VCDQuality Forums - The Lord Of The Rings: The Return Of The King *XviD* *NUKED* - DVDRIP

Show all 38 posts from this thread on one page

VCDQuality Forums (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/index.php)
- DIVX (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=23)
-- The Lord Of The Rings: The Return Of The King *XviD* *NUKED* - DVDRIP - BRUTUS (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=36475)

Posted by [-BiG_W-] on 03-03-2004 12:42 PM:

Nuked for bad AR lol

CTP^H^H^H Brutus aren't having much luck with this one.

Posted by r0t3x on 03-03-2004 02:46 PM:

Or not?

Nuked or not nuked? Nforce seems to change it's opinion every 10 minutes

Posted by JimRitchay on 03-03-2004 04:44 PM:

Damn the video's pretty nice and clear, too bad it has a bad aspect ratio

Still better than CTP though.

8/8/x

Posted by megara on 03-03-2004 05:39 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by JimRitchay
too bad it has a bad aspect ratio

what aspect ratio do you want? reencode it

9/9/10

Posted by Wolter on 03-03-2004 06:33 PM:

is it interlaced?

Posted by Famoso on 03-03-2004 08:20 PM:

Nothing wrong with this one, AR is just fine. Nice release!

Posted by luckyluke80 on 03-03-2004 09:02 PM:

LOOKs good to me i don't have a problem with will hold me over until aug or sept when i can buy it
9/9/10

Posted by r0t3x on 03-03-2004 09:50 PM:

AR is FINE.
No reason for NUKE

9/9/10

Posted by vcdkrew on 03-03-2004 11:29 PM:

wow, looks super ws, which i like.

-ryan

Posted by kjeks on 03-03-2004 11:59 PM:

3 friggin CD's?!

2 is enough!

They shouldve had mp3 sound and kept it to two CD's!

__________________
What the fuck does WTF mean?!?

quote:
Originally posted by Kn!ghTMarE
mislabeled? wat is it then? if its not dumb and dumberer, then it is...?

::LOL! -FuzZ::

Posted by Scotpunk on 03-04-2004 12:44 AM:

Re: 3 friggin CD's?!

quote:
Originally posted by kjeks
2 is enough!

They shouldve had mp3 sound and kept it to two CD's!

mp3 sound blows...ac3 is a must for this movie

Posted by mrph on 03-04-2004 02:12 PM:

Was the movie really so flat in the theaters too? Or is this release cropped?

Nice video and audio quality anyway!

Posted by kiris_mcleskey on 03-04-2004 03:29 PM:

hey

hey im stil l downloading this i can view my sample, but how do i view to see what cd 1 has downloaded into it so far windows media lpayer wont open any of the files

Posted by The Belgain on 03-04-2004 06:47 PM:

Well, I haven't finished downloading this, but it says in the nfo that the res is 640x256. This is an AR of 2.5:1. Normally, "thin widescreen" films have an AR of 2.35:1, which means 640x272 for the correct AR with 640 horizontal pixels (max allowed by tdx rules).

I'm assuming the film itself wasn't released in this AR, so there is a mistake in this release. Does anyone know whether it's due to cropping (the original was cropped to 2.5:1, and then encoded to 640x256, causing loss of picture area, but no distortion), or to bad AR (the original was cropped to 2.35:1, and then encoded to 640x256, causing distortion but no loss of picture area)?

If the latter (probably more likely), then all you need to do is stretch the film on playback. If you're really that bothered you could remux into a container like Matroska which supports pixel aspect ratio.

Posted by mrph on 03-04-2004 11:02 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by The Belgain
Does anyone know whether it's due to cropping (the original was cropped to 2.5:1, and then encoded to 640x256, causing loss of picture area, but no distortion), or to bad AR (the original was cropped to 2.35:1, and then encoded to 640x256, causing distortion but no loss of picture area)?

Object dimensions seem to be more real with the ratio of 2.5:1 than when streched to 2.35:1. That would mean the release is cropped? Assuming it wasn't originally in 2.5:1 AR.

Posted by junchul on 03-05-2004 01:05 AM:

when I watch the movie

it looks very choppy to me
I don't have this problem with any other movie

It's not horrible, but it is noticeable that there is some dropped frames.
Is it just me?
Or do I need a certain codec for this?

Posted by XeroFightsAlone on 03-05-2004 01:36 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by junchul
It's not horrible, but it is noticeable that there is some dropped frames.
Is it just me?

Bad IVTC maybe?

__________________
soda box

Posted by junchul on 03-05-2004 01:39 AM:

Sorry I don't know what IVTC is.

But it's the same copy you all probably have
it happens with all three files

and i got each file from three different sources

Posted by Mistar Muffin on 03-05-2004 01:44 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by junchul
when I watch the movie

it looks very choppy to me
I don't have this problem with any other movie

It's not horrible, but it is noticeable that there is some dropped frames.
Is it just me?
Or do I need a certain codec for this?

Yes. You need the latest XviD decoder, which is 1.0 RC3. Get it from h**p://www.roeder.goe.net/~koepi/xvid.shtml

Do NOT use ffdshow unless you have the absolute latest build.

quote:
Originally posted by XeroFightsAlone
Bad IVTC maybe?

No, it's fine. As to the aspect ratio question, it LOOKS fine to me. But then again I definately don't think its right. Cropped has my vote, I agree with the guy who said the heigh should be 272 that should be right. Time to compare to the Chakra TC and see. Report back later.

