adywan

Lord Grievous said:

corellian77 said:

I couldn't agree more, the designs of Star Wars are timeless. I hope Ady isn't even considering putting these things in.

No, i have no intention of adding any of these into my edits. I'm fed up of these type of displays popping up in almost everything, even non sci-fi related.  In fact i may be taking the PT one in Palpatines office out and replacing it with something a little different ;)

VincentSmalls said:

interesting...

 

http://io9.com/5500510/the-one-thing-george-lucas-could-do-to-sway-the-people-in-his-favor

 

yeh, i've just seen that interview. I'm not very happy with the example they agve of the "critters". This is something they never asked me about yet use it as an example in the film of how "nit-picky" i am with my edit. If they had bothered asking then i would have given them a logical explanation ( the fact that i had extended that shot so would have had to slow the creatures down, which didn't work and the fact that they look stupid turning around to watch the landspeeder) . It will be interesting to see how they twisted my interview to make me look like some obsessed fan with too much time on his hands. Has anyone seen this movie yet? I'm really starting to wish that i had never been involved with this

Angel, there's definitely some scale/ positioning problems with the hatch you have added. Maybe this pic will help (just click on the image to see it full size)

BmB said:

(DVD is a crummy format anyhow.)

BmB said:

MPEG-2 is ancient. It needs huge bitrates (and thus filesizes) to look anything decent, and still most DVD's I have are drowning in a sea of artifacts. Not only that, the whole telecine process is pretty much obsolete, as most playback systems can smoothly represent whatever framerate you feed them nowadays. One hears terrible things of NTSC judder and has witnessed the agony of PAL speedup oneself. And to add to the filesize is the fact that even with support for anamorphics DVD's feel the need to have hardcoded black bars.

BmB said:

Dunno, MPEG4 seems to be all the rage these days.

Sorry but you are talking complete rubbish here. If most of your DVD's are drowning in a sea of artefacts then you have a pretty crappy DVD player or they are not retail DVDs and DVD is not a crummy format at all. Most people who will watch a movie will do so on a DVD. The people who watch a movie via other methods are still a minority as are Blu-Rays. I can't believe that you moan about Mpeg2 having artefacts yet suggest MPEG4. And you are wrong on MPEG4 being all the rage because x264 is. MPEG4 looks like shit unless you use high bitrates. x264 however looks amazing. Compare a 2gb mpeg4 DVD rip to a 2gb x264 DVD rip and the difference is almost like the difference between VHS & DVD.

Timstuff, great to hear you have finished the colour correction. From the screengrabs its looking mighty nice.

For authoring the DVD you could use either Sony DVD Architect or DVDLab Pro. Both are pretty easy to use with DVD Architect having the edge on authoring features. There are demos available for both online so you can try each one out to see which one suits you the best first.

wow, fishmanlee. I posted in your "remastered" thread  about your trolling in other peoples threads and what do you do? you straight away post another one of your so called remastered tracks in another thread. You are just self promoting to get higher view counts on Youtube. And when people advise you to start learning about audio editing instead of just ripping off other peoples work before posting even more links you just ignore the advice and post a new link to a horrendously mixed video.

I'm not going to even bother trying to help you any more as you are just a troll.

fishmanlee said:

 the remastering was fixing volume jumps the best i could, and the track i remastered was the sail barge hip-hop one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G55mY3xCjII

i have since made it so the sudden jumps in volume every few seconds or so are diminished

also it doesnt help that its never been fully released

you really don't listen to a word anyone says to you, do you? What you have done is NOT remastering and how the hell is that link your work? You admit to have ripped it from someone else and the volume cuts are horrendous. If you have fixed this problem, as you have said, then why post a link to the screwed up track? And the "max rebo jam" all you did was badly splice the track that Filmtracks posted to youtube. It's pretty obvious where his one video ended and the other began because he had to split the file to youtube. And there is no remastering done to that track because it actually sounds worse than his version

Listen to the helpful advice people give you or you will learn nothing and just end up pissing people off

fishmanlee said:

ABC said:

fishmanlee said:

Max Rebo Tracks have been Remastered

...  Re-what ?

