DVDizzy Forum

This week I tried out a program called FlaskMPEG that is available for free on the internet. I'll let you guys do a GOOGLE search for it...
But anyways, I took my copy of the Little Mermaid and reframed the entire film into 16x9 using the high quality video scaling function.

It looked pretty cool on the monitor of my computer, and when I finally stuck the disc into my TV, I was amazed at how much better I was able to make the transfer look using just a few of the tools included in the program. The downside is that I don't have the option of burning the disc in 5.1 surround, just Dolby 2.0 surround...but the picture is still pretty cool.

I was able to windowbox it, so that I can see more of the picture on the sides than I usually can on my monitor...
and the video scaling quality is excellent,
if I didn't know any better, after I'd used the 3:2 pulldown feature and it's restructuring tool, after the brightness controls and the matting feature,
and after finally re-encoded the film in 16x9 MPEG 2, I'd say that I can honestly tell a difference in display quality on my monitor. However, the compression artefacts are a little more pronounced, due to the fact that it's been compressed two times.

However...I was pretty proud of myself on that one....and I think it's pretty cool that one program was able to do that...for FREE.
(However, I did have to pay for the DVD Burning Program many years ago - Sonic DVDit! PE)

I think for my next project I'm going to do the R4 version of A Goofy Movie, and then redo the R1 Happiest Millionaire Widescreen Roadshow edition.

Just thought I'd share with you what tools you can use to simulate a higher resolution image for those of you with 16x9 displays, or 4x3 displays with 16x9 enhanced mode capabilities!

That1GuyPictures:

I see you've been in the Lab too
(MMB might want to talk to you about some Darby O'Gill issue )


Yeah , it's funny when consumers can make better versions on their PCs with relatively inexpensive tools, while studios with $$$$$$ equipment can't do better...

That1GuyPictures wrote:I know that the Archive Edition Laserdisc transfer of Mary Poppins that I have in 1.66:1 was far more superior in color (And even framing) when compared to the 1.85:1 DVD edition which lops off the top and bottom slightly. (I'm still scratching my head on that one.)

Yeah the Archive was a good transfer. I haven't seen the Masterpiece LD or the DVD. Maybe the Archive source was a Technicolor print or something? (I remember it having the slighly darker contrastier look that transfers from prints have, but the colors were good.) While the other editions might been done from Eastmancolor material?

About the framing, that's the way you make the 1.85 version from an image shot on an Academy camera. You crop (or "letterbox") it vertically (You can see this in my <a href="http://www.ultimatedisney.com/forum/vie ... 164">mulan aspect ratio comparison</a>). The 1.85 version would have less top and bottom. Btw mvealf informed us that the Japanese Mary Poppins showed even MORE picture. Having not seen it, well I can only conjeture, but maybe the Archive 1.66 is a slight pan/scan of the 1.85 image area, and then the Masterpiece/DVD is a letterboxing of the 1.66 pan/scan of the 1.85 area? (hope that makes sense) while mvealf's Japanese version shows the full area.?

Also, you have to remember that (apart from the various aspect ratios/mattings) each movie frame image has 3 circunscribed "rectangles" one smaller than the other:

1. The bigger camera aperture shot area, which has about 5% more width* than the proper and composed for:
2. Projector Aperture area.
and there's also the

3. SMPTE maximum allowed error, which is 5% less that the proper Projector Aperture (Actually, 3% max recommended ) which is the theatrical equivalent of a TV set's "overscan"

DVDs of course should show the correct composed-for Projector Aperture area within their 480 x 720 pixel frame.





*The camera aperture also has 5% more height of unmeant to be seen image, but that's only meaningful in Academy ratio shot movies, hard matted standart widescreen movies, and 70mm, Technirama and true anamorphic-shot Scope movies. Since Standart Widescreen movies (1.66/1.75/1.85) are usually shot with Academy Aperture cameras, the full height of the camera aperture-unmeant to be seen area can reach the full 1.375 area/framing so it can be much more than just 5% extra, obviously . (Generating lots of UD controversy and interminable dethi posts )

The correct proper height for these, is the "abstract" Projector Aperture frameline (at whatever ratio the movie was composed for (again 1.66/1.75/1.85, depending.) which has to be determined at the telecine transfer with the proper <a href="http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/ ... ">RP-40</a> SMPTE Projector alighment test film or the newer <a href="http://www.proiezionisti.com/img/smpte_ ... ">35-PA</a> version

(The main diference among the two is that the old one included the original Academy 1.375, the 1.75 Disney ratio, and the 60's Scope dimensions, while the new one has them negligibly changed to current Academy 1.37, HDTV 1.78, and after the 60's Panavision 2.40 height ratio . Also the RP-40 jpeg is showing the Full Silent 1.33 Area including the space where the optical sound track falls while the 35-PA image is cropping that area out )

_________________
Hope Just Myself is satisfied by the length of this one

Animated - Pocohontas
Live Action - Cant believe this one hasnt been mentioned - Treasure Planet

JimmyJackJunior wrote:Animated - Pocohontas
Live Action - Cant believe this one hasnt been mentioned - Treasure Planet

I'm sorry...you said Live Action - Treasure Planet.

Did you mean Animated - Treasure Planet (Which is a great transfer, minus the color banding)
or
Live Action - Treasure ISLAND which is just an OK transfer. It could have been a lot better...

