logo Sign In

gltaylor74

User Group
Members
Join date
11-Nov-2005
Last activity
7-Feb-2021
Posts
70

Post History

Post
#168590
Topic
Digital transfer of TPM?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/168590/action/topic#168590
Time
Originally posted by: Hal 9000
I heard rumors a while back about a digital transfer of Episode I scheduled for release. Does anyone know anything about this?

Reason I ask is that when editing this for my own fan edit, shrinking it makes it really suck compared to other DVDs. The rest are either digital or digitally remastered. Not so with TPM.
Thanks for the info.


Episode II and III were filmed with digital cameras, so there was a direct digital to digital transfer for their dvd's. Episode I was not filmed digitally, so hence they did a film to digital transfer. It's still digital on DVD just like episode's I and II, it just didn't come from a digital source. You don't need a digital transfer anyway, there are tons of films that look as good as Episodes II and III and were not filmed digitally. Episode I just needs a new, better transfer. I can't see though how they could ever do a true digital transfer as the original elements or film based.

Post
#162676
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/162676/action/topic#162676
Time
Originally posted by: Moth3r
Isn't the word "adaptive" short for "motion adaptive" equivalent to "3D"?


I don't believe so. From what I remember, Kurtis Bahr once stated on the AVS forum that a 3D comb filter is not always motion adaptive. He had said that the filter on the Elite CLD99 was 3D but not motion adaptive while it was a 3D motion adaptive on the LD-S9/X9 players.

Post
#162603
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/162603/action/topic#162603
Time
Originally posted by: nin
Originally posted by: gltaylor74
I can tell you that on the X9's video board, there is an adjustment that increases the level of "sharpness" by increasing the frequency response. There are two seperate dedicated adjustments, one for S-video output and one for composite output. If the X9's composite output just came from recombining the S-video output, then there would be no need to have a dedicated adjustment for composite. I think this indicates that there are two seperate signal paths on the X9, one S-video and one composite. It's always been accepted for a long time that the X9 did have a "pure" composite output and did not just recombine the S-video. I think folks like Kurtis Bahr and Ivar documented this. I will ask another gentleman I know and see if he has any thoughts on it.



Well, that say really nothing. It is two seperate outputs and of course they will have different adjustments.
But try what I said before. Take composite out from you HLD-X9 and change the comb filter. I have always wonder why I could change the comb filter and have an effect on the picture if the signal is a pure composite. And here we maybe have the answer. I will try to get a BNC to RCA cabel tomorrow and try the BNC output.
Can there really be any other answer than that the output is not recombining?

/Mattias


I don't think it is recombing. If the composite output was a recombination of the S-video, why would they have dedicated composite adjustments on the video board? If the composite can from the S-video, the S-video adjustment that is also present would be all that was needed. A dedicated composite adjustment wouldnt' be needed because it would have already been done on the S-video signal path. I'll email a laserdisc tech I know. He is the best in the business in the US. It is not Kurtis Bahr, but Duncan Hunter. Duncan has worked on my X9 and is well versed in ld theory and about the adjustments on the X9's video board. I had my X9 hooked to my pioneer elite HDTV when I first got it for testing purposes since the Elite HDTV has the same comb filter. The X9's comb filter settings had no effect on the picture as far as I could see and I tried using the HR, Normal, and C-wide modes under the Standard setting. This was running composite direct to the HDTV. I'm now using my X9 with an Iscan HD+ using S-video. I'll have to try hooking up the composite again and see if I notice anything.

Post
#162585
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/162585/action/topic#162585
Time
I can tell you that on the X9's video board, there is an adjustment that increases the level of "sharpness" by increasing the frequency response. There are two seperate dedicated adjustments, one for S-video output and one for composite output. If the X9's composite output just came from recombining the S-video output, then there would be no need to have a dedicated adjustment for composite. I think this indicates that there are two seperate signal paths on the X9, one S-video and one composite. It's always been accepted for a long time that the X9 did have a "pure" composite output and did not just recombine the S-video. I think folks like Kurtis Bahr and Ivar documented this. I will ask another gentleman I know and see if he has any thoughts on it.




