[quote=āStanton, post:360, topic:122ā]Aute, as far as I understand this, these TV HD transfers must have still a Pal runtime. We have every TV HD channel still also as a SD channel for all those who still have old TVs, and they need for this the exact same runtime cause by parallel airing everything on TV has to start and end at the same time, and this is only possible if the HD stuff also runs the same 4% faster.
This Pal stuff will still bug us for the next years.
Itās different with DVDs and Blus. Even if taken from the same HD master and played on the same TV sets, the Blu has now the theatrical runtime, the DVD is still in Pal.[/quote]
Hmm, so if I understand you correctly, the HD TV programs would be playing 4% sped up which would mean it actually is playing faster?
Are you familiar with the ARTE channel? Do they play both SD and HD broadcasts?
I was able to find on the internet that ARTE does broadcast in both SD and HD. Still kinda confused about the 4% speed up though. Shouldnāt the HD broadcast just be showing 2x as many frames per second, not actually playing the video any faster?
I suppose this could be one kind of evidence of upscaling, if its producing 50 frames per second out of SD videoā¦ maybe?
Sorry to get off on a tangent in this film thread, but actually have been thinking this over since my last post and I think I must not properly understand FPS in relation to film content
I was originally thinking that an old film like this could just cram in more frames using a HD transfer which includes more frames in the scan, but with these films the source material is not going to be shot in anything like 50fps, so I guess you wouldnāt have enough source material to generate a real 50fps scanā¦ so in order to broadcast a 50fps signal on their 720p50 HD TV station, I guess they would have to convert it up to 50fps which maybe produces this kind of effect? Not sure if my logic is sound there or notā¦
The HD version is shorter than the French PAL DVD yet nothing is missing? It should run the same.
Since it is a PAL TV recording I would assume it is simply an interlaced videoā¦ 25fps becomes 50 (PAL TVs used to be 50Hz) by separating every frame into two fields. One field has all the odd lines from the frame and the other field all even lines. But the fields are from a different point in time so on progressive displays like computer monitors it will look like shit unless deinterlaced (but deinterlacing cannot recover the proper full frames). (So basically with interlaced material every frame with movement looks like this http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Interlaced_video_frame_(car_wheel).jpg but you wonāt notice it on interlaced displays)
And NTSC TVs were 60Hz (why?) and so the material was broadcasted (and even put on DVD in the early days and by some companies even now ) in 29.997fps interlaced (by repeating some fields so the running time wonāt change! and why it isnāt 30 I donāt know) so 60 fields per second.
I think it is also possible to show interlaced material (at least in PAL) with both fields actually being from the same point in time so on progressive displays you can simply be shown the complete original frame. The Italian Blu of Sollimaās Violent City is for some reason (probably because the master was made for TV use) 1080i50 yet all the frames looked just fine to me. But I suppose it might run in PAL speed (and some US players canāt handle 1080i50).
And nowadays most DVDs whether PAL or NTSC are progressive so you have the proper full frames intact and if needed (shown on non-progressive displays) the players make them interlaced.
But maybe you knew all this and if you didnāt Wikipedia might be a better source than my possibly incorrect badly explained information.
Ok, so the DVD copy I was comparing run time with is an x264 encoding at 23.976 fps. Looking at the actual DVD now, it has a PAL runtime of 102 min (with 1 minute of black footage at the end) which is basically the same as this 101 minute HDTV recording.
So the 4% PAL speed up Stanton was referring to appears to solve this mystery as the 50fps HDTV capture is the same as the PAL DVD runtime. The DVD encoded down to 23.976 is longer
Now, what I still donāt quite understand is why the action seems to move faster to me, when I donāt recall ever noticing this in any PAL video prior to this one.
@Sundance I found on the stationās wiki page that they air in 720p50. I know what interlacing looks like in NTSC content and this does not look interlaced at all. Its progressive video so I guess it could be PAL interlaced and not visible in the way I am familiar with interlacing.
[quote=āautephex, post:361, topic:122ā]Hmm, so if I understand you correctly, the HD TV programs would be playing 4% sped up which would mean it actually is playing faster?
Are you familiar with the ARTE channel? Do they play both SD and HD broadcasts?[/quote]
Yes, Iām familiar with Arte, it is great. Maybe the best TV channel on earth.
All HD channel broadcast the same program also still in SD. So they must inevitably have the same runtime, and thatās then the shorter one. Actually I havnāt asked me this before ,even if I already noticed that the runtimes of films are still Pal runtimes.
Technically it would always have been possible to air every film with the correct speed. That the Blus have now 24 frames per sec is as arbitrary as DVDs running with 25 frames. There are btw several NTSC transfered DVDs which run with 24 frames. Like Kochās first DVDs of Run Man Run and Quien sabe!. The later and better versions are real Pal DVDs.
Cheers, auteprex. Iāve got the presentiment this print is going to be a real treat for my eyes. Thatās not to say that I tend to be particularly fastidious about some lesser-known filmās quality, but itās always arousing to behold such a film in a genuinely good quality.
Johnny I would assume its an issue on your end, maybe your connection is being throttled. Iāve seen my server upload at around 20mbps before so speed generally depends on the other person
Must be, guys. I got it not once but twice yesterday, took a couple of hours each time.
Iām seeding it now, and will be forā¦ what? Couple of weeks? Does that sound long enough? If Autephex wants me to leave it out there for longer I will do.
I found that it stuttered somewhat on full screen on my TV through VLC player but if I left VLC player in windowed mode then pulled it out to full-screen size, the film moved perfectly smoothly. Iām not even for a second going to pretend to know why these things might be so, but there it is.
Yeah, it probably is my shitty college internet. Iām getting something like 5 kB/s, so itāll take me a while at 31.8% now, hopefully I can get it before fall break is over.
@last.caress appreciate the help seeding, up to you on if you want to continue. Iāve got it on my server which includes unlimited bandwidth unlike my ISP, so it doesnāt really affect me to leave it up until I need to free up space. Iām going to eventually post it over at CG, so it will be there for a while longer at least. Feel free to help seed over at CG, it will be the exact same files so you can seed at CG without re-downloading.
[quote=āReza, post:375, topic:122ā]I donāt know but if anyone cant download from torrent just pm me,i will give u a direct link with high speedā¦
Of course with your permission autephex :)[/quote]
No problem, share freely. Just donāt sell it
[quote=āscherpschutter, post:376, topic:122ā]Downloaded it, but it doesnāt play smoothly with VLC-player
Using DivX Player it looks much better, but I have no sound.[/quote]
hmmm, I use only VLC and have not had any problems with it. Are you using current version? Does your DivX player support ac3 playback? (the sound is in ac3 format on track 1, maybe select track 2 and see if plays the German dub which isnāt AC3)
Also a consideration is whether or not you usually play HD videos on your computer. Some computers may not play HD content very well, depending on video card, memory, etc.
āMedia player classicā suggested by Reza is another good player that may be worth trying. Iāve personally found VLC to play better than MPC but may vary from setup to setup
) in 29.997fps interlaced (by repeating some fields so the running time wonāt change! and why it isnāt 30 I donāt know) so 60 fields per second.
.
