It is currently Tue Apr 16, 2024 2:41 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » Indian Media Forums » General

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 5 of 7
  [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
  Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
Canadaflix
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2002 10:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 6:09 am
Posts: 14
shuman wrote:
would i be wrong to guess you dont have an HDTV? i have played interlaced and progressive dvd on my computer... and i do see the artifacts or combing for interlaced DVD.

Shuman,

Yes, I do not have an HDTV.

I have asked several Authoring experts about this, and what I have been told is that if your DVD player supports Progressive output, then you should not see the combing effects on HDTV.

As for watching the movie on a computer, I just played Angoor with both PowerDVD and WinDVD and my untrained eye could not make out combing.

What can I say about the sound? It's excellent. The DVD actually has all three songs which were all missing in the pirated version of the DVD.

In all, this DVD is about 15 minutes longer than the pirated DVD.

Sincerely,

Kshitij
Top
 Profile  
 
ali
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2002 11:28 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 2:06 pm
Posts: 4944
Location: UK
Canadaflix wrote:
What can I say about the sound?


Try saying how it’s encoded, i.e. mono original or mono 5.1 pseudo depending on how it's actually encoded :p

Ali



Edited By ali on 1038180710
Top
 Profile  
 
Canadaflix
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 12:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 6:09 am
Posts: 14
ali wrote:
Try saying how it’s encoded, i.e. mono original or mono 5.1 pseudo depending on how it's actually encoded :p

Ali,

It's Dolby Digital 2.0 channel, encoded directly from Stereo 2-channel source.

Kshitij
Top
 Profile  
 
Canadaflix
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 12:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 6:09 am
Posts: 14
ali wrote:
Are these shots from the same DVD? They look different, has Canadaflix adopted the faddy approach to screen shots?

Ali,

Yes, those are from the same DVD if you took the images I posted.

If by "faddy approach" you mean doctoring of images, no they are not doctored. I hope you don't think I would do that, Ali bhai. :D

Kshitij
Top
 Profile  
 
Satya
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2001 10:32 pm
Posts: 40
ali wrote:
Image

Image

Are these shots from the same DVD? They look different, has Canadaflix adopted the faddy approach to screen shots?

Ali :sus: :oo:

Ali, this comparison clearly shows that playing in Bob mode makes the picture clearer for this DVD (you don't see the combing artifacts in the bottom picture) so why would you post screenshots of force-weave mode when a user has the option of viewing better quality by changing to Bob mode?

In my opinion we are being too harsh on Indiaweekly. I know DEI had this film for almost a year but the original print was in such a bad shape that they gave up on it (we are talking about a 20 year old film here). Conditions of storage facilities in India are not that great. Indiaweekly took the task of restoring the original print against going for a cheaper option of using a video source. What you see may not be a perfect result but the best possible. Regarding interlace/progressive discussion, its the end result that counts. If you take a inferior video source and do a progressive transfer, what good it is? If you have a interlace transfer with sharper quality source, I don't see anything wrong with it? At the end of the day, its the quality I see on my tv screen that counts. According to my sources at Indiaweekly, the best equipments available in India could only do interlace transfer. They did what they could do under the given circumstances.

-satya



Edited By Satya on 1038192838
Top
 Profile  
 
sknath
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 4:17 pm
Posts: 2853
Location: Canada
Satya I think you have missed out the point here... (like a few others)....
No one is doubting the claims that IW hasnt taken the pain to do a decent job here... What is bothering me (as well as others) is that, the whole point of watching a film on DVD is ruined by the fact that now I would have to watch a Video on DVD (if you know what I mean)..
As for the user switching to a Bob mode... again no one is doubting that..but read what I had stated somewhere else...
You will end up getting flickering on ur Comp monitor as well as ur TV screen...if the picture source is interlaced !....

This is what should have been done :-
A copy of the original film should have been brought here (on negative of cos... a simple transfer could have been done)
The transfer from a negative to a positive should have been done here in North America (in a proper manner)... I presume this is what DEI used to do....
The rest of the process follows....