 Remastered with what little skills/knowledge i possess

I think you are confusing this:

REMASTER:

tr.v., -tered, -ter·ing, -ters.
To master again, especially to produce a new master recording of (an old recording) in order to improve the sound quality.

with this:

SPLICE:

Connection of two or more pieces of linear material to make a new whole:

• Tape splice, the joining of audio tape

or...

EDIT:

tr.v., -it·ed, -it·ing, -its.

1. To assemble the components of (a film or soundtrack, for example), as by cutting and splicing.

If this was indeed remastered you wouldn't be able to spot the different sources or at least where the different sources cut in. As it stands now its a mess with it switching between stereo and mono which jumps right out and smacks you in the face.

You keep making very bold claims with saying its a remastered set that you have done but for the most time you are just ripping other peoples audio from Youtube. And the ones you have done are pretty awful. Maybe, before you should actually learn the craft of audio editing and remastering before you constantly post links to more tracks you have done, especially when you are just trolling with your links in other peoples threads. You'll be on so many peoples ignore lists that when you finally do have something to show that you will have no one left here to listen to it

I know you say you have limited skills but you have been doing this for a while now without any signs of improvement.  If you really do want people to take you seriously then please start learning and practice enough to begin to show improvement.

BmB said:

adywan said:

It's a section of the vane. Sometimes things don't need to be made obvious to the audience. That was a huge problem, as i have said before, with the PT - everything was explained too much. But i've never believed that it was Lukes hand/saber becausse that would have been thrown out of the city a long time before and it certainly wouldn't have gone through the exact same shaft.  Luke lands pretty hard on the vane and part of it breaks off. I'm certainly not going to be making it look any clearer because it doesn't need it.

I'll have to disagree here. Not everything needs to be made obvious, no. But this is something that in the script has a dramatic effect, which is not present in the movie. And to boot has caused nothing but confusion for 30 years. Some things, yes.

Not this thing.

Can't disagree with you more. It's a 2 second shot and with the speed an object needs to fall it wouldn't matter how clear you made the object (which it already is now) it would just be the same old blur as its falling. And not only that but what would the object need to look like so it looks like a piece of the vane that will be noticeable enough for this quick shot?

Also i really can't see how the script give this a more dramatic effect than the movie.

From the published script:

EXT. BOTTOM OF CLOUD CITY - WEATHER VANE - DUSK

Luke tumbles out, emerging at the under-most part of cloud city. Reaching out desperately, he manages to grab on to an electronic weather vane.

NO mention of the falling piece there

From the shooting script:

TRUCKING FULL SHOT as Luke tumbles through the exhaust pipe.

403. EXT BOTTOM OF CITY - EXHAUST PIPE - DUSK

Luke is spit out of the exhaust pipe on the underside of the city. He manages to grab a protruding weather
vane at the exterior mouth of the pipe.

404. EXT BOTTOM OF CITY - EXHAUST PIPE - DUSK

FULL SHOT - Luke hanging on weather vane on bottom of the city. Dangling helplessly above the awesome cloud sea hundreds of miles below, he struggles in vain to pull himself to safety. Finally, he closes his eyes and begins to concentrate.

Nothing about in it that version either. Are you sure you don't mean the novel? If that is the case then of course things are explained in greater detail in a novel and often described with greater effect, but that doesn't mean it has to be the same way in a movie

Again i say it doesn't need changing and i'm not going to be doing anything to the object.  But if you really need it explained then i know someone who will only be too happy help....

Lord Grievous said:

How's your apartment holding up Ady?