I think the worst DVD transfer so far is The Rescuers. It's not my favorite movie, but the DVD looks AWFUL. Of course I agree that Poppins is bad on DVD but at least they have a chance to fix it soon. Also, some of the Limited Edition DVDs had bad transfers, but they were done in the early days of DVD and have an excuse. Besides, they have rectified a few of those transfers (i.e. Mulan), but the Lady and the Tramp DVD is still pretty bad. The Pinocchio DVD was BAD, but I replaced it with a Mexican R1 / R4 version which uses the new restored print that was meant for US release (I bought that alond with So Dear to my Heart). The quality of this Pinocchio DVD is outstanding. As clean as Snow White SE but without that bland look! I highly recomend you picking up the Pinocchio & So Dear to My Heart mexican DVDs. They are 100% same quality as if you were to buy them here in the US and they are the same region so they will play here too. I could tell that both of those were meant for a US release based on the games, and bonus materials. Besides, all recent Disney DVDs have a Made in Mexico sticker (Mulan and Aladdin US editions were both manufactured in Mexico and I suspect any further titles will be).
Your friend,
Louis

deathie mouse wrote:That1GuyPictures:

I see you've been in the Lab too
(MMB might want to talk to you about some Darby O'Gill issue )


Yeah , it's funny when consumers can make better versions on their PCs with relatively inexpensive tools, while studios with $$$$$$ equipment can't do better...

That1GuyPictures wrote:I know that the Archive Edition Laserdisc transfer of Mary Poppins that I have in 1.66:1 was far more superior in color (And even framing) when compared to the 1.85:1 DVD edition which lops off the top and bottom slightly. (I'm still scratching my head on that one.)

Yeah the Archive was a good transfer. I haven't seen the Masterpiece LD or the DVD. Maybe the Archive source was a Technicolor print or something? (I remember it having the slighly darker contrastier look that transfers from prints have, but the colors were good.) While the other editions might been done from Eastmancolor material?

About the framing, that's the way you make the 1.85 version from an image shot on an Academy camera. You crop (or "letterbox") it vertically (You can see this in my <a href="http://www.ultimatedisney.com/forum/vie ... 164">mulan aspect ratio comparison</a>). The 1.85 version would have less top and bottom. Btw mvealf informed us that the Japanese Mary Poppins showed even MORE picture. Having not seen it, well I can only conjeture, but maybe the Archive 1.66 is a slight pan/scan of the 1.85 image area, and then the Masterpiece/DVD is a letterboxing of the 1.66 pan/scan of the 1.85 area? (hope that makes sense) while mvealf's Japanese version shows the full area.?

Also, you have to remember that (apart from the various aspect ratios/mattings) each movie frame image has 3 circunscribed "rectangles" one smaller than the other:

1. The bigger camera aperture shot area, which has about 5% more width* than the proper and composed for:
2. Projector Aperture area.
and there's also the

3. SMPTE maximum allowed error, which is 5% less that the proper Projector Aperture (Actually, 3% max recommended ) which is the theatrical equivalent of a TV set's "overscan"

DVDs of course should show the correct composed-for Projector Aperture area within their 480 x 720 pixel frame.





*The camera aperture also has 5% more height of unmeant to be seen image, but that's only meaningful in Academy ratio shot movies, hard matted standart widescreen movies, and 70mm, Technirama and true anamorphic-shot Scope movies. Since Standart Widescreen movies (1.66/1.75/1.85) are usually shot with Academy Aperture cameras, the full height of the camera aperture-unmeant to be seen area can reach the full 1.375 area/framing so it can be much more than just 5% extra, obviously . (Generating lots of UD controversy and interminable dethi posts )

The correct proper height for these, is the "abstract" Projector Aperture frameline (at whatever ratio the movie was composed for (again 1.66/1.75/1.85, depending.) which has to be determined at the telecine transfer with the proper <a href="http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/ ... ">RP-40</a> SMPTE Projector alighment test film or the newer <a href="http://www.proiezionisti.com/img/smpte_ ... ">35-PA</a> version

(The main diference among the two is that the old one included the original Academy 1.375, the 1.75 Disney ratio, and the 60's Scope dimensions, while the new one has them negligibly changed to current Academy 1.37, HDTV 1.78, and after the 60's Panavision 2.40 height ratio . Also the RP-40 jpeg is showing the Full Silent 1.33 Area including the space where the optical sound track falls while the 35-PA image is cropping that area out )

_________________
Hope Just Myself is satisfied by the length of this one

I need to get a DVD Writer so I can make anamorphic transfer of some films! I was thinking of the Sony double layer writer, what do you think Deathie? in the other side I had the non anamorphic 1.66:1 transfer of B&B which I made anamorphic on my pc but my mom deleted the whole movie which took me alot to get the picture enhanced and encoded! I looked like a DVD quality of the VHS colours! I did the same with a copy of SB that I had! It had the same destiny B&B did! I think it was the 2.35:1 reframed

Boy, it is your Destiny.
*breathes thru a black metallic mask

Hello to everyone. This is my first time here. My name is Eduardo and I live in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. I grew up watching Disney films and I still enjoy them.
I'd like to give my opinion about the transfer of Dumbo 60th Anniversary Edition. I think it's terrible, if you consider it was apparently restored.
See ya.

eduesberard wrote:Hello to everyone. This is my first time here. My name is Eduardo and I live in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. I grew up watching Disney films and I still enjoy them.
I'd like to give my opinion about the transfer of Dumbo 60th Anniversary Edition. I think it's terrible, if you consider it was apparently restored.
See ya.

WELCOME TO THE FORUM!
I'm gald you're here, and thanks for posting.

I agree...Dumbo was a very lacking transfer. Maybe someday we'll get a cleaned-up transfer of it.

That1GuyPictures wrote:

JimmyJackJunior wrote:Animated - Pocohontas
Live Action - Cant believe this one hasnt been mentioned - Treasure Planet

I'm sorry...you said Live Action - Treasure Planet.

Did you mean Animated - Treasure Planet (Which is a great transfer, minus the color banding)
or
Live Action - Treasure ISLAND which is just an OK transfer. It could have been a lot better...

My bad - meant Treasure Island.