logo Sign In

Zottig

User Group
Members
Join date
17-Mar-2003
Last activity
12-Mar-2024
Posts
44

Post History

Post
#216293
Topic
ORIGINAL STAR WARS TRILOGY OUT 09/2006 BY LUCASFILM
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/216293/action/topic#216293
Time
Originally posted by: THX
Yes, they could, but they would be making things worse for the vast majority of consumers, who will be watching on 4:3 TVs. By the time HD 16:9 is standard, all SD discs will be outdated, whether letterboxed or anamorphic. Given the source, the letterbox release will actually be better for most people during its lifetime.


This shows a simple misunderstanding of how DVD and more importantly anamorphic DVD works. There is no downside for anamorphic. If you have your DVD player set properly you will not notice a difference on standard TVs. If you have a 4x3 TV and the DVD player is set for a 16x9 one then, yes it'll look funny.

I'll grant that you only see the downsides of NON-anamorphic when you have a modern 16x9 TV. But why accept mediocrity, especially from Luca$? It may not matter to you now, but it will eventually. The fact that they are playing the "it's too expensive" card is amazing to me. How much money have those versions made him?

This is the last time we're going to get a shot at these.

Lucas has created a wonderful catch 22. If they don't sell he gets to say, see nobody wanted the theatrical versions. If they do sell, he can say, I've already put it on DVD, now leave me alone.

Cunning

Ben
Post
#215475
Topic
ORIGINAL STAR WARS TRILOGY OUT 09/2006 BY LUCASFILM
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/215475/action/topic#215475
Time
You know, people at Lucasfilm could just as easily put the source video into VirtualDub and resize it and get better anamorphic results than any line doubler or the inevitable fan rip and resizes that will result. Any fan results will be post compression. And I doubt LFL will give the "bonus" films much of a bit budget in the first place.

They could do better, they just won't. Nothing must compete with George's Frankensteins.

Star Wars will preserve the 4x3 TV like it did for laserdisc players. These DVDs are simply planned obsolescence! Remember the SE versions are those for posterity!

Bleah


Where are the private collectors with prints?
Post
#181843
Topic
Evidence of OOT at Lucasfilm?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/181843/action/topic#181843
Time
Has anyone got anymore evidence of great looking OOT transfers in the possesion of LFL?


Yes. The THX Demo DVD that contains the THX WOW montage was also re-done in stunning anamorphic and has the original Deathstar II explosion and Sebastian Shaw as Anakin's ghost at the end of ROTJ. Sadly I think they are missing enough frames on either end of the clip to prevent their usage in restoration efforts.

Ben

Post
#109203
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/109203/action/topic#109203
Time
This may be slightly off topic, but how big are the X0 transfers? Are they considered the best "source material" transfer at the moment?

I know when I did my transfer of all three films they were ~65GB per film using lossless (a must IMHO) HuffyUV codec. I had ZERO dropped frames and manually (mathmatically and dealing with pattern breaks) deinterlaced it all. The problem was that I was using an ATI card which I KNOW wasn't giving me the best possible results. My LD player also was the Pioneer DVL919 which was the last generation made and was likely made with the cheapest possible parts as LD had all but died at that point.

I'm just curious. I can't wait for Zion's release as it has the most potential in my opinion as he seems to have the highest standards in terms of uncompromising quality (anamorphic 16x9, dual-layer, best screen cap results, audio options, lack of annoying "branding" etc,) but having the best "source" to play with myself is something I'd also be interested in. Not to mention that lossless compressed AVI would be useful for future (post-DVD) archival.


Ben
Post
#93569
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/93569/action/topic#93569
Time
I agree, DVD2One or other solutions exist to squeeze it to one layer. And for all those concerned about +DL compatability, my goal is to get a disc in my hand. I could care less if it's only playable on my computer at first, though +DL is fine and when "bitset" 100% as good as retail discs.