Originally posted by: nin
Originally posted by: Warp99
And here is something I found here:

Back to the interesting subject of composite re-composition, the HLD-X0
and HIL-C2EX specifically mention that one of their composite outputs
(the one with a BNC plug) is a "direct out" composite with a different
path than the other composite output (with a regular pin plug). The
manuals explain that nothing but TBC is applied to this "direct"
output. In particular, the Sony manual says that screen info will not
be shown through the direct output. I thought it meant the regular
composite output was a recombination, while the direct would not be. As
other decks do not mention this, i also thought it meant the other
decks only had "regular" (recombining) outputs. Can someone
explain/confirm in opposition to what these outputs are "direct", what
else than TBC is applied to the composite "normal" outputs, and if
outputs on some hi-end models (X9 etc...) could be "direct" even though
the manual doesn't mention it ? The X0 even had a flow-chart explaining
this feature, maybe someone could post a scan of it ?



Thanks. That is what I thought. Why? Well, on both the X9 and X0 RCA composite output, there will be showing the different comb settings and you can change them and that WILL effect the image. That would only be happeing if the composite output have been thru the Y/C.
I don't have any BNC to RCA cable home right now, only a BNC to BNC so I cannot test it right now. Hope to do so soon.

Btw, I have just received info that the PDI delux card have "only" a Adaptive 2/4-line comb filter for two dimensional chrominance/luminance separation. So we should maybe try to get another card with a 3D motion adaptive filter? Or are the current transfers done with the Black magic card that maybe have a 3D comb filter?


Post
#156897
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/156897/action/topic#156897
Time
Originally posted by: Grinder
What is the rolling bar issue?


Check out this link. The following is from the webpage regarding the rolling bar:

"3. Scrolling, horizontal waves throughout the entire box set's picture. These waves scroll upwards and can be most easily seen in those areas where the picture is gray or dark. (They are very hard to see in bright scenes.) SPECULATION as to the waves' source points to AC's 60 cycles/second versus television's 59.97 cycles/second. This difference in frequency coupled with AC interference during the mastering stage, could be the source of the scrolling lines. Fox and Image Entertainment were both notified concerning this. Refusing to admit to a pressing error, they blamed incorrect tele- vision brightness settings as the problem. NOTE: The brightness settings do very little to mask these annoying waves.)"

Flaws List
Post
#156821
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/156821/action/topic#156821
Time
Originally posted by: Patrick R.
I'll have to read up more on the rolling bar issue. I've heard of it, but I haven't been able to see it myself yet. Were all pressings of the DC set susceptible or just the first? Is it something that develops with age or is it inherent in the LD's when they are made? Can it be overcome without losing quality? Is there anyway to tell what pressing you have? I know mine is not the first pressing because I am not missing the Leia welding footage in ESB. Sorry for the barrage of questions.

Patrick


As far as I can tell, it only appears to be the first pressings that are missing the Leia welding footage. My set is a first pressing and during the opening space scenes in A New Hope it can cleary be seen. It was supposed to have been fixed in subsequent pressings. It is not there on my Faces sets. However, I'm finding the Faces set to be inferior in many ways to the definitive set. I'd love to see a non first pressing without the rolling bars to see how much better it may look.

