Well, it's just a mockup, so not a huge deal.
But look again, Ripplin... The upper outer laser are going from out->center, while the lower ones are going from center->out. That can't be the way it's supposed to be...
Nicely done but the lower outer lasers are going the wrong way... :)
*pats -1 on the shoulder*
There, there, chin up little buddy!
;)
A real City in the Clouds?
Well, it's actually London under some heavy fog with only a few Canary Wharf buildings breaking through...
It immediately made me think of Cloud City though. :)
Here's some info:
http://www.cheeptech.com/2600mods/2600mods.html
http://www.best-electronics-ca.com/TV_sw.htm (commercial site)
^Have you read 'Tag & Bink are Dead'?
neebis said:With the DC48 track, my receiver takes the Digital 2.0 from optical S/PDIF and automatically detects and decodes it as Prologic and I have 5 speakers (L,C,R,LS,RS) plus a powered subwoofer. So I was listening to it as proper surround, not just 2 channel/2 speakers. I might be able to force it to Prologic II, but I didn't think Prologic II was around in 1993.
No, but I believe dpl2 is supposed to be 'backwards compatible' and is preferred even for older surround mixes.
I wouldn't mind hearing someones thoughts on a comparison of the two (and maybe also neo6 and what have you).
By the way, did you use the latest version of ATSurround 1.0? Do you know if there is a big difference in output between that and the older freeware 0.1.6a? Would the AS2 setting be the equivalent of the active matrix you used? Or ASr?
Yes I did use the latest version, some of the settings were renamed and there's only one active matrix setting, I'm not quite sure which of the older ones it corresponds to..
vbangle said:You're one sick fuck, you know that? The GIRL is half your age, you perverted sick bastard. You should be ashamed of yourself. You're old enough to be her father.
And yes you have some nerve coming back, and you keep babbling on about how sad your life is so that we'll all understand and feel sorry for you...jeez get a life.
That's a pretty pathetic personal attack.. What are you an ageist? You don't have to like it, but you don't know either party and they're BOTH old enough to decide how to live their lives. Christ...
..
Congrats to -/+1 for finding someone!
Thanks for the 'review'! :)
No low-end freqs was redirected during the upmix.
I don't know the technicalities of active matrix decoding, so I don't know if it favors some frequencies 'by default', I mean maybe it puts more of the 'voice freqs' in the center channel, making them seem louder?
One question though: Did you listen to the 2.0 as stereo or did you run it through a hardware dpl/dpl2/neo6/etc decoder?
Though it's not what you asked, I would simply try one of the other free converters like Handbrake or Staxrip.. Very easy to use imo.
Well, you'll probably need to give a little more info... You want to encode something with it?? What software do you want to use it with? What's the specific problem?
neebis said:I see you used ATSurround active matrix to do the upmix. That seems to be a plugin for foobar2000 or Winamp. Did you pipe the audio through one of those or use some other method? Or is there another version of ATSurround? Can you explain your process exactly? What settings and setup did you use for the relevant applications?
Yes, I used the foobar2000 plugin. I used the default active matrix (dpl2) 5.0 settings and ran h_h's edited wavs through it and saved as a multichannel wav, then split that into mono wavs.
Did you use any of the files from the wav_to_5_1_upmixer.rar you posted earlier for the final work or other tools?
No, that was just something I found early on when trying to find ways to do upmixing, but it turned out it wasn't very good.
Is there a generational loss or potential artifacts created by the decoder process separating the Prologic channels?
Well, depends on what you consider a generation loss, there wasn't a 'lossy' step per se, but it's probably difficult to get the same bit-for-bit 2ch file back from the 5ch file..
I'm not sure if there are artifacts inherent in active matrix decoding; atsurround didn't produce any obvious artifacts to my ears. There is another upmixer called fsurround which uses libfftw3f-3.dll and it left very obvious artifacts in the channels.
Is there is a slight degradation of the audio when comparing this multi-step process to the one step of encoding the Belbecus DC48 mix directly to 2 channel AC3? Should it be noticeable or not? Would be it be like a very mild version of the artifacts caused by re-encoding an MP3 over and over a few generations?
Depending on the bitrate used when encoding the 2.0 file, the 5.1 will likely have a lower bitrate for each channel, so it's possible there are more obvious 'lossy artifacts' in comparison. I used the eac3 encoder with standard settings, I don't really know if there's another encoder considered to be better.
If you're hearing artifacts in the upmixed ac3, one way to discern if those artifacts are from the upmixing process or the ac3 encoding would be to compare it to the 1536kbps dts, which should be transparent to the wavs.
^That setting doesn't seem to do anything??
Monroville said:joebshmoe said:i thought you had to pad the video to exactly 1080p or 720p
That may be the case, but it also comes across as (at least with TSmuxer) some programs just aren't very consistent in their performance. I know I'm a dummy when it comes to this stuff at the moment, so user error is a definite culprit, but when I've managed to get 3 different results by doing the same exact thing...
Well, TSmuxer probably just does what it's supposed to do - muxes... I'm no expert at this hd stuff, but I think you need to look at the specs of your source files and check if the resolution/bitrates/codecs/etc. are compatible with the AVCHD specs.
