logo Sign In

totsugeki

User Group
Members
Join date
20-Nov-2006
Last activity
1-Sep-2007
Posts
13

Post History

Post
#316468
Topic
Why is the GOUT not anamorphic?
Time
Arnie.d said:

Colorspaces are filterspecific but virtualdub itself can process any colorspace.


It says here http://www.virtualdub.org/filtersdk.html that the filter interface is RGB.


I can open any avi and compress it with whatever codec and colorspace in virtualdub.


Yes, but if you use VirtualDub filters, there is a conversion to RGB, which was the point in my original post about not using VirtualDub for scaling (scaling is done via a filter).


Besides I don't use any filter in virtualdub, I only use avisynth and feed it to virtualdub.


That's what I'd do too. Most(all?) of AviSynth's filters support YUV.


I don't. Besides the GOUT looks like shit and needs much more work than just scaling. So why not in the process make it anamorphic.
Also, the PAL version were made from the same NTSC master so it had to be resized (and cropped) anyway. Another chance to make it anamorphic.


Good point about the PAL version - I'd have made it anamorphic too if all you had to work with was the NTSC master.
Post
#316464
Topic
Why is the GOUT not anamorphic?
Time
Actually, it doesn't.


If you create a bitmap with alternating black and white horizontal lines (i.e. the most possible vertical detail) and resample it to 133% height, you'll have phase reversals all over the place. And if you have a fixed-pixel display, it will get resampled again on playback. I'd much rather have one resampling (from the non-anamorphic master directly to the display's pixel matrix rather than master->anamorphic->display). I'll admit though that the artifacts aren't that noticeable especially with a low-quality source such as the laserdisc master.


Arnie.d said:

You can select any colorspace you want in virtualdub.


Yes, VirtualDub can import and export in plenty of color spaces, but its filters work in RGB. There's a reason for the fast recompress option - it bypasses the filters and thus the color space conversion (useful if you only use VirtualDub for cutting and as an encoding front-end).


What do you think your widescreen tv or dvd player does when you use the aspect ratio button? It scales the image on the fly and probably isn't is as good as resizing it on a PC using avisynth (and/or virtualdub).


It obviously depends on the device, but many have quite advanced scaler chips that do something like NNEDI (a slow, high-quality AviSynth scaler) in real-time. Also, unless you have a CRT, it will get scaled to the display's native resolution in real-time anyway, anamorphic or not. Like I typed earlier, I'd much rather have one conversion from the original master video (master->display) than two (master->anamorphification->display).
Post
#316457
Topic
Why is the GOUT not anamorphic?
Time
Since they took the video off an old laserdisc master I'm 99% sure the master wasn't anamorphic, so making it anamorphic on the DVD would gain nothing. Actually, resampling by only 33% does damage to the fine details. And I wouldn't use VirtualDub for scaling anyway, since it operates in RGB instead of YUV.

Star Wars deserves a Blade Runner style restoration, but since it didn't get one, I'm glad they didn't mangle the video further by artificially making it anamorphic - I'll take the original master over a faux-anamorphic one any day. Your DVD player or widescreen TV has a button to control aspect ratio - use it.
Post
#296542
Topic
Info Wanted: Moth3r's PAL trilogy vs. anamorphically enhanced GOUT's
Time
Originally posted by: Red5
The active part of a PAL or NTSC scanline is 52 - 53 usec long and to fill that part with 704 alternating white-black pixels equals a period time of 148.148 nsec which is the same as a 6.75 Mhz signal.

You're right! I forgot to divide the number of pixels by two. Silly me. I'll edit out my misinformation.

Originally posted by: Red5
I've measured the multiburst VITS (Vertical Interval Test Signal) on a few of my PAL LDs and at best the 5 Mhz burst was at -4 dB and quite noisy, so the 5.5 Mhz bandwidth of PAL LD is in practice more like just below 5.0 Mhz.


Does that mean that Laserdiscs have test signals embedded in them (during blanking)?

Also, I'm still wondering about Moth3r's statement about DVD's 6.75 MHz translating into 540 lines. Shouldn't it be 720 lines?
Post
#296520
Topic
Info Wanted: Moth3r's PAL trilogy vs. anamorphically enhanced GOUT's
Time
Here's blown-up comparison pics (NTSC GOUT, Moth3r, Citizen, German HDTV, Official DVD, Sharpened HDTV):
http://i10.tinypic.com/4otvjsz.pnghttp://i4.tinypic.com/4pob6zp.pnghttp://i14.tinypic.com/6glpx79.pnghttp://i19.tinypic.com/66voq6p.pnghttp://i12.tinypic.com/6fizbeu.pnghttp://i2.tinypic.com/66agozr.png
Moth3r's has more vertical definition, but GOUT has more horizontal. Citizen's is way too filtered IMO.

edit:
Added HDTV and Official DVD for fun. I matched the Official DVD's colors to the GOUT image.

edit2: Added sharpened HDTV for ultimate sharpness :^) I wish I had a widescreen VHS copy of Star Wars so that I could add that too.
Post
#294507
Topic
I say forget the OOT on DVD, lets target HD-DVD/Blue Ray Now
Time
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Originally posted by: totsugeki
"To answer see you auntie's question, typically the DVD player does the upconverting, though I understand there are TVs that do it too."

