As problaby you all know, I need a new PC, and I think it's time to buy one, because, if I will not decide, I will never buy one!
Frankly, the "revenant" actual PC works quite well, but I can't stand to spend another week just to encode lossless a "simple" project like Waterworld - I can't think how much will take to encode other, more heavy, projects...

I would choose between two interesting models, and I need an advice - even know if prices are good, as I think:

Workstation - 420€ (maybe shipping included) (reached this price from 550€)
CPU: Intel Xeon E52620 6 Core 12 Thread 2.0 GHz, 2.5 Ghz Turbo, TDP 95 W
Mother board: Gigabyte X79 UD3, Quad channel
Memory: 4x8 (32) GB DD3 1333 GHZ
Video card: AMD Radeon HD 6850 2 GB GDDR5
HDDs: 2 HDD Seagate 1 TB 7200 rpm +1 SSD Samsug 850 EVO 256 GB +1 SSD 110 GB
OS: Windows 10 pro 64bit

Mini Desktop - 360€ + shipping (maybe 20€)
CPU: Intel Core i7 3770 (should be 3.4GHz)
Motherboard: Intel Mini DH61BL
Memory: 8GB (2 x 4GB ddr3)
Video card: none - Intel 4000
HDDs: SSD 120GB
OS: Windows 7 pro 64bit

Workstation PROs:
Great CPU, great motherboard, plenty of RAM, very good video card, a LOT of HDDs (even if small)

Desktop PROs:
Higher CPU clock than the workstation, price is a bit lower, has 6 months warranty

I searched a lot on the net about the two CPUs, and even if the i7 has an higher clock, the Xeon should have quad channel memory Vs dual, more cache, higher bus speed); plus, the workstation has more memory, has more HDDs, has a good video card, has a better (I think) motherboard... this lead me to think to buy the workstation, that has a very good price, and, eventually, in the future, upgrade the CPU,

Last thing: of course, they should work perfectly with VirtualDub and AviSynth, and MUST be a lot faster (I'd like to be 5x fast) than my actual Core 2 Duo E6300 1.86GHz, both with AviSynth, and also with x264. Other speed improvements are not that important, apart 4K fluid play, even if with those video card, no more than a "mere" 1920x1080 resolution is possible, that is good for now with my plasma HDTV set, and for the near future, where I would like to find a bigger, used, HDTV plasma set, waiting for a great UHDTV technology at good price...

Sadly, according to this page https://openbenchmarking.org/showdown/pts/ffmpeg-2.5.0 it seems that the speed increase will not be so high, as one could think following benchmarks score... indeed, the Xeon (with benchmark almost 8x the Core 2 Duo E6300) is "only" 3x faster, while the i7 3770 (benchmark almost 10x) is "only" 4.5x faster... still, faster than Xeon!

HELP!!!

Finally, after two weeks of downloading - yep, 14 days, more or less - I grabbed the famous HDTV versions of the whole trilogy! (I searched those files for the last two or three years, by the way...)

Fellowship Of The Ring.mkv - (3:28:18) 1920x1088 (active 1893x782) 27634067KB
The Two Towers.mkv -(3:44:06) 1920x1088 (active 1893x782) 26044590KB
The Return Of The King.mkv -(4:12:26) 1920x1080 (1920x798) 33587604KB (C more HD logo in the black bar)

Quality is really good; I’m often surprised to discover how good these MPEG-2 broadcasts were (are, like the latest WOWOW Star Wars). But now, I’m aware of the existence of open matte 16:9 versions… and the mission to find’em all begins!

OK, back on track: it is still interesting the idea of using those HDTV versions to make a project? IIRC the EE BD of FOTR has of course different colors than this (and the EE DVD), while TTT and ROTK seems to suffer less of color problems; can't remember the DNR "affaire", though...

It comes to my mind some shots found in the theatrical version are not included (or are different) in the extended edition; also, I discovered there are some snippets of deleted scenes in trailers and documentaries - I have seen them, and many are ready to be inserted, while others have bad quality, or unfinished... but Frodo as a sort of Gollum is nice!

I wonder if an "Extra Extended Edition" could be feasible, and interesting.

I registered a while back, but never introduced myself. I'll be around these parts a bit more now, so I thought I should say hello! I am a regular over at OT and have been directed here for a few projects. This place is awesome!

