Sign In

riftamos

User Group
Members
Join date
21-May-2019
Last activity
4-Apr-2020
Posts
64

Post History

Post
#1329567
Topic
TOTAL RECALL (1990) UNCUT Version Reconstruction
Time

MrBrown said:

Okay, pal running time is about 108 to 109 minutes. Same version as the normal 113 minutes ntsc version.

The cut version in germany had a runtime of 106 minutes in PAL.

No country so far got the unrated lost cut.

The normal us rated-r Version was not for sell in public (not banned, just considered harmful for youth) so in regular stores people just could get the cut version. You had to get the uncut (rated r) version on stores just for adults,and online stores.

Few years ago the movie got removed from the list of considered harmful media, and was re-rated by the FSK.
The movie got a rating of 16,but because of bonus features there is the red 18 rating on front. But now the uncut (compared to us r-rated) could be sold in normal stores, so the big “Uncut” is on that fro t as a selling point.

The German “uncut” mostly is regarding original theatrical releases. Often seen when movies also got cut releases for younger target groups.

Gotcha - now I’m on the same page.

Post
#1329397
Topic
TOTAL RECALL (1990) UNCUT Version Reconstruction
Time

MrBrown said:

Uncut German is normal us version… It was strongly cut in Germany back in times.
And comparing 109 minute HD BD with a 103 minute DVD… It’s just the same… PAL just runs faster than ntsc and 1080p.

Understood, that makes sense.

I was under the impression that this was a 109 minute PAL DVD release not BD

Post
#1329350
Topic
TOTAL RECALL (1990) UNCUT Version Reconstruction
Time

This may have it.
https://www.amazon.de/Total-Recall-Arnold-Schwarzenegger/dp/B0083E1FDG/ref=as_sl_pc_as_ss_li_til?tag=rewind01-21&linkCode=w00&linkId=&creativeASIN=B0083E1FDG

http://dvdcompare.net/comparisons/film.php?fid=806

A supposedly “Uncut” german dvd release. The runtime is listed as 109 minutes, and I see other PAL releases listed at 103 minutes… Not sure what to make of it, probably bogus. I can’t imagine that there is 6 minutes of additional footage.

I’ve got the original LD release, I’ll have a look at that, I thought for sure it showed Benny’s chest and the drill, but not any of the other clips mentioned.

Post
#1326603
Topic
Topaz Gigapixel upscale of the GOUT
Time

phoenixobia said:

riftamos said:

For those that are curious -

I found that for my purposes, a frame by frame scale in the regular gigapixel software generated better results than using their beta video upscaling software.

GP has released a new app called Video Enhance AI. It is so much better than GPAI beta.
Check it out. I have posted a few comparison iamges of my Beauty and the Beast LD at the following thread:

I was just playing with it the other day, definitely a huge improvement. From my experience, I still seem to be getting better results doing a frame by frame in just regular old gigapixel, but I still need to explore the settings in Enhance more.

Post
#1324446
Topic
Topaz Gigapixel upscale of the GOUT
Time

For those that are curious -

I found that for my purposes, a frame by frame scale in the regular gigapixel software generated better results than using their beta video upscaling software.

I have tried a double pass and I cannot recommend it. I have also tried to layer a pass of low/low on top of a pass of none/none - my feelings on this are mixed, depending on your software you could adjust the opacity of the layers until you find your desired/optimized results.

For me, I’m finding my best results scaling with the none/none preset. It does actually do a fair job of preserving detail and removing a layer of blur even on the “none” preset. At most I run a low/low.

I think with certain scenes you could play around with a variety of filters and use masking to pic out the best parts of the best runs. The background of space for example while inside the x-wings will look better with a none/none, but Lukes face will likely look better at low/low. Use the none/none as a matte and mask Luke back into the frame by hand.

Post
#1323135
Topic
Topaz Gigapixel upscale of the GOUT
Time

ZigZig said:

riftamos said:

ZigZig said:

Hi OldMateMatt,

What are the settings that you use (noise, blur, face refinement)?
I use GP a lot and I have found that the main problem in frame by frame processed videos is with the stars : they are “split” (GigaPixel redraws two sharpened stars instead of one blurred) and they move from frame to frame.

It seems to me that you also have this problem in your video. Did you achieve to reduce or solve it?

I know exactly what you are talking about. I personally have found the best results are on low/low anything more than that just amplifies the mistakes Gigapixel is making. I’ve been thinking about doing a double pass, at low/low and then just a plain scale with no image improvement, and layering the two images to try and reduce the enhanced noise/small details that become distorted.

Hi riftamos,

Thank you very much for sharing your tips!
Did you try doing a double pass, or did you just think about doing it?

On my side, I tried to increase the original frame with a simple bilinear resizing (ia from 720x480 to 960x640) before upscaling it with GP (ia from 960x460 to 1920x1280): that reduces the distorstion of small details, but that reduces also the advantage of using GP…

I have not had a chance to try the double pass & layering of the frames yet, but I will report back when I have had a chance to try it. I was also thinking about trying a single pass on low/low then running a separate pass just as a resize with no filter and using TOOT to average between the two - generating a new frame (as compared to laying two frames on top of one another).

There is a brief discussion about TOOT over in my “Faces” upscale thread.

One thing that I have tried and I know works, but is incredibly cumbersome is “masking.” To me, it seems like GP is great on larger objects that are “up close”/the foreground in the frame but it makes a lot of mistakes on small details in the backgrounds. I’ve successfully made a mask to show just the enhanced detail of the foreground images overlayed over an enlarged background without enhancements - its not great, but its a step in the right direction. It takes a lot of time and the more elements there are in a frame(or scene) the harder it is to pull it off.