There are some specs here. A quick look and it looks like the cropped resolutions you had problems with aren't supported, so you'd probably need to reencode those.
adywan said:The main problem is that i no longer have any of the original files i used to create the disc so it would mean rebuilding it from scratch which is probably going to be impossible :(
Um, just replace the old ac3 with the new or am I missing something? Why would it need rebuilding from scratch?
You probably shouldn't just do L+R of the stereo and slap that in as the center channel, you want as little as possible of the L and R in the center...
You could do passive or active matrix decoding/upmixing (dpl or dpl+) of the 2.0 and use the resulting center channel, that might be ok.
Assuming that the 5.0 is a real 5.0 mix and not just an upmix itself, otherwise there's no point of course.
Watched a little more than an hour, gonna take a break from it now, but a few more impressions:
I like the new music. But it seems kinda schizophrenic at times, for example with R2 and the jawas - it goes from foreboding/scary, then suddenly lighthearted/comedic and then dark/mechanical/scary. Maybe they're a bit too drastic shifts in mood.
Also, as Bingo said, consider cutting more of the PT, like perhaps most of the awkward bickering between 'Annie' and Obi-Wan.
Here's an idea: When we cut to the 'past' (PT) from the 'present' (OT), fade up into a sepia-toned still, then fade the colors in, then start the clip. When we leave the past, it could do the same only in reverse. Just to make it really obvious. But just a thought. (I probably saw something like this in a movie, but don't remember which.)
I watched a bit more..
When we cut to ANH the regular score almost doesn't fit now, due to the almost sombre mood before. :)
Also, I see it is almost 4 hours long, I thought it was about 2... So that explains some of the artifacts.
Edit: Well, you all know how changing the music in a movie changes the mood, but it's really funny how different it is now because the SW score is so well known and ingrained in you. :)
Asteroid-Man said:I decided I would give everyone else a low quality 700mb avi so they could get an idea of what it will be like. The low quality is only for now. The final release will be in December so if you can't wait, watch the work copy now or if you want a crisp clean version you can wait. Plain and simple.
Don't misunderstand, A-Man, but two things about this:
I thought you wanted feedback from this early version? It just seems a bit strange to intentionally degrade it so much then.
And with that quality the avi could/should have been ~200mb instead.. 700mb is just bloat.
But NEVERMIND all that now...
More importantly, how about a subtitle file for the alien voices? Seeing as you replaced their voices, it makes it hard to follow your intentions and give feedback when you don't know what they're saying...
EDIT: Watched the prologue, the mood is nice, the 'montage' section is maybe a bit long, and the whole thing is a bit hard to follow chronologically.
Well the avi is EXTREMELY pixelated. :(
What on earth happened?
First, you should see if the eps in question have the same framerate and running time. If they do, that will simplify things a bit.
You will need a variety of apps for this, something for demuxing the audio from the mpgs and avis, like virtualdub, virtualdubmod, tmpgenc, dgindex.
Something to decode (and later encode) the audio (likely in mp2 and/or mp3 format), like lame, toolame or maybe winamp or foobar2000.
Since they're tv-rips (I assume?), most likely the audio will not match up completely without some editing, so you'll also need a multitrack sound-editor, like audacity.
Load both tracks in the editor and match the 'new' track up to the one you're replacing. You may need to make a few edits/cuts here and there. When you're done, you just need to save the edited track, encode it again and mux it back with the video.
I'm still not convinced your dub can't work Trooperman.
I don't like the voice in the rots clip to be honest, and I don't think yours is inferior.
But there are problems in the mix. The clip Ady posted is probably the best mixed of the clips i have seen of that scene. The voice is already more integrated than the early clips. I believe 100% that the 'sound' of the voice can be fixed with a bit more work. Of course I haven't seen the entire thing, so I don't know if there are places where the dub doesn't fit, 'acting wise'. For example I have an early clip of the garage conversation that doesn't quite work because you are talking somewhat quietly and Hayden looks like he's shouting. But I think you redid some lines right?
There also seem to be sync issues, but they're most likely fixable.
Then there's the club music, personally I don't really like it, but other than that it doesn't sit as well as it could in the mix if it's supposed to be ambient music, needs some aggressive eq'ing.
If you like, I wouldn't mind trying to do the audio mix for a scene. I do a lot of sound editing/mixing, usually with music though.
Ok, if you still need this, it's actually pretty easy. Say you have a menu called 'Scenes 1 for Movie 1', open that/double click it, then at the bottom tabs select 'backgrounds'. Then just drag and drop a background on to the open window (of the scene menu).
If you have a custom background you will need to drag it into dvdlab beforehand, then it will show up in the bottom tabs.
Yeah sounds reasonable, thanks for the clarification. Too bad the 2.1 seems a bit problematic for some though.
dark_jedi said:That looks very nice Ady,can you please tell me how you did that split screen comparison,this could come in very handy for me in my projects.
Thanks
It is also very easy to do in avisynth, something like
split_org=last
(filters goes here)
split_filter=last
crop(split_org,0,0,320,352)
split_org=last
crop(split_filter,320,0,320,352)
split_filter=last
stackhorizontal(split_org,split_filter)
(For a 640*352 clip)