Every fixed-pixel* display "upconverts". How else would they be able to fit 720x480** standard definition to their 1366x768*** native resolution?


By stretching the picture? Which is why a DVD looks like garbage on a 50"+ TV. I don't notice it on mine because my TV is across the room. My cousin notices it on his 65" HDTV because he's much closer to his TV than I am to mine.

So no, it's not being "upconverting" if it's just stretching the picture. It's upconverting it if it's resizing it and then sampling all the pixels to make the image look smoother. Real upconverting players and TVs look halfway decent. The ones that simply stretch the picture look bad.


"Stretching" and "upconverting" are the same thing. They both mean resampling (interpolating) the image to a different pixel count. There are countless image resampling methods. Some are crap, some are awesome, but like I said, why assume that every DVD player has a better resampling ("upconverting") implementation than any display? Even if your television does a crappy job at it, it's still "upconverting". If it looks like scheisse, it's probably using a "nearest neighbor" method, which makes the image look pixelated. For examples of more advanced "upconverting" algorithms, see http://www.general-cathexis.com/interpolation.html
Post
#294399
Topic
I say forget the OOT on DVD, lets target HD-DVD/Blue Ray Now
Time
"To answer see you auntie's question, typically the DVD player does the upconverting, though I understand there are TVs that do it too."

Every fixed-pixel* display "upconverts". How else would they be able to fit 720x480** standard definition to their 1366x768*** native resolution? The question is, which device does it better? I find it odd to assume that every DVD player does it better than any display device, especially when DVD hardware often costs less than $100 and displays cost more than $1000.

* Fixed-pixel display as in LCDs, Plasmas, and DLPs
** Replace with your favorite standard such as 720x576 for PAL etc
*** Replace with your favorite display's pixel count such as 1920x1080 for "FullHD"

edit: Old-school CRT displays directly scan whatever they get if it's within their scan range****, in which case an "upconverting" DVD player would be useful for eliminating visible scan lines or flicker. Remember that upconverting doesn't magically add any additional detail. Real HD will always look more detailed.

*** Most CRT televisions only accept 480-line or 576-line input at 60 or 50 Herz interlaced respectively, in which case an upconverting DVD player wouldn't be of any use. CRT TVs that have component input often accept 1080-line input at 60 Hz interlaced or 480-line input at 60 Hz progressive, in which case an upconverting DVD player would improve the image a little. Computer CRT monitors accept nearly anything. My 10-year old monitor works great on 1080-line input at 60 Hz progressive (so-called "1080p"). In fact, it accepts up to 1536 lines at 60 Hz progressive (my video card can't generate more lines than that). Too bad monitors are tiny.
Post
#264998
Topic
Star Wars HD coming in November! All SIX movies!
Time
Originally posted by: digitalfreaknyc
Europe is broadcasting in 1080p instead of 1080i?


American ATSC includes 1080p too. Look at the ATSC A/53E Digital Television Standard at http://www.atsc.org/standards/a53.html - table A3 Compression Format Constraints includes 1920 by 1080 progressive at 23.976 Hz, 24 Hz, 29.97 Hz, and 30 Hz. Doesn't get much more progressive than that. Every ATSC tuner has to support those. Since I have no access to actual ATSC transmissions, I can't say how often it is used, but there is absolutely no reason to transmit film content as interlaced 1920x1080.
Post
#258392
Topic
Star Wars HD coming in November! All SIX movies!
Time
Why are you so interested in ripping these American broadcasts of Star Wars? The German HD broadcasts are of much higher quality (higher bitrate and MPEG-4 encoding) and being satellite broadcasts, they can easily be recorded on the computer (DVB-S PCI tuners). Also, slowing down the 25fps broadcast by 4% is much less error-prone than IVTCing the 30fps interlaced broadcast (the IVTC pattern may change). You can get high-quality audio from the Laserdisc or DVD releases. Although you'll need to replace the Krieg der Sterne texts :/

edit: I imagine there are hacks for cable boxes similar to region-free hacks for dvd players to disable 5c restrictions.