The reason is... it's a "bird in hand" vs "in the bush" arguement. You can rip the files from the DVD+R DL and burn them to -DL or whatever you want in the future.

Trust me, having the discs done is paramount compared to the issue of what they'll go on. In fact... when I was doing my project DL discs weren't even available, but I was working on a DL project because I didn't want to sacrifice quality asn knew that DL would be possible eventually.
Post
#90624
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/90624/action/topic#90624
Time
Originally posted by: DanielB
Zottig, just so you know the +R format is not a standard DVD format (the reason Mol's player doesn't work with them).


"DVD+R, a recordable DVD format that along with its rival DVD-R, is 100% DVD compliant as specified by the DVD Consortium (a group comprised of the ten companies who originated the DVD format). "

While you are correct that the +R format isn't officially sanctioned, it is 100% compatable to the DVD standard.

There are several references to that fact online. The problem is that there is a flag that the player uses to identify the disc. The flags are "DVD-ROM", "DVD+R", and "DVD-R" as well as ones for the RW flavors. IF the player is old, or the manufacturer is being pissy/cheap the player may not allow (or understand) anything other than the DVD-ROM flag or may allow some but not all of them.

Again, as DVD-Rs are pressed with that designation at the factory, you're stuck if it doesn't work, however, with the plus (+) format you can tell the burner to "lie" and write "DVD-ROM" to the disc describer bit. That's why it's called bitsetting. At that point, it should work as the reflectivity of +R discs is 100% in line with the DVD consortium's standards.

Ben
Post
#88251
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/88251/action/topic#88251
Time
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi
"it doesn't make sense to not use them. "

Except that a lot of players won't read them.


Quality sacrifices are unacceptable, given the cost of DVD players. Why would anyone settle for a lesser "Archival edition" under any circumstances? I'd buy players until one worked, given the low cost of DVD players these days. That is if this were even an issue...

There is only an issue with players that REFUSE to play them. Also, if they don't work, they were not burned "the right way".

The +R format has the EXACT reflective qualities of retail DVDs. Only players that refuse (or are confused by) anything other than the DVD-ROM flag will have issues. Of course there is a fix, if you have a burner that has something called "bitsetting" you can instruct Nero to lie and report the disc as a DVD-ROM rather than DVD+R (DL).

Bitsetting is something unique to the +R format as the -R format has DVD-R pressed onto the disc at the factory.

Ben
Post
#87785
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/87785/action/topic#87785
Time
Originally posted by: ReverendBeastly
Looks frickin great, Zion, as per usual. Between this set and MeBe's upcoming discs, I do believe we're set... At least until dual layer DVDs become the norm


I hope the best quality projects don't mess it up at the last minute by going single layer. I was never sure whether or not it was the DL drives/media trickling out or the SE DVDs that sparked all these archival OT projects.

At ~$5-8 per DL disc, it's a small price to pay to get the best archival OT DVD short of having access to the actual AVI source files.

One of the reasons I'd been really excited about Zion's effort was his very good results, but also his choice of going dual-layer. It's not worth working hard to get the best results then blowing it at the last minute.


Ben
Post
#76970
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/76970/action/topic#76970
Time
Originally posted by: tellan
but then you have the issue of getting Vdubsync to work in 2000 or XP with its strange vfw workaround because vfw was not designed to work under a 32bit OS environment.

I used vdubsync for mine under windows 98 but I don't think for Zion that is going to be an option.


I was able to get Vdubsync to work flawlessly in XP, but then again I wasn't using the card Zion is.
Post
#76827
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/76827/action/topic#76827
Time
VirtualDub Sync is what I think will be necessary to get the audio and video to properly sync up.