What would really be ideal is more control over where GP focuses during its upscale when its attempting to add in details. I’m also giving “Phoenix” a try which could be promising.

Post
#1322950
Topic
Topaz Gigapixel upscale of the GOUT
Time

ZigZig said:

Hi OldMateMatt,

What are the settings that you use (noise, blur, face refinement)?
I use GP a lot and I have found that the main problem in frame by frame processed videos is with the stars : they are “split” (GigaPixel redraws two sharpened stars instead of one blurred) and they move from frame to frame.

It seems to me that you also have this problem in your video. Did you achieve to reduce or solve it?

I know exactly what you are talking about. I personally have found the best results are on low/low anything more than that just amplifies the mistakes Gigapixel is making. I’ve been thinking about doing a double pass, at low/low and then just a plain scale with no image improvement, and layering the two images to try and reduce the enhanced noise/small details that become distorted.

Post
#1322189
Topic
Topaz Gigapixel upscale of the GOUT
Time

OldMateMatt said:

emanswfan said:

I don’t remember the GOUT being that compressed…are you working with the source file or a re-encoded RIP?

re-encoded rip yeah, it could also be youtubes compression or my render settings in sony vegas

I’ve been doing some work with Gigapixel on some of my upscale projects. Did you use regular old gigapixel and do a frame by frame or did you try their beta video upscale software?

Post
#1318582
Topic
Original Trilogy "Faces" LD Preservation & Upscale project
Time

clashradio said:

@ riftamos: it looks like your aspect ratio is too wide on these two screen caps.

@ willirob: what do you use for your comb filter? I’ve been using the EVAL adv 7842 board along with a HLD-X0. But have been reading about the Domesday Duplicator. Since it taps into the RF signal, it can make any low or average player give great results. I thought I had the best set-up by using the best player and best comb filter. I think it’s more geared toward PAL stuff at the moment.

Yes, I agree - those are just a couple frames from the raw capture file. I’ve got to squeeze it back to the right size.

The Domesday Duplicator looks awesome, over on LDDB there was someone trying to get a bunch of them produced but I don’t think they ever got the project off the ground. Have to build one of these from scratch?

Post
#1318454
Topic
Original Trilogy "Faces" LD Preservation & Upscale project
Time

Williarob said:

Since the 3:2 pulldown is completely reversible (unlike true interlaced video) I think you’ll find converting your 60fps capture back into frame accurate (capable of being GOUT Sync’d) full frames at 23.976 fps with no interlacing and no duplicates is much harder than if you just capture it at 29.97 and then IVTC it with a single line in an AVISynth script:

AVISource(“c:\path\to\my_29_97_LD_Capture.avi”).Tfm().tdecimate()

Or simply open it in Virtualdub, go to Video -> Filters -> Add -> IVTC and choose Reduce Frame Rate, Auto, Adaptive, Click OK and then save your file.

I’ll give this a try and see what I can come up with

Post
#1318391
Topic
Original Trilogy "Faces" LD Preservation & Upscale project
Time

ZigZig said:

Interlaced means that every 60th of a second, half the image is shown. The first 60th shows the odd lines of the image, the second 60th shows all the even lines. So basically, you have 30 full images a second. But you know that already.

As the movie was shot at 24 fps (not 30 fps), the “trick” to transform 24 fps into 30 fps (so that it can be carried on NTSC) is by doubling (pulling up) some frames, which you can easily remove (“pull down”) with IVTC (in AVISynth or even VirtualDub).

You won’t get additional information, image or quality by keeping those pulled up frames.

I understand that and I don’t disagree with you - I’m suggesting only that by capturing both halves and generating product at 60fps, the end result appears with less blur, and little to no combing.

I know that the pulled up frames from 24 - 30 doesn’t give us any additional quality, but I believe there is a significant increase in combing if this is captured at 30fps.

Post
#1318363
Topic
Original Trilogy "Faces" LD Preservation & Upscale project
Time

ZigZig said:

clashradio said:

You can use AVISynth to IVTC the 3:2 pulldown 29.97fps back to the original frame rate, or at least the original frame rate when telecined. The true original is 24fps.

Ok… there is a misunderstanding here of some form. I’m confused as to what you both mean. I certainly understand that I can use AVISynth to IVTC a 3:2 pulldown 29.97fps back to 24fps. But I am not working with 29.97 content per say.

I guess where I’m at is - I’m capturing at 60fps because the content is natively 480i/60 (60 being the field rate, not the frame rate). I understand the frame rate of the movie was originally 24fps on film and then 29.97fps on the disc, but the field rate of the image is what I am concerned with, the LD content is displayed at 60Hz.

The disc is playing at 29.97fps, but that image is flickering at 60hz. I’m capturing the entire flicker by capturing at 60fps, then post-processing to remove flicker/interlace. I understand that functionally what I am left with is a frankenstined 30fps content with the frames more or less doubled and being played back at 60fps. However, I have found that because of the 60Hz rate that this was originally outputted from the LD player at, that this leaves me with a much better image. It seems to me that this has prevented a great deal of the “smear” effect people describe in LD captures.

I understand there a numerous different ways to work with analog interlaced signal, I am not understanding what benefit would be derived from taking this content back down to 24fps - 60 is to ensure the image remains as smooth as possible.

If I’m misunderstanding what you’re suggesting please explain why - I do want to offer the highest quality image possible.