It's a complete mess. They have finished the wiring now but everything's covered in brick dust even though they did use dust sheets. It just takes so long for it all to settle and they still have all the plastering to do. Still got another week at least of all this. They have put the kitchen units in but one unit doesn't match the rest as they forgot to order enough units. But i'm making sure that it will be replaced with the correct one, then theres all the tiles to be put up in the kitchen and all the redecorating. I just wish i had a TARDIS so i could skip to the future when this would all be finished

It's a section of the vane. Sometimes things don't need to be made obvious to the audience. That was a huge problem, as i have said before, with the PT - everything was explained too much. But i've never believed that it was Lukes hand/saber becausse that would have been thrown out of the city a long time before and it certainly wouldn't have gone through the exact same shaft.  Luke lands pretty hard on the vane and part of it breaks off. I'm certainly not going to be making it look any clearer because it doesn't need it.

As for the curvature of the city then that's another things that doesn't need fixing. That city is huge and Luke is close to the central core so there wouldn't be such a slope and there is already a slight curvature to the underside. from such a great scale of the city and the angle that luke is the existing curvature is how it would be. So i'm not doing anything to that either.

dark_jedi said:

LOL DVDShrink?,I can't believe what I am reading,DVDShrink.

at least you could have recommended DVDRebuilder Pro using CCE SP and let the program re-encode everything else but the main movie to squeeze it down.

wow, thanks for being such an ass dj. Didn't you read he said that NOTHING else would fit on the DVD apart from the movie as it was oversized and it seemed like he didn't want to have to spend the time  re-encoding the movie again. Using DVDRebuilder with CCE to just shrink the extras would be a waste of time as you can't shrink the extra content down to practically zero. Might as well just re-encode the movie at a smaller bitrate, like Moth3r suggested, as it would take the same amount of time as DVDRebuilder. I only suggested DVDShrink because of the speed element and at 2% oversized there would be no visible quality difference using DVDShrink

A-man, is it DVD Architect that is reporting the project size as 8.7 GB? If it is then just try outputting the whole DVD then check the size after it's done because it's file size reporting isn't too accurate

Or you could just use DVDShrink to make it fit to a DL. Its really fast and with such a small amount to shave off you wouldn't even notice the difference in quality

9. For bears to wipe their ass on in the woods
10. Door draught excluder
11. Merchandising.

This documentary is just superb. Laughed my ass off.  And you've gotta love the fanboy comments. One day they will grow up but it is worrying when a so called film student just doesn't get it. I guess there's going to be a new generation of even suckier films. lol. And what the hell is with the "real" Anakin comment? I thought these idiots were just a myth but now i know they're all too real

Well it should be ok to post the rapidshare links in here because the original poster of the files didn't have his links removed. So here they are

EPISODE 4

EPISODE 5

EPISODE 6

They are the original OGG files so haven't been synced to the movies

yes, it was me. If i had known you would have preferred rapidhsare i would have uploaded them to there but i don't think i'm allowed to post the links here so it was easier to upload them to usenet

yeh, it's really strange DE.  Something i did find interesting when looking in photoshop cs3

About the HD Star Wars, i would have agreed with you about the possibility that the ratio may be wrong from the HD caps but with a commercial DVD/ Blu-ray matching each other i'd say that the aspect ratio is indeed correct. I've seen a lot of people complain about the changes in CS4 when using 3D programs and the problems the new ratio standards adobe have implemented have caused.They have used the other standard for all these years then implemented it for CS4 and they surely did mess up with CS4 as a lot of people will testify

Anyway, whichever one is correct the only one that i need is the one that is correct for my edits, and working with 1024 x 576 originally worked perfectly, and upscaling any DVD sourced  footage to 720p still works perfectly for me too using that calculation.

With HD being square pixel and on a TV that produces a 1:1 1920 x 1080 picture the aspect ratio is correct. So when you upscale a DVD to HD and the pixels match perfectly doesn't that mean that the correct ratio of a widescreen DVD is in fact 1024x576. The square pixel ratio remains the same through these scalings: 1920x1080 > 1280x720 > 1024x576 then if a 720x576 image was stretched to 1050x576 it would cause the image to be slightly distorted, even if it is only stretched horizontally by 26 pixels

Ripplin said:

Dorian Gray? I assume you mean the 2009 version, which I just found out exists. :p I've only seen the 1945 version, which I quite liked!