Problem:
When capturing video with your TV-card and audio with your soundcard simultaneously, after some time audio becomes desyncronized with video. This is because the clock of the soundcard is not syncronized or locked to the framerate of the incoming TV-Signal. Thus the number of audio-samples per frame will change slowly in time. Ok, when adding some timestamps while recording, or using some data framing techniques and e.g. bit stuffing mechanisms, this is no problem anymore, when using these information for playback.
For short sequence capturing, that does not matter because this effect becomes visible only when recording some longer periods (depends on the quality of the soundcard-oscillator and on the oscillator(s) in the tv-broadcast-station or in your VCR).
In order to syncronize audio and video, all capture programs we know (Virtualdub, AVI_IO, etc.) throw away or duplicate frames when audio is behind or in front of video.

Solution:
In order to syncronize audio and video we apply a realtime sample rate conversion to the audio signal and do not throw frames away, anymore. That is, we have some means to permanently measure the time delay between audio and video during the capturing process and e.g. if there are too much audio samples per frame we reduce the number of audio samples in such a way, that there is no audible degradation (in the professional music domain, sample rate conversion is applied when mixing digital audio of different sources, but in a hardware-circuit like the AD1896 from Analog Devices). In order to avoid additional jitter, the measured time delay is feed into a servo loop with a high time constant.
So even when capturing many hours, the number of samples is as specified (e.g. PAL with 25frames per second and 44.1kHz audio sampling frequency, there have to be exactly 44100/25 = 1764 samples per frame).

Post
#74681
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/74681/action/topic#74681
Time
The reason the Japanese LDs are darker is because while the Japanese use NTSC, their flavor of it (NTSC-J) was darker then the US version. It may have been because their TVs defaulted to brighter images, I'm not sure on that point.

From what I've read, NTSC-M is the modern "global" version and came about around the time of DVD so that DVDs could be standardized. All flavors of NTSC are all inter-compatible, but each has it's idiosyncrasies and the NTSC-J is usually darker than NTSC-E (I think that's what the older US version was, but not sure.)

The reasoning is that NTSC had (has) flaws and extensions or fixes to the standard kept getting added. NTSC-M is a newer standard that takes all the various meddling with the base standard and incorporates the various enhancements.

It's a moot issue today unless you are dealing with the kind of stuff we are all trying to accomplish.

Usually though PAL is considered the best source as it has more resolution (just shy of 100 more lines) in the image. With LDs, take away most of the black bars and you have a small number of lines that need to be resized to make up the DVD image so the more that are there in the beginning, the better. PAL has more lines than NTSC so many people have chosen to grab PAL images (they also have no interlacing) and retime the video (slow it down) to 23.976 fps from 25. Assuming the frame count is standard and everything else is done properly, adding the correctly timed US audio should mesh perfectly.
Post
#74279
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/74279/action/topic#74279
Time
Bars are required on anything wider than 1.78:1 (Star Wars is 2.35:1) DVD players add additional thickness to the bars when fitting it to 4x3 TVs. Research it, you'll find it to be true.

I had luck with the alien subs in the black bars when I did my copy of Jedi (I was working backwards) and would highly recommend against them marring the image. I'd primarily object because it's possible to do the alien ones in the bars as they only come one line of text at a time. This effort seems focused on utmost quality so why spoil the picture if it can be easily be avoided? DVD subtitles can be set to coordinates corresponding to the black bars so it'll look fine.

After playing with a program called Subtitle Workshop (and others) I think the alien subs (and to a lesser degree the Closed captioned ones as they are sometimes more than one line) can be done properly in the correct font with overlay thus keeping the image pure. Which is the point, isn't it?

Post
#74204
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/74204/action/topic#74204
Time
Personally I found that "burning" the alien subtitles worked best for me but I get the idea that Zion wants to keep the image clean. While I can understand why keeping the image clean is important, I was sucessful in putting the alien subs in the lower black bar. Even on a 16x9 TV the black bars are still thick enough to work because Star Wars is a 2.35:1 film. At the time though I didn't have access to the new subtitling tools

I've found a program that should do everything that'll need to be done and can convert betwixt the major formats.

