Відео

What about fractal upscaling?

The thing with Lucas is that he's always trying to push the boundaries of what's possible. Digital cinema cameras are pretty common today but back then the technology was still growing and someone had to be the first to take the leap. Now, Lucas wasn't the first guy to shoot a movie on digital cameras but where Lucas goes, the industry tends to follow so when he did it. others stood up and took notice. The first Red camera launched 2 years after Revenge Of The Sith came out and digital technology has been growing ever since. In a sense Lucas sacrificed his movies for the sake of pushing the technology forward.

Magnifique!

I would like to use this workflow, but for DaVinci Wide Gamut. How does one acquire the .cube file necessary for the last step, since I don't want to use ACES?

AI Video Upscaling has also come a long way.

AI upscaling pretty much solves this entirely. Also they could re-render the effects very cheaply, I don't know why you think it would be expensive. Compute power is about 1000 times cheaper now, and it wouldn't even need to done for each scene. So if they have the files it would be easy.

I feel llike this is something AI could be used to solve.

Thank God the prequels are too terrible for me to care.

This video is old but… This video mostly focuses on resolution of remastering old footage which does matter. However bitrate is an extremely important part of how good video footage looks. The 4KUHD of movies that were not filmed in 4K will still have more actual detail because there is actually more information there because they use higher bitrates for 4KUHD which will make it closer to the master copy than the 1080p blu ray that they released.

To be fair, you are forgetting that AI video upscaling works wonders on some of these movies. I used Topaz Video AI to upscale some old George Lopez SD DVD rips I made around 2007 and remastered them in 4K 4:3 via AI and it looked insanely good compared to the original. It "interprets"/fills in data based on the learning model and can usually do pretty well. As time goes on, the AI will likely become even better and more powerful and accurate. Obviously you can't get the same "detail" by normal "stretch upscaling" and a sharpness post-process, but with AI it looks insanely uncanny.

Absolutely fantastic video.

So you're getting some things wrong here: The first stage isn't the creation of a "master", it's creation of Original Cut Negative/OCN (note - this is your original camera negative cut and conformed to the work print and will also include optical effects that are not original camera negatives, but are treated as such because they are the first generation of the end product). From the OCN you'll do an answer print to get all the color work spot on, once that's completed, two inter-positives will be made, one will be used to as a "Video and Film master" the second will be archive copy in case you damage the first copy. You want ot use your OCN as little as possible here because you don't want to damage it or wear it out. Now for each step you get away from OCN, you'll have some loss of resolution, so think about when you see a film back in the old days and it's actually film, that print was 3 generation away from the OCN (OCN makes IP, IP make Dupe Neg, Dupe Neg makes release prints). So most of us who saw the original trilogy back in the day, didn't see full resolution due to photo chemical based generation loss. Now most of us who also saw the movie after the first print releases saw it either on 1/2" video tape or of you were lucky laser disc, and the resolution was at NTSC (about 400 dpi), so we remember that being low resotion today vs the newer digital work flow that can retain the details of the OCN here and can clean up the optical special effects too and make a much better end product then you could make back in the day.

One thing that has been super promising is the advancement in AI upscaling - and I do hope that studios in the future use it to help make better remasters.

What a great and informative video!

Here is a bizare thing lord of the rings was shot in 35 mm film with practical effects but when they realsed the 1080p bluray version the colors where changed from the original print everything had a green tint it was fast forward to 2020 when peter jackson decided to remaster the trilogy to 4k he remastred it but guess what he used the digital 1080bluray printto remaster rather than to scan the 35mm film in 4k this has to be biggest blunder of remastring

The quality of the content is unmatched. Truly one of a kind.

Still not full frame 1000 nits it is peak L

no process can create details that were not there. They can sharpen images but they can’t compensate for an image that is poor quality to begin with.

2:38 The Cat

the real problem here is that nowadays everyone is too much obssesed with perfection....

The state of AoTC and RoTS is so weird to me. The effects should by todays standards very cheap to redo. And we're not talking about Buffy the Vampire Slayer here, this is Star Wars, at any point they could've burned literally any amount of cash they'd want. Shooting on digital cameras does hurt the remastering process, but leaving aside the Disney trilogy, these two movies should still be the best looking ones. Also, after comparing the official 4k releases to Harmy's Despecialized and project 4KXX releases, I am of the opinion that the people responsible for those remasters must have been taking the piss. It's unbelievable how much of a better job the fans did.

luckily the trilogy doesn't need a remaster, it's perfect as is (or well... "perfect")

Hey this is pretty interesting... *Cotton Eye Joe reference exactly where it should have been* Alright, I'll subscribe.

