VCDQuality Forums (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/index.php)
- VCD (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=19)
-- SpiderMan *SVCD* - TELESYNC - Centropy (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=2637)

WOW .. the best I have ever seen. Centropy blows everything away at this point.

Haven't burned it to CDs .. no need because I have the S-Video out. Because I am a moron, it took me a while to get it to a watchable aspect ratio on my TV. Using Power DVD I was able to get it full screen at the normal aspect ratio and it looks fukking UNBELIEVABLE.

THANK YOU CTP

btw, is anyone having out of sync audio issues with their shitty Apex players .. BAAHAHAHHAHAHAA

I think 1 or or 2 of you crazy kids and have gotten abit to excited with this release!

Im mean 8 out of 10 for video!!!!!!!!

please its not even in the same league as LOTR's!

anway great release, but they should have just released it on vcd.

I don't see what is the big deal, it is a good telecync, but it is not THAT great.. it looks just like all the other telecync.. I mean they did a good job, but I don't see why people are being all excited and saying this is the BEST ever..

But it is a job well done..

i suppose people r just excited because its a good movie and released with great speed

Fuck SVCD Bashers

I am so fucking sick of people bashing svcd's. Spiderman is the best TS I HAVE SEEN PERIOD. It is worth the extra cd! Go and buy a fucking $70 apex ad-1500. I really cant believe a TS can look this good. Maybe it isnt even because of it being encided in svcd, but i doubt that. SVCD's OWN!!!

blah

Gawd, some of you people need to try to help yourselves instead of coming straight to boards and cluttering them with whinning. 1/2 the comments are bitching about how it doesnt work or how you hate svcd or whatever. First off 99% of dvd players DO play mpeg2, but for some reason they look in the wrong dir for the mpeg, so ALL you have to do is burn the svcd as a vcd in nero, are you listening? its been said 100x, maybe some of you should READ the posts before adding something asked/complained about 50 times in ONE THREAD. Quit acting so helpless... youd be suprised what you can find vcdhelp and google actually have info ya know. And if it doesnt work just fuckin reencode it, we dont wanna hear about your problems when in the time you took to come complain you could have a working disc. Learn to be self sufficient...

Re: Fuck SVCD Bashers

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mongrel
I am so fucking sick of people bashing svcd's. Spiderman is the best TS I HAVE SEEN PERIOD. It is worth the extra cd! Go and buy a fucking $70 apex ad-1500. I really cant believe a TS can look this good. Maybe it isnt even because of it being encided in svcd, but i doubt that. SVCD's OWN!!!

---

NTSC conversion

HI all, I got a Pinoeer DV440, as i read in other post i'm not the only one with this PAL problem. I'm not a newbie at this, I tried with Iso Buster (bin ---> mpeg) and then reburned it with nero (svcd and vcd) with NTSC, i didn't work.

As anyone got this working ? NIN i know you got the same problem, did you manage to get something ?

Re: NTSC conversion

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrPlow
HI all, I got a Pinoeer DV440, as i read in other post i'm not the only one with this PAL problem. I'm not a newbie at this, I tried with Iso Buster (bin ---> mpeg) and then reburned it with nero (svcd and vcd) with NTSC, i didn't work.

As anyone got this working ? NIN i know you got the same problem, did you manage to get something ?

---

Yup it finally worked, at first TMGenc gave me an error when i tried to reencode it, but i gave it a try with the isobuster mpeg file (bin --->mpeg) and now it works with tmgenc. I burned the new ntsc mpeg file with nero and it works just fine !

btw the movie is awsome ! good job centropy

Cant get it to work!

Downloaded and burned the 3 mpgs, plys fine on my standalone how do u play on my PC nothin is working help will be much appreciated!

http://members.aol.com/jbomb1261/nero.htm

WTF is going on !

I sucessfully converted cd1 to ntsc with TMPGEnc using an mpeg file generated by iso buster, but i get an error while trying to convert cd2 and cd 3: (can't open or unsupported error) i've got the mpeg2 codec.

I've tried converting it to vcd with nero as said in other post but got unlucky. Anyone else got the same problem ?:

same here mr plow. i tryed to get out the MPG file it worked for cd1 but cd2 i get an error in isobuster. whats wrong wit da mpg? i aint a newb either.

I have solved the problem with disk 1 and 2, but not 3. I used Tmpg and re-encoded the cd's with nero before they burned. But on CD3 I get an error as if the cd or file size is to large.

this release is great!!!!!!!! i am just really lucky it plays on my DVD player

I finally got it working ! Try it with vcdgear, it creates an mpeg file from the bin/cue. Worked way better than IsoBuster.

Then reencode it to svcd NTSC with TMPGenc

Well i have to say ,the SVCD isnt as good as i thought it would be, not that it was really bad, it was actually quite good, not up to a standard of SVCD though, seeya

Crossy

spider man aspect ratio

Hey guys,
All you bitching about the aspect ratios need to calm down. You got it for free, shut up and buy a ticket and see the whole thing in digital surround sound and the correct aspect ratio. the AR isn't squeezed to 1.85:1- it's squeezed to 1.66:1 because it's encoded in PAL- European pal tv's are 1.66:1 as NTSC tv's are 1.33:1, hence the difference. The OAR of this film was 1.85:1, and it was, like most 1.85 movies, shot open matte, so a 1.33 frame would be exposed to be used fully on the eventual vhs home video release. The black things you are seeing at the top of the frame on a full frame shot are parts of the camera matte box, which was probably there to block a lens flare. Just because the aspect ratio changes for special effects doesn't mean that the the svcd was sourced from two different places, and just because you can see boom mics DOES NOT mean it is a workprint. Boom mics appear all the time in theatrical releases of major movies. Also, i would expect a lot better contrast from a workprint. This was a telesync that was probably made in a theater during a private showing or something. It was probably made using a good digital video camera using a direct stereo sound input and the matte on the projector was removed so that the full frame image could be projected in 1.33:1 or 1.66:1 section of the screen. If the changing ratio pisses you off so much matte it yourself with tmpeg or something, but the fact remains that this is NOT a screener or a workprint, it is a telesync. The hulk trailer before the movie is a dead giveaway that it is not a workprint, let alone the overall quality of the "transfer". Yes, this is a damn good telesync, but not good enough to be a screener.

All you bitching about the aspect ratios need to calm down. You got it for free, shut up and buy a ticket and see the whole thing in digital surround sound and the correct aspect ratio. The OAR of this film was 1.85:1, and it was, like most 1.85 movies, shot open matte, so a 1.33 frame would be exposed to be used fully on the eventual vhs home video release. The black things you are seeing at the top of the frame on a full frame shot are parts of the camera matte box, which was probably there to block a lens flare. Just because the aspect ratio changes for special effects doesn't mean that the the svcd was sourced from two different places, and just because you can see boom mics DOES NOT mean it is a workprint. Boom mics appear all the time in theatrical releases of major movies. Also, i would expect a lot better contrast from a workprint. This was a telesync that was probably made in a theater during a private showing or something. It was probably made using a good digital video camera using a direct stereo sound input and the matte on the projector was removed so that the full frame image could be projected in 1.33:1 or 1.66:1 section of the screen. The fact remains that this is NOT a screener or a workprint, it is a telesync. The hulk trailer before the movie is a dead giveaway that it is not a workprint, let alone the overall quality of the "transfer".