The biggest thing is where they display on the screen and you are correct that there is a different set with different placement of the text for widescreen and Letterbox (for 4x3 tvs.)

I'm assuming there is time to figure all this out. Getting every frame of the film in order and all nice and pretty is the important part. Hopefully if all the frames are present and are in 23.976 timing, the audio and subtitles should fall into place.
Post
#74139
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/74139/action/topic#74139
Time
I have pulled the subtitles from the official DVDs. I'm in the process of editing them to return them to the Theatrical cuts. The biggest pain is going to be the timing. Zion, I'll need a point of reference to begin. I need an exact time code to sync with. Can you tell me what the exact time code of the first frame where the "Star Wars" first appears on the screen?

Thanks


Post
#73845
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73845/action/topic#73845
Time
I sorta figured it'd be too jarring, but I just wondered if anyone had given it a try or messed with it. I sorta wondered if it'd be easier to slightly dumb down the DVD footage to achieve a better match. That'd eliminate a lot of issues with ghosting and stair step correction needed for the vast majority of the films. But by the looks of your results it's obvious that you know what you are doing.

By the way Zion, The Empire menus are impressive but the general jerks around somewhat. I know it's an early draft but I just wanted to point that out in case you hadn’t noticed it. Also I think the hollow font is a little crunchy. In the animated opening, the S and Rs have issues and I wanted to point you to this resource in case you hadn't seen it before. I assume you used After Effects to do that and I'm not sure if you manually drew the lettering or used a pre-existing font. The hollow font at this site looks dead on.

http://www.theforce.net/theater/postproduction/Crawl/opening.shtml

:Edit: Actually the hollow font link is broken and I did find a better one but it's a $15 font. It's available here

I figured the font info at the first site would also be useful for subtitling to keep the fonts as close to the LDs as possible. Oh on the note of subtitling, some people are die-hard purists... Where do you stand on the spelling errors in the Jabba subtitles from Jedi? Do you consider fixing the spelling of Wookiee a problem? I personally don't think so, but some people are funny that way.

Zottig
Post
#73785
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73785/action/topic#73785
Time
One thing I considered doing with my project was to focus only on preserving the theatrical footage that cannot be found on the new DVDs.

I mean since 95% or more of the film's footage is unchanged in terms of content, it made quite a bit of sense to go with the highest quality source for the majority of the movie. My only concern was that the transition from DVD footage to LD footage and back would be too jarring.

Has anyone experimented with this? Couldn't the idea still have some merit?
Post
#73618
Topic
.: The Zion DVD Project :. (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/73618/action/topic#73618
Time
Wow, I just read all 14 pages of this thread in hopes to get myself up to speed and my hopes are once again renewed that it could be possible to have the original trilogy on DVD. I hate coming in so late because I don’t want to seem like another “me to” sort, but I’ve spent a lot of time researching and doing my own transfer that I’d love to help in any way I can.

Question though… I couldn't find (or perhaps missed) which LDs (DC, faces, NTSC or PAL) you are using to accomplish this transfer.

I used the NTSC Definitive Collection LDs in my transfer and the one thing I was able to accomplish that no other group seems to have bothered with was PERFECT deinterlacing back to the 24FPS source. After fiddling with filter after filter that attempted to perform IVTC, I finally spent the time to MANUALLY determined the PATTERN of the interlacing and exactly WHERE it reset/errored.

After mapping out the 3:2 errors and accounting for them mathematically I made an avisynth script that actually disassembled the fields into 24fps frames rather than artificially (via filter AI.) Now, I am not positive about the “faces” LDs, but the DC LDs are EXTREEMLY close to being a perfect 3:2 pull down. Buy that I mean, except for one or two changes in the pattern you can actually apply a mathematic deinterlacing and get all the actual frames back flawlessly.

I’d love to know what you are doing for IVTC and if my frame counts could be put to use to allow your work to be perfectly deinterlaced I’d LOVE to participate!

Zottig