www.dead-donkey.com
https://forum.dead-donkey.com/

Cut (2000)
https://forum.dead-donkey.com/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=18533
Page 1 of 2

Author:  elchupacabra [ Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Cut (2000)

Image

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0189456/

Anyone interested in an AFR?

Author:  Slayer [ Mon Aug 04, 2008 1:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

Yes, please :beerchug:

Author:  turvey2 [ Mon Aug 04, 2008 3:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

Me Too :beerchug:

Author:  elchupacabra [ Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

Alrighty then. So be it. 8)

Author:  Terje [ Fri Dec 26, 2008 3:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

oh i realy want to see this movie, looked over like the whole google in search for it ..

Author:  elchupacabra [ Fri Dec 26, 2008 6:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

No problem, it's coming. But it's not going to be my next release. :wink:

Author:  elchupacabra [ Mon Jan 12, 2009 10:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

I would do this next.

Unfortunately the DVD I have seems to be 1.77:1 - whereas the original AR is 1.85:1

The perfect solution would be that someone rips the 1.85:1 video and I provide the original 5.1 AC-3 English audio. Any volunteers? :D

Author:  elchupacabra [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

If you look here: http://www.dvdcompare.net/comparisons/film.php?fid=2292

You'll see that every DVD that has the original 1.85:1 AR has only stereo sound (2 channels). Every DVD that has DD 5.1 audio has an AR of 1.77:1. :?

I have a DVD with the second specs. Does anybody have a DVD version with the 1.85:1 AR? Preferably the Italian or French version for they are PAL too. :googley:

Author:  elchupacabra [ Sat Jan 17, 2009 10:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

Ok, I'll not rip this then.

Author:  MCMLXXXVIII [ Tue Jan 20, 2009 3:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

elchup, stop worrying about the AR and rip it if you want to.

Many films are reformatted to 1.78 from 1.85 by revealing a tiny amount of picture information top and / or bottom. This is done because it matches the standard TV aspect ratio and is quite normal.

The difference between those ratios is minute, and you're getting more slightly more image with 1.78 (or rather 1.77 in this case) rather than less.

Author:  elchupacabra [ Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

Do you mean that the 1.85:1 version is more cropped than the 1.77:1? Unfortunately 1.85:1 is the original AR and my version looks quite washed out. I would like to see a frame from the 1.85:1 version just to be sure.

Author:  elguaxo [ Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

elchupacabra wrote:
Do you mean that the 1.85:1 version is more cropped than the 1.77:1?


It's as MCMLXXXVIII explained it. I'm sure there are a few exception, but 1.78 has always more picture on movies where the "intended" AR was 1.85.

Author:  elchupacabra [ Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

So I can simply crop it to 1.85:1. :twisted: I'm still interested in seeing the picture of the 1.85:1 version. Maybe it is better. :googley:

Author:  MCMLXXXVIII [ Tue Jan 20, 2009 11:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

Yeah you could crop it to 1.85 if that's what you prefer, it would make little difference though.

Post a VOB capture and I'll give my opinion on the image quality.

Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Wed Jan 21, 2009 5:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

I know it was tongue in cheek, but do not make matters worse and overcrop. Its rarely a uniform reveal/hide xyz pixels when matting a movie.

Author:  elchupacabra [ Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

Here are three screen captures, instead of a VOB sample. The video is interlaced. :(

Image

Image

Image

Author:  MCMLXXXVIII [ Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

It looks a bit soft but a bit of sharpening should fix that. I reckon it's okay to rip.

Author:  elguaxo [ Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

spudthedestroyer wrote:
I know it was tongue in cheek, but do not make matters worse and overcrop. Its rarely a uniform reveal/hide xyz pixels when matting a movie.


+1

The screenies look ok. Some SeeSaw magic is all you need! :beerchug:

Author:  elchupacabra [ Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

I got hold on the Region 1 disc. It is also 1.77:1 so that 1.85:1 info on the net is bullshit. :evil:

I'm going to use the R1 video though, because the image is better/sharper.

Author:  elguaxo [ Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Cut (2000)

elchupacabra wrote:
I got hold on the Region 1 disc. It is also 1.77:1 so that 1.85:1 info on the net is bullshit. :evil:


It happens all the time! Many times you can't even trust what's printed on the cover :lol:

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
What's blood for, if not for shedding?