Post
#156386
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/156386/action/topic#156386
Time
Many ld players do exhibit the CLV smearing. It's very easily seen in Star Wars during the opening scene. The X9 and X0 did not suffer from this. On my X9, even with no CLV smearing, I'm starting to prefer the definitive collection. I just now need a new pressing that does not suffer the "rolling bar" issue.
Post
#155793
Topic
"FACES" (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/155793/action/topic#155793
Time
Originally posted by: dark_jedi
so how will the X0 look on a HD TV at the size i mentioned above?
DJ


The X9/X0 make laserdiscs look much better, but regardless you're still taking an analog source and displaying on a large digital display. The quality of the TV's deinterlacer, zoom (or aspect ratio) modes, possibly comb filter, all come into play. The quality of the LD itself is the biggest factor. I use my X9 through an Iscan HD+ and while some lasers look great, others are just okay, even with the Iscan HD+. A laserdisc is not ever, unless it's MUSE, going to look as good as a good anamphoric dvd on a digital display. Some of the best looking to me are Star Wars Episode I, Blade, and Saving Private Ryan. The Faces and definitive look much better but are still not great due to the low quality of the transfer.
Post
#155352
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/155352/action/topic#155352
Time
Hey Grinder,

I think NIN said it great. I haven't used the players you mention but will give you my impressions of the X9. My first LD player was a Pioneer Elite CLD52, which was not very good. I then moved up to a brand new Elite CLD 79, which was much better. I used it with a Pioneer Elite 53" HDTV. I connected the 79 to the elite via a composite cable as the Elite HDTV has the same comb filter that is used in the X9, which tells you how good the X9's was since it's still used in the Elite CRT's and the Mits Diamond sets. The image quality was great.

However, once I found that Lucas was serious about not releasing the original versions of Star Wars, I set out for a better LD player. I ended up with the X9 and had a new laser, motor, belts, etc put in and had it adjusted by the best LD tech in the U.S., Duncan Hunter of www.laserdiscservice.com. I then hooked it up to the HDTV via S-video and put in a copy of the Faces version of Star Wars into both the CLD79 and the X9 at the same time. The difference was immediately noticeable from the opening crawl. Much better color, black levels, sharper image, and less noise. The 79, while a great player, just didn't compare.

I'd still love to see the X0. I thought about getting one of them but they are scarce, very heavy (it cost enough just to ship the X9 at 40lbs, let alone the X0 at 80!), and the single side only play kills it for me. For purposes of capturing for the project it should be great as I used to read it had better noise levels than the X9 due to it's design differences. The X9 relied on digital noise reduction while the X0 was designed for low noise without the need for DNR.
Post
#155249
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/155249/action/topic#155249
Time
It may not be appropriate for this thread but I'm also willing to use my HLD-X9 to create captures if someone had the right hardware, software, and know how. I guess it would have to be local to me or send me the proper equipment as I won't ship out the X9. The X9 has been modified to produce a sharper image from it's S-video output and use it's internal 3D comb filter. It may be a small step down from the X0 in terms of basic video quality, but it also has a brand new laser, spindle motor, belts, and was setup by Duncan Hunter, who is the top laserdisc tech in the US. I agree with NIN that the new laser for his X0's would likely give better results as well, according to how many hours the current laser has on it. I'd love to see an X0 to compare with!
Post
#155189
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/155189/action/topic#155189
Time
Sorry if this is off topic, but I'm wondering if there were seperate U.S. and Japanese pressing of the definitive collection set like there was the Faces set? I've been comparing my definitive set to my U.S. and Japanese Faces sets and I do think the Definitive has less noise and just looks better. The more frequent side changes makes it worse though. I believe my Definitive set is pressed in the USA. I was just wondering if there was a Japanese pressing of it and if so is it any better?

Glad to see Zion still hard at work on this project. Thanks so much. I use a Pioneer HLD-X9 through an Iscan HD+ scaler and the lasers look very good but I can't wait to see how good then can look via DVD!
Post
#154157
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/154157/action/topic#154157
Time
The THX optimizer is based on the individual movie, which means you really need to calibrate then for each movie, which is not practical. The early THX optimizers were tested by Joe Kane and he showed the patterns to often be wrong. I believe they have improved since then. I find them useful for those who don't have a good calibration disc, such as Digital Video Essentials or Avia. I did like you though and ordered a pair of the blue lens glasses from THX and then picked up digital video essentials.