifically?
Post
#244528
Topic
Stormtrooper with 4 eyes ::( or Stormtrooper showing terrible IVTC/telecine artefacts
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244528/action/topic#244528
Time
Originally posted by: Mielr
I didn't watch the movie in slo-mo, I didn't watch it frame-by-frame, I just watched it, and enjoyed it. I think you'll find that there are a lot of flaws you'll thankfully miss that way. Personally, I think that whatever flaws that are evident are less objectionable than the flaws in the 2004 DVDs (Greedo shooting first comes to mind....)

And most people are going to be like you in that they don't really notice things like this. The sad part is that those of us who know the flaws are there are going to notice them every time and be distracted by them. I noticed the problems initially when I was watching at normal speed, however. Call it a keen eye, or a curse...
Post
#244478
Topic
Are the PAL GOUT DVDs upscaled from the NTSC masters?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244478/action/topic#244478
Time
Originally posted by: boris
Of course, someone who would describe the letterbox vs. anamorphic dilemma as a "little thing" wouldn't be bothered at all. Similar people couldn't care less about a potential significant improvement in video quality, so long as their widescreen display allows them to stretch their letterbox DVD horizontally to fill up the screen.
Zion, I'm not stupid. I've gotten so pissed off at seeing people here just dismiss the OUT as shit - before even seeing it - and then claiming that the crawl is recreated, that there should be PCM audio (name 1 official DVD with PCM audio?) whine, whine, whine. What would bother me is if we got an NTSC release, or an interlaced release.

But if you can't be happy with this Zion, if you can't be "mostly" happy with this release - then I doubt you'll ever be happy. I'm pretty sure that if they remastered it and released it in a pristine format I would be more disappointed due to the over-saturation, inconsistent colour, contrast and brightness that plagues the 2004 restoration.

It's good enough for me. And you know what? Personally - while I respect you Zion - I wonder how it could possibly be worth it to you spending soo much time restoring your X0 project, so that certain scenes may have a very slight edge over the OUT. I don't think it's worth that much time, blood sweat and tears. Also, I have more respect for Falle, Coov, Rikter and the other partakers in the SW covers thread - now that really is creative, and I think sometimes that it would never have existed if Lucas hadn't kept the OUT from us. And there's some great stuff in there - I've printed some of it too.

If you would rather spend 2000 hours restoring Star Wars from a laserdisc capture then to spend $20 to get the official DVD - well that's your choice. It wouldn't be worth it for me to do that, however... I have other hobbies which are more entertaining then removing defects frame by frame.

Anyway, I'm not trying to kill your passion for your project, I'm just saying my priorities are different, and if you can't see that then so be it - but I don't need to be flamed for my opinion.

I guess I struck the wrong chord there didn't I? OK, first of all, the second part of my comment was not intended to be directed at you. I was making a point that some people who don't see the anamorphic issue as a big deal also don't seem to care if they have to stretch the picture on their widescreen TV - or even notice for that matter. I did not intend to mean that you were one of those people. Personally, I can't watch anything in "fish eye" mode on a widescreen TV because it's way too distracting. Anytime my friends are watching a movie on TV, I'm the first one to point out if it's in the wrong aspect ratio, which is usually at first glance. Some people say they can't see any side effects of the DVNR like the ghosting shots I posted or the "4 eyed stormtrooper", but I notice that stuff all the time while I'm watching the films in regular motion. Did I "dismiss the OUT as shit" before I even saw it? In a way I did, yes. But if you go back and read what I posted, you'll note that I was the first person to point out that the DVNR would be present on these and, combined with the letterbox presentation, these were going to be subpar by today's standards. I was also one of the first to point out that these would be slightly more detailed than the even the PAL transfers, which was a good thing. So call me what you want - a vidophile, a quality nazi, whatever. I've been editing video for years as a hobbie - well before I ever got started on Star Wars. And to be honest, I'm in the X0 Project more for my own enjoyment than to please "fans". If people like what we do, that's great. If nobody else on the earth cared but us, it wouldn't change my attitude one bit.

The fact that they upscaled the NTSC video to create the PAL version means that they clearly had the time and resources to create a pseudo-anamorphic version. It especially bothers me that they didn't do it because I know how ridiculously easy the process is.

Post
#244455
Topic
Stormtrooper with 4 eyes ::( or Stormtrooper showing terrible IVTC/telecine artefacts
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244455/action/topic#244455
Time
It's there, you just have to use slo-mo if you can't catch it in regular motion. As someone who's gone through the whole film shot by shot and frame by frame, I can tell you that there are hundreds of shots that have the same problems. They all stem from the 1993 THX DVNR process that cleaned up the dirt. Interesting side effect, isn't it?
Post
#244064
Topic
Star Wars Limited Edition Screen Captures.
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244064/action/topic#244064
Time
Originally posted by: Moth3r
This is weird. Although the GOUT version has more horizontal detail, it looks like vertical detail has been filtered. Compare the width of the black line in shot 4:

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/3729/untitled1copyyc7.jpg

(GOUT - top, Moth3r - bottom. The increase in grain is also evident in this shot.)