Let's face it: even little blind bugs found in the most remote cave in a forgotten land know that, maybe, it's time to upgrade our video system to Ultra HD (I will not use 4K, as, to me, it's the DCP 17:9 version).

So, what do I think about this? Frankly, after the demise of my beloved full LED 55' HDTV (sigh!) I thought to buy a new UHD TV, but prices were quite high at that moment, and I grabbed an used, nice "small" 42' plasma HDTV... and I was surprised how good it is! Really, anybody could think plasma technology is obsolete, and maybe it is, but hey, quality wise, it's still to be beaten in many fields, even by newest OLED TVs...

Possible solutions:

1. Buy now an UHDTV, spending more money that I want to
   
2. Stick with my old 42' plasma HDTV for a while
   
3. Upgrade to a bigger plasma HDTV now (read: 60' or 65'), used, at a great price, waiting for affordable (and improved) OLED or full LED UHDTV
   

• size doesn't lie! Just make a comparison of the filesize of the HD and UHD files; the UHD, encoded in AVC, should be at least twice the size of the HD, and, if encoded in HEVC, should be at least the same size - of course, the bigger the better (usually...); also, always check the Kush Gage calculator to discover if its bitrate is good enough.
  
• master is everything! If the UHD source use a 2K master, it will be simply not possible to have a definition given by a 4K one... if you have a good quality BD version, stick with it.
  
• read reviews. More than one; read what magazines think of a given title, what forum posts say about it, and, if all say it's great, it *should* be great! But use always your own mind, so, before shell out some cash, just...
  
• compare, compare, compare! Even if the previous advices are valid, sometimes the best things to do is to watch screenshots from both versions, and compare them - possibly in full screen, using the display where you watch movies... because when you see them zoomed in your 15' laptop screen, and the UHD seems vastly superior, maybe you will discover later that, when watched in your big brand new 55' UHD, sit four meters (about 13ft) away, the difference is not that great...
  

• UHD source, UHD display - not only for resolution, but also for HDR
  
• UHD source, HD display - difference with HD sources could be quite evident
  
• HD source, HD display - no need to uspcale (with a 1:1 pixel mapping)
  
• HD source, UHD display - upscaling "could* degrade the quality
  

I haven't found anywhere info about an open matte version of LOTR trilogy, but there were full screen DVDs, they were p&s versions of an open matte version, so at least there *should* be an open matte master used for them.

Proofs? https://fanrestore.com/thread-20-post-22...l#pid22751

Ideas?

G'day all, 

Poita here, just registered as requested on OT.COM

I need some help to properly IVTC a video clip (H.264, 29.97fps, 720x480 enhanced) & a movie (D-Theater: MPEG2, 29.97fps, 1080i).

I don't have any experience with Avisynth or the likes.
A guide for this would probably help others as well.

Any help for the proper tools and methods would be appreciated

Hi there mates, a BR (Blade Runner, not Battle Royale) nut saying hello here.
I am a budding cinematographer trying to break into the industry, just arrived in London couple months ago after 6 years of wasting my life in other parts of Britain.
Hopefuly I find something interesting here beside my craving for the regraded BR blu-ray.

Would be cool if I could find a FAQ here, if some could help I would appreciate so much.

I followed any episodes of the new series - from Cristopher Ecclestone's doctor ahead - but I missed the last one... so, I took the occasion an rewatch them all during this week - currently in the middle of series 8.

Peter Capaldi is not the best Doctor IMHO - don't know if I preferred Matt Smith or David Tennant... still think he doesn't "fit" the new course of young doctors... maybe he would have fit in the original series! Also, now, episodes are less interesting... can't say he is not a good actor - he's fun, too; maybe it's just the author's fault.

Best episode: "Blink" - and all related "angels".

Never heard before, this little Nexflix sci-fi movie surprised me; almost no special effects, few actors, story not entirely original - read: there were at least two movies and a TV series based on the central idea (can't say more, won't spoiler it); incredibly low budget has no impact on the story itself: quite fast pacing, interesting actors, good dialogs and not so much music, just enough...

Every sci-fi fan - who can stand to watch a movie without space ships or laser sabers - will like it!