Hopefully in the next batch of Angoor this is what is gonna be done (or I am expecting the Moon :( ) ?
Top
 Profile  
 
dvd_pankhaa
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 7:29 pm
Posts: 127
if i may complain here,
what has happened to the color
it is faded, seems to be very little of it there
gvi dvd shows better color, at least looking at the screen shots

kshitij????????????
Top
 Profile  
 
faddy
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 9:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 7:25 pm
Posts: 1798
Location: Sunny Manchester..............
if the pictures are fake.. maybe canadaflix should have employed me i surely could have done an excellent job out of these screen captures!! :)
Top
 Profile  
 
ali
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 11:10 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 2:06 pm
Posts: 4944
Location: UK
Satya wrote:
Ali, this comparison clearly shows that playing in Bob mode makes the picture clearer for this DVD (you don't see the combing artifacts in the bottom picture) so why would you post screenshots of force-weave mode when a user has the option of viewing better quality by changing to Bob mode?


I haven't got this DVD (yet), I posted whatever screen shots Arsh sent me - and trust me these were the best of the 30 odd he sent me! I'm pretty sure about the difference bob mode makes to the picture and I'm sure it doesn't enhance the colour in the process - or does it? That's what I was getting at, the difference in colour of the two screen shots not the artefacts. Could be something else causing the colour difference like different graphics cards but excuse me for being cynical with screen shots coming from the guy who actually did the DVD. Maybe they've been taken in vivid mode in powerDVD - which still isn't right as it misrepresents how the video is on DVD. I trust Arsh's screens shots of being a closer representation of the actual video on the DVD than the shots coming from the author.

Satya wrote:
In my opinion we are being too harsh on Indiaweekly. I know DEI had this film for almost a year but the original print was in such a bad shape that they gave up on it (we are talking about a 20 year old film here). Conditions of storage facilities in India are not that great. Indiaweekly took the task of restoring the original print against going for a cheaper option of using a video source. What you see may not be a perfect result but the best possible.


I understand the nature of storage facilities and age of the film - I wasn't really expecting anything from this, certainly not a perfect DVD. As for 'best possible' - like everything else best possible is only good as other standards. If time and money was spent on restoring this print then the colour and detail would shine (regardless of how it was encoded ie progressive or not) - and the print will be mostly be blemish free. From the screen shots this doesn't look the case. So what actually was 'restored'?

Satya wrote:
Regarding interlace/progressive discussion, its the end result that counts. If you take a inferior video source and do a progressive transfer, what good it is? If you have a interlace transfer with sharper quality source, I don't see anything wrong with it? At the end of the day, its the quality I see on my tv screen that counts. According to my sources at Indiaweekly, the best equipments available in India could only do interlace transfer. They did what they could do under the given circumstances.


I agree with you here - this progressive discussion is blown out of proportion. There are people like Rana saying now that they like a DVD that has bad PQ and is progressive than a good PQ interlaced DVD - this is absolutely ridiculous! The PQ on the Devdas is poor, but if it was progressively encoded it would be acceptable DVD - just over look the fact that it's dark, improperly framed and cropped!

People who are fighting for these progressively encoded DVDs are fighting on the wrong front without understanding what advantages the progressive DVDs bring.

I'll come back to the Angoor DVD once I get it.

Ali
Top
 Profile  
 
ali
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:56 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 2:06 pm
Posts: 4944
Location: UK
Looks like the shots being posted here from Canadaflix are in vivid mode - I did get this DVD today and had a quick browse through it. Kinda of overloaded with screen shots on this thread but here are two more of the same point - one in vivid mode other in normal;
Image
Image

... the difference being Canadaflix is trying to pass screen shots off being better than they actually are. From what I’ve seen of the DVD is pretty bad in terms of picture quality and that’s nothing do with progressive/interlace malarkey. Colours are poor, sharpness is pretty much non-DVD quality and ... well others I’ll come onto when I’ve examined it further :laugh:

Ali :baaa:
Top
 Profile  
 
Zoran009
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 7:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 5:53 pm
Posts: 14989
prog or interlaced!!!leaving aside!!this dvd is not satisfactory for me!!

regarding taking screen shots...i always stay, uniform and consistent, using, auto mode, normal colors, so no two diff transfers are treated differently(some of my friends here recomended using vivid mode for judwa(prog) dvd that i humbly denied, my self and still, tried to take shots for comparison in both normal and vivid..and believe me it was not a much difference that i would choose over the other!!
i do occasionaly take a few shots in forceweave for some of us prog loyals!!just to satisfy, our curiosity...that it does show combing!!!

leaving aside giving us a prog transfer!!this film is not even as good as relatively better interlaced dvds have been made!!

Age of the film...we have seen even older films coming from DEI that had been restored to much much better results..this film is old I agree, print /source was bad! possibly, but that does not provide all possible excuse that this dvd transfer has shown!!