So - is this loss of vertical because of the upscaling from NTSC to PAL? Please can somebody grab some comparison frames from the NTSC release?


I think before we start throwing ideas around llike detail has been lost or they added grain, we need to compare the GOUT to the NTSC Definitive Collection LD, which all versions of the GOUT look to be sourced from. It's one thing to compare it to a PAL transfer or a pre-'93 transfer, and completely another to compare it to the version it actually came from. When I have time tonight or tomarrow I'll post screenshots of a DC capture, unless someone beats me to it. (hint )

And THX, you are the MAN!

Post
#244059
Topic
First Impressions of the OOT ...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/244059/action/topic#244059
Time
Originally posted by: boris
Does it? You know if that cap was off the OUT then you would have had a point. As it is, here is a real cap of that frame from the OUT - captured with VirtualDubMod, unretouched, just resized:

http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/7151/outcapxv3.jpg

Where did the ghosting go? Oh sure, it's still there.. but it's not much any more. Not to mention that it has a little more then just a "slight edge" in detail over the laserdisc, wouldn't you agree?
It's amazing how two people can look at the same frame and have a completely different opinion. Are you telling me you DON'T see the horrendous blurring that has virtually rid that shot of all detail? The only reason you can't see the ghosting trails as well is because your image is darker. If I had the OUT disc myself, I could show you dozens of other shots where the '93 DVNR ruins the film.

Post
#243968
Topic
This guy will not be buying the DVDs
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/243968/action/topic#243968
Time
God, I don't see this going anywhere positive. Give the guy a break please, he just got here. And don't turn every thread he posts in into a flame war. Not that you have, I'm just warning you to think before you actually do it. There is room for differing opinions on this board. Keep in mind that not everyone who disagrees with you is a troll.

Go-Mer, keep in mind that this place is nothing like TFN. We don't embrace the PT or the SE here for the most part, and you may find that I get sick of people and start deleting posts instead of editing in witty parental phrases with pretty colors. Try to be constructive in your posts, and that really goes for everyone.
Post
#243954
Topic
Are the PAL GOUT DVDs upscaled from the NTSC masters?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/243954/action/topic#243954
Time
Originally posted by: boris
Honestly? No. Very little actually bugs me about this release, so I'm not going to let a little thing like that worry me.
Of course, someone who would describe the letterbox vs. anamorphic dilemma as a "little thing" wouldn't be bothered at all. Similar people couldn't care less about a potential significant improvement in video quality, so long as their widescreen display allows them to stretch their letterbox DVD horizontally to fill up the screen.

Post
#243945
Topic
First Impressions of the OOT ...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/243945/action/topic#243945
Time
Originally posted by: boris
Whenever people here still complain about the quality of the 1993 masters, saying that they should have re-scanned the film from scratch I just think of that one frame – and I think what little difference it would have really made.

A new transfer would have gotten rid of a much bigger problem, the nasty ghosting that plagues this release from start to finish:

http://img103.imageshack.us/img103/1192/anhdcbi8.jpg

(Above is a cap from the LD, but the GOUT looks exactly the same with a slight edge in "detail".)

http://img457.imageshack.us/img457/8917/anh2004mi4.jpg

Spot the difference?

The screenshots on my site were hand-chosen to make each transfer look good and ignore flaws like this. But it's hard to ignore this flaw when watching them.
Post
#243916
Topic
This is all I wanted. I'm happy, no need for another OOT release EVER for me!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/243916/action/topic#243916
Time
Getting rid of the bars and watching something in the correct aspect ratio are two different things. Most widescreen TVs have several modes for stretching 4:3 material to fill up the screen, but most of them use some method of leaving the middle of the screen unstretched while stretching out the sides. If you can't tell the difference while you're in the "fish eye" mode, then more power to you. But at least realize that the only way to view a letterbox source in the correct aspect ratio is to watch it in normal "postage stamp" mode as pictured above, or to use zoom. All modes aside from the normal mode, be it "full", "zoom", or what have you, stretch the picture.
Post
#243857
Topic
This is all I wanted. I'm happy, no need for another OOT release EVER for me!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/243857/action/topic#243857
Time
OK, what you're saying doesn't make any sense. You say you have a widescreen TV and you are not zooming in. That would mean that these LETTERBOX DVDs are sitting in the middle of your TV like this with bars on all sides:

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i139/zombie__84/non-anamorphic.jpg
(credit goes to zombie for posting this on TFN)

If you aren't using zoom, this is what your screen looks like.