Any ETA on when the workmen will be done? Also, how would you rate their work ethic? Haha.

yes, the 2009 version. ETA on the work being done is now 2nd april, which i'm really hoping that they finish before then because i have got the Star Wars concert that day and as i have to stay at the flat while the workmen are there i won't be able to get there in time. But there are 7 different contractors working on this, which i find really stupid. so if one of them doesn't turn up on time it delays the rest. They were supposed to have started putting the new kitchen units in today but they never turned up and now it turns out they haven't ordered enough units as they only have the old work plan. But the plumber has been brilliant for me. My token gas meter was inside the one cupboard tucked behind the door on the floor so it has been really difficult for me to get down to it with my back problems. Even though he was supposed to have left it where it was he bullshitted to the housing association that he has to remove it to install the new gas piping and place it in a different place. So now it is above waist height which is perfect for me.  The electricians, again, have the old plan and have wired the plugs in the wrong place in the kitchen for my fridge and have just disappeared. They are not coming back until friday which has delayed the plasterer because all the rest of the flat has to be rewired.

Everything use to run so much smoother before everything was subcontracted. When i worked for the council we rewired a whole 2 story house and installed a whole central heating system in 2 days. why the hell is it taking over 2 weeks to do this job? most of the time i'm just having to wait in for someone to arrive and out of the whole of today only the plumber arrived bad he was here for 3 hours, but my whole day was wasted

It seems very confusing about which is the correct measurement for widescreen. Some places state its 1048 x 576 others 1050 x 576 but many state 1024 x 576. Even after effects up until cs4 had the aspect ratio resized to 1024 x 576. There is an aspect ratio calculator here that also states 1024 x 576

http://www.digitalrebellion.com/pixel_calc.htm

i'm going to go with that the correct resizing is in fact 1024 x 576. It isn't only the Star Wars DVD that matches perfectly with its HD counterpart. Just checked dorian gray PAL DVD against its Blu-Ray 1080p counterpart and that matches perfectly too.

WINDVD also resized PAL widescreen to 1024 x 576 so it seems that many players use this standard

Kurgan , the audio descriptive tracks for episodes 4, 5 & 6 are going up in alt.binaries.starwars right now

sorry DE but i have to disagree there.  i scaled the HD to 1024 x 576 originally and when i upscaled the DVD from 720 x 576 to 1024 x 576 when i was doing image detail comparisons & the picture could be overlaid perfectly. It still works the same now i am working @ 1280 x 720. If i had upscaled the DVD to 1050x576 then overlaying it on top of the downscaled HD source would have resulted in the pixels not matching up

no, when i was working in SD the image was 1024x576 as this was the correct aspect ratio to work with as adding any effects have to be using a square pixel ratio. The HD source was downscaled to 1024 x 576 and would have been  scaled down to 720 x 576 and 720 x 480 for the respective PAL & NTSC DVD's. When i stated the project in HD all project files were replaced with the 720p versions and the same scaling will happen for the DVD releases

yes, i'm going to be collecting all the audio clips from the soundboards

 i've never had a problem importing mepg file in vegas before.

what does vegas say when you try to import the mepg file?

But you did say originally that it is an avi file so this would not have been encoded as an MPEG file at all, apart from maybe an mp4 but you can't change the extension of that to mpeg as this won't work.  open the file using vlcmedia player and check the video information to see what codec is being used.

Rogue Leader said:

Hahaha... Considering all the props and FXs you can render and rig. Couldn't you make it seems like that their flat is haunted? That Wampa you're building could be a blood thirsty creature from hell after you get your shots! ;)

Trust me, i've been so tempted to do something like that. Drive the buggers out

This is one thing that really pisses me off about what is called art nowadays. So some guy can stick the original trilogy in an editing program, do the most simple split screen effect and this is called art? And as bkev correctly pointed out its just an idea ripped off from Wookiegroomers Addicted to Star Wars. And the description is the biggest pile of bullshit nonsense i've seen. No talent whatsoever involved in this.