8k likely WILL be the upper limit for many decades to come. The vast majority of people's eyes simply don't have enough resolution themsevles to notice any difference, unless they are looking at a 20ft screen from a few feet away. The only exception to this I can imagine, is if in the future, 'zooming in' to a tiny piece of a film is wanted for some reason. Say, you're watching a film showing a stadium filled with 50,000 people from 1,000ft in the air, and your buddy was an extra in the stadium. You want to watch that bead of sweat roll down his nose & fill your screen, so you zoom in to over 1,000x. Yeah... not likely to be something most people would do on a regular basis, unless they do Spy Work. Of course... there IS the relevance of creating a completely believable virtual world, where you would ideally want a 1-to-1 ratio of 1 pixel = 1 ATOM. That would probably satisfy just about everyone. ^_^

Very understandable and useful. Good job! To further understand, why there are always two opposing frequencies that produce the same colour impression, one could add to 6:37: With the assymmetric overlapping of the susceptibility curves and the approx. proportional response of each cone to the combined weighted intensity of all frequencies, Grassmann's Laws hold as follows: Any vector of three visible spectral frequencies (f1, f2, f3) maps linearly to (S, M, L) spanning a convex subset of a 3d vector space. Linear algebra then shows, that due to linear independence in 3d, even after projecting out intensity (luminence) to a 2d subspace, you can counteract any shift of one spectral frequency with a shift of the other frequency to get the same S:M:L impression. Then you tweak the horseshoe shape to make the lengths all the line segments, that meet in the same color impression, to reflect their mixing ratios. And this, too, is possible because of linearity and smoothness of the cone response.

Would the 2k versions of the prequels maybe be released and look ok?

Iron your shirt? I can't hear what you're saying over the wrinkles. :P

You can use grain density.

looking this up after otoys amazing 2001:a space odyssey doc. mentioned the slit scan effect. One of my favorite design elements. The whole reason i got into dabbing in fx and 3d and photoshop is because of star trek tng. Awesome bonus this video breaks down the warp effect and the stargate from 2001. subscribed.

Resolution is only one variable. Resolution, in displays, is low on the list of importance. Contrast and black level is at the top. Excellent video!

10:24 It is probably not difficult to re-render these scenes anymore, computers have come a long way since then, so I doubt the reason was that it would take too long. The issue was likely file loss or something.

Film just looks better

Oh, no! Not the prequels! What will we do?

it's pretty wild that "we" made the switch from film to digital a while ago but are just now starting to catch up to the fidelity of film in order to properly display all the detail captured.

Would you make a video about the PA279CRV? It seems to be one of the cheapest AdobeRGB capable displays available.

🔥

👏

Face: 12 Voice: 16 Arms: 40 Jokes: Timeless

I doubt that the sequel trilogy effects were created in 4k, they were likely rendered in 2k and upscaled to 4k.

Great video!

One thing you didn't mention is that a lot of old TV shows were recorded directly to video tape. The tapes used were better than the ones available to the public, but these shows can never be remastered, because they were recorded in 480i on tape, with all of the rainbow banding and dot crawl built in. It would take some very impressive programming to make those look good. Also, part of the reason that SD recordings aren't remembered well is that they don't scale properly to HD displays. They really didn't look that bad on a CRT. It's ironic that most early adopters were paying a LOT of money to make their shows look worse than before.

Keep up the good work!

4:44 "Telly-sinny" It's pronounced "tele-scene" bro 😂

Your background is ai because the speaker turned into a cat.

Preguels have film versions that have much more natural colour and lots of more detail in them.

awesome video. I had no idea what was going on behind the scene, I just always pressed a button and there was my picture

This is good, star wars prequels were abomination

ive always wondered this. most interesting video ive seen in a while. nice job.

I seem to remember seeing ROTJ in 1983 at a 70mm theater but I may be mistaken. Also I am not sure I fully agree that the technology does not exist to upscale the 2K digital effects shots. Current GPUs use real time AI upscaling today on PCs and even frame generation. Admittedly this is nowhere near the needs of cinematic mastering, but they would not require real time processing either. AI can easily quadruple scale, or basically make one old pixel into 4 new ones, then use previous converted frames to determine change at each pixel, apply anti aliasing to take the jagged edges out of lines, etc. The result would 25% real data and 75% generated data. After AI has had its go at it human artists can look for any improper artifacts that remain (also using computer support). While the results will not be as good as a native 4k or 8k original it would come very close to it.

There are only 6 parts to the skywalker saga