EDIT:

Ok I simply took the JPG of the Centropy SVCD from here, cropped off the black bars and compared it to this release. The SVCD the right aspect ratio, when resized it is 640x272, just like the XviD release should be. I found the exact same from in the XviD release that is posted as the JPG of the SVCD and took a shot of it and posted to my host. When compared, you can definately notice that the XviD release is stretched wide because of its 256px height. Honestly it doesn't bother me that much, its only a 16px offset. I'm getting the DVDR and I'll prolly end up ripping to XviD RC3 myself. See the screenshot comparison for yourself here. (A good way to compare is save them both to a folder on your computer and use the WinXP picture viewer to quickly go back and forth between then to see the differences.)

http://www.muffinworld.org/images/r...cd-centropy.jpg
http://www.muffinworld.org/images/rotk_xvid-brutus.jpg

__________________
mmm...muffins

Posted by luckyluke80 on 03-05-2004 02:23 AM:

i do agree after watching it. it does seem choppy don't know why its choppy every once in a while o well im going to go on dvd anyways

Posted by Hardice on 03-05-2004 05:43 AM:

Does getting the new codec really fix the problem?

Posted by psychoace on 03-05-2004 06:43 AM:

yes why else do you think everyone says it fixes the problem? i had the whole bad frame rate to when i installed xvid 1.0 and turned off xvid through ffdshow it ran perfectly.

Also yeah the movie has nothing cropped but ap does seem to be squished a little nothing to bad

Posted by junchul on 03-05-2004 07:47 AM:

The codec worked!

Thanks

Posted by The Belgain on 03-05-2004 11:23 AM:

Since this release does have bad AR, how come there hasn't been a proper of it? Seeing as the Centropy's DVDR is untouched, it should be ok for someone to do an XviD rip from the Centropy DVDR surely?

Posted by Mistar Muffin on 03-05-2004 05:44 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by The Belgain
Since this release does have bad AR, how come there hasn't been a proper of it? Seeing as the Centropy's DVDR is untouched, it should be ok for someone to do an XviD rip from the Centropy DVDR surely?

My thought's exactly. Brutus needs to repack this or someone needs to proper. Either way I don't really care, as I just finished Centropy's DVD-R of the movie this morning. I'll probably end up doing a two cd XviD encode, one CD per DVD, that way I don't have to worry about combining the two DVDs and then split the encode into 3 CDs. This should be nuked on Nforce IMO.

__________________
mmm...muffins

Posted by HollywoodBob on 03-05-2004 06:27 PM:

Just use something like Zoomplayer that lets you specify an aspect ratio. That's what I did and it looks great.

-HollywoodBob

Posted by Psycho-michael on 03-06-2004 12:52 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by The Belgain
Since this release does have bad AR, how come there hasn't been a proper of it? Seeing as the Centropy's DVDR is untouched, it should be ok for someone to do an XviD rip from the Centropy DVDR surely?

It has. Incite has released a proper

Posted by commiewhore on 03-06-2004 12:57 AM:

Re: 3 friggin CD's?!

quote:
Originally posted by kjeks
2 is enough!

They shouldve had mp3 sound and kept it to two CD's!

ac3 is way better...mp3 audio for xvid? what the hell...anyhow, great rls, worked niceley...

8/8/4 <--- didnt care too much for the trilogy..but yea enjoy it

Posted by elamericano on 03-07-2004 07:57 PM:

looks good 2 me using zplayer and changing the aspect ratio, 9/9

Posted by DVDyke on 03-08-2004 12:04 PM:

This should have been nuked not just for bad AR but also for using packed bitstream in XviD RC2.

It won't play on my stand alone without jerkiness and it's not audio interleave or preload.

Posted by Farooq on 03-08-2004 07:42 PM:

The Movie plays too slow about 1 fps. You only notice it if you compare the Movie with another Version of the Movie.

Posted by Hardice on 03-08-2004 08:24 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by DVDyke
This should have been nuked not just for bad AR but also for using packed bitstream in XviD RC2.

It won't play on my stand alone without jerkiness and it's not audio interleave or preload.

When you say stand alone what exactly are you referring to?

Posted by neak on 03-09-2004 05:04 AM:

I compared this to the diamond release. It appears to me no picture is lost.. so wouldn't a simple resize to 640x272 with a program such as virtualdub fix the AR problem ?

Posted by GUN on 03-10-2004 03:13 PM:

hm

in the NFO at the DiAMOND - Release (Lord Of The Rings: The Return Of The King *AC3* *XviD* - TELECINE - DiAMOND)

RESOLUTiON : 640x256

I think BRUTUS used this as reference ....

I doesn`t see any Problems , the only possible Problem is that the new options of XviD has been used ... huh how can they do that *ironic* ...

I think that I have readen in the rules that always the newest CoDec has to used.

Posted by JOEYDOWNLOAD25 on 03-10-2004 04:52 PM:

What fuckin maniac surgested that this should have been released as 2 disk with mp3 sound rather than 3cd ac-3 ,are you simple do you use 2 speakers on your system or something or carnt you afford to spend out on an extra cd-r,
anyhow very nice copy will be keeping this 1 in my collection
thanks brutus!we like you

Posted by patric_angefuhr on 03-14-2004 04:51 PM:

Great release! Loved it!

10/10/10!

Best movie ever...!:-D

Posted by zangano on 03-16-2004 10:54 PM:

Re: 3 friggin CD's?!

quote:
Originally posted by kjeks
2 is enough!

They shouldve had mp3 sound and kept it to two CD's!

huh?
if you dont like surround sound get a reencode or a vcd :P

i like AC3

8/9/10

video 8 because i will have to reencode to get exact AR
doesnt bother me much to me it just doesnt deserve more

Posted by bigmouse64 on 04-03-2004 10:19 PM:

10/10/10, excellent, this ones a keeper

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:29 PM.

Show all 38 posts from this thread on one page