Bottom line, even not prog, this dvd does not meet BOTTOM LINE, GOOD, OLD, INTERLCED transfers either IMHO!!!
Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 7:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6140
Canadaflix wrote:
The Digital source I was talking about getting from India is Digibeta - which is made directly from the 24 fps Film source and only contains the movie recorded in the best possible Digital Format. All Indian movie DVD makers have to get their source Digibeta from India.

Is it true??

What was the source and process for DEI (KNPH, HDDCS etc.)and for some better DVDs from Super Digital like Koyla??

Rana
Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 7:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6140
ali wrote:
Satya wrote:
Regarding interlace/progressive discussion, its the end result that counts. If you take a inferior video source and do a progressive transfer, what good it is? If you have a interlace transfer with sharper quality source, I don't see anything wrong with it? At the end of the day, its the quality I see on my tv screen that counts. According to my sources at Indiaweekly, the best equipments available in India could only do interlace transfer. They did what they could do under the given circumstances.


I agree with you here - this progressive discussion is blown out of proportion. There are people like Rana saying now that they like a DVD that has bad PQ and is progressive than a good PQ interlaced DVD - this is absolutely ridiculous! The PQ on the Devdas is poor, but if it was progressively encoded it would be acceptable DVD - just over look the fact that it's dark, improperly framed and cropped!

People who are fighting for these progressively encoded DVDs are fighting on the wrong front without understanding what advantages the progressive DVDs bring.

Ali

Hi Ali,

I didn’t know you were following Progressive/ Interlaced discussions. Understandably, this topic is not very popular yet as progressive displays weren’t/ aren’t that common yet. But, it’s changing.

In recent sales flyers for TVs, it is hard to find any TV 32 inches and up that is not HDTV compatible. Prices are no more than what they were last year for interlaced TVs. So, more people will take note of progressive playable DVDs.

Now regarding the statements you quoted me on:

“I prefer progressive DVD with bad PQ as opposed to interlaced DVD with better PQ”

The reason for this is that with line doubling, progressive DVD PQ will improve and most likely will surpass the better interlaced DVD that doesn't benefit from line doubling equally. I must admit that if the progressive DVD was way too bad as compared to the interlaced DVD, then line doubling will not improve it enough to surpass the comparing DVD. Also, if picture can be weaved back together by pixel to pixel comparison, I don’t consider it to be interlaced, although it will give combing in Power DVD’s Force Weave mode. From this point of view, DEVDAS and perhaps IW ANGOOR too are Pseudo-progressive. The only disadvantage of Pseudo-progressive DVD, over progressive DVD, is that 25% of disc space has been wasted in recording the un-necessary repeated video fields.

I think progressive DVD gives more improvement in PQ (50% as per ganti) as opposed to anamorphic (33%). Of course, best will be anamorphic as well as progressive (why not).

Regarding my comment on DEVDAS DVD: What I said was that I found DEVDAS DVD better than its theatrical print. I was not glorifying DEVDAS DVD here (we all know its DVD quality) but was stating how pathetic DEVDAS theatrical projection was.

Rana

P.S.
Ali, regarding your last statement:
"People who are fighting for these progressively encoded DVDs are fighting on the wrong front without understanding what advantages the progressive DVDs bring"

Do you think it is a good idea to clarify that issue in a new thread? I am not an expert. By no means. But, would like to know the issues. Hopefully, Michel, Ganti, Arsh, sknath, DragunR2, Anil and others can share their experiences and expectations. Unfortunately, Ganti, who knows fully the advantages of progressive encoding, hasn’t been logging on since Nov 7.



Edited By rana on 1038253000
Top
 Profile  
 
Zoran009
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 7:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 5:53 pm
Posts: 14989
Sorry to INTERUPT/JUMP rana ji!!even "INTERLACED" ANGOOR is not a SATISFACTORY/LOUSY transfer/remaster..it seems print was BLEACHED out of COLORS and life!!It is lifeless even shemroo,s crap PAKEEZAH is better! looks wise if u askl me..Iam not addressing orig AR here! :bangbang:
Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 7:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6140
Arsh, Shemaroo has state of the art picture enhancers in their DVD lab. Check their site. They sure can put new life (I think even better than DEI) to faded prints.

http://www.shemaroo.com/shemaroo/new/vinci_frame.htm

Rana



Edited By rana on 1038254564
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 5 of 7
  [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Board index » Indian Media Forums » General

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group