Jump to content

1-0-0-1-0-0-1

ADMIN
  • Posts

    42366
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

Posts posted by 1-0-0-1-0-0-1

  1. 1 hour ago, 1-0-0-1-0-0-1 said:

     

     

    Thanks for the clarifications. I don't know much about laserdisks. So the question is, why don't Rush's upscales look as good as StickHits'?

     

    17 minutes ago, Rush Didact said:

     

    Likely because they weren't processed with any sharpening algorithms like Stickhits uses. They're just straight linear upscales with maybe some noise reduction or deblocking, which would soften them even further.

     

    Right, but it isn't just sharpness. Stick's videos are cleaner looking. You look at the dark areas and the blacks are black. Yeah, it looks upscaled as opposed to how a proper HD transfer from the original film would look, but it's more watchable than any other versions we've seen to date.

     

    The dark areas of Rush versions are smothered with a ghosty fog -- it's the look that you get when you overdo the noise reduction. In fact, it looks like the noise reduction I used 25 years ago when I was doing tape-to-tape S-VHS editing. Surely Rush has the resources to do better than that.

  2. 2 hours ago, 1-0-0-1-0-0-1 said:

     

    The one advantage that StickHits had was that he had the Laserdisc to work with, which, if it was an official studio release, is a digital copy of the original edited master. While it's still in standard definition, it has a decently clean image to work with for AI upscaling. The upscaled clips that the band is posting right now look like it was taken from a tape, and the results are pretty much what you'd expect.

     

    5 minutes ago, Rush Didact said:

     

    The laserdisc and the DVD would have both been produced from the same video source, there isn't a whole lot between them in terms of picture quality.  The DVD has a slight edge, being a digital format, while the laserdisc is analog.  (The video track, anyways.  Audio was encoded on the laserdisc as 16 bit 44.1 kHz PCM, the same as a CD.)

     

    My understanding is that Stickhits is using the DVDs as the video source and the laserdiscs as the audio source for his videos.  The DVDs had a terrible remix done for the Replay set, while the laserdiscs have the original mixes.

     

    I did this myself with A Show of Hands, I took the audio from the laserdisc and married it to the video from the DVD (splicing in Lock and Key from the laserdisc) to produce a better product than either one alone.

     

    Thanks for the clarifications. I don't know much about laserdisks. So the question is, why don't Rush's upscales look as good as StickHits'?

  3. 2 hours ago, Rush Didact said:

     

    Yup, absolutely. I don't know why they haven't done it yet. The time is now: the remaster of Stop Making Sense a couple years ago was such a big event it even got a theatrical release, and the Beatles Get Back  that Peter Jackson did was a sensation.

     

    A properly done remaster of ESL could reach those heights. (Okay, maybe not Beatles heights, but that isn't a fair comparison.) I don't understand why they won't do it. This band's stony ambivalence towards their archives is inexplicable and irritating.

     

    The one advantage that StickHits had was that he had the Laserdisc to work with, which, if it was an official studio release, is a digital copy of the original edited master. While it's still in standard definition, it has a decently clean image to work with for AI upscaling. The upscaled clips that the band is posting right now look like it was taken from a tape, and the results are pretty much what you'd expect.

    • Like 1
  4. 3 hours ago, 1-0-0-1-0-0-1 said:

     

    Those new videos are upscaled to 1080p, but when you play them at full screen you can see how soft the image is -- a lot of noise reduction was applied. Noise reduction lowers the graininess but also softens the image.

     

    Let's compare the new Xanadu with the StickHits upscale from a year ago. The Rush version is first.

     

    (For a fair comparison, make sure both videos are set to 1080p)

     

     

     

     

    1 hour ago, Rush Didact said:

     

    Yeah, it's quite clear that they're all sourced from the same old video transfer.  As much as I appreciate what Stickhits does, no amount of AI upscaling will ever beat a proper remaster from the original camera negatives.

     

    God I hope I get to see it done right someday, it could look incredible...

     

    It's been 42 years since ESL came out. With the band nine years retired and their fans looking for something new to get excited about, now would be the time to dig out those original film negatives and do a full-blown restoration with remixed audio. If they're not doing that now, I'd have to think they're never going to -- with the band and a lot of their fanbase reaching advanced age status, what would be the point of waiting another ten years?

     

    Plus, we don't know if the negatives still exist -- if they do they're probably in some underground vault that only Indiana Jones and Lara Croft can get to.

     

    Pink Floyd did it right with their1988 Delicate Sound of Thunder video. Fans were clamoring for an upgrade for decades, so what did the band finally do? They completely re-edited it from the original footage and remixed and remastered the audio. The finished product is as good as you could hope for.

    • Like 6
  5. 2 hours ago, Rush Didact said:

    The thing that doesn't make sense is why would they be uploading the old video if they're planning a remaster?  Unless they're planning on just re-releasing the same crappy 80s video transfer yet again, which wouldn't surprise me...

     

    Those new videos are upscaled to 1080p, but when you play them at full screen you can see how soft the image is -- a lot of noise reduction was applied. Noise reduction lowers the graininess but also softens the image.

     

    Let's compare the new Xanadu with the StickHits upscale from a year ago. The Rush version is first.

     

    (For a fair comparison, make sure both videos are set to 1080p)

     

     

     

    • Like 1
  6. 10 hours ago, 1-0-0-1-0-0-1 said:

    RIP to probably the best shot blocker ever. His timing was just silly.

     

     

    2 hours ago, TheAccountant said:

    That we have extended film footage of.  There were 2 guys (Russell and Chamberlain) who were wayyy better (IMO at least).  But yes an amazing shot blocker.  Pitty the one time he got to the finals (that I remember) was with Philly against the lakers with Shaq.  If that series had been called the way they called games back from the 60's and early 70's (when Wilt and Bill played) Shaq would have fouled out by half time in most of the games.  Wilt put it best when he said "I happen to think if one guy has position and another guy bangs into him and he winds up on his back a foul should be called and almost certainly it should be on the guy who is not on his back".  Shaq got away with so many offensive fouls in that series that its not funny (and even more the next year when the NBA rigged the western conference finals so LA could beat the Kings).

     

    RIP to a great player though.

     

    I may have been a little biased there -- I was able to watch Mutumbo but Russell and Chamberlain were before my time so all I've seen of them were a few highlights.

×
×
  • Create New...