artifacting?

[newpball]

Probably not. Look up 'work for hire'.

You obviously don't know what you are talking about.

Oh, but I do. Only too well, since I have to deal with the issue all the time thanks to copyright thieves on YouTube.

How dealing with 'copyright thieves' is relevant to the question if unpublished old material should automatically fall into the public domain after a certain time is beyond me.

Clearly the material under discussion is from a pirated source as:

Complete name : C:\Daniel\MOVIES\Il Demonio\Il Demonio - The Demon (DivX)\Il Demonio - The Demon (Brunello Rondi 1963) DVD-Rip by davide466.avi

A quick Google to the term davide466 will make that very clear.

I am actually surprised that some of the holier than thou 'copyright hawks' have not pointed their finger yet.

[Coffindan]

Oh yeah I do want to make sure I am not violating any forum decorum by posting about this dvd rip. If I have I apologize but I really dig this movie and to clean it up some and have it looking better than it is would make me happy.

[LMotlow]

Oh yeah I do want to make sure I am not violating any forum decorum by posting about this dvd rip. If I have I apologize but I really dig this movie and to clean it up some and have it looking better than it is would make me happy.

No problem. Short cuts for educational use is OK. Anyway, what you're working with is a long way from the real thing.

[manono]

How dealing with 'copyright thieves' is relevant to the question if unpublished old material should automatically fall into the public domain after a certain time is beyond me.

It's very relevant because my problems with copyright thieves have resulted in me researching the topic thoroughly and even consulting a copyright lawyer. You're the one that made the statement:

The big problem is that very often (re) publishing rights have to be negotiated. So for instance if you even wanted to republish some 1940 orchestral performance of some classical piece of music you would literally have to make legal negotiations with every single member (or their immediate family or estate) of the orchestra and others involved.

And I say that's nonsense. Someone wanting permission to use an orchestral performance not yet in the public domain for whatever purpose might have to deal with Sony Music or EMI or UMG or some such, but certainly not the musicians involved. They might conceivably have to deal with a music composer or a lyricist, but not the musicians as they're always hired. For people not hired (such as members of a rock and roll band) the situation might be different. Which is why I suggested you look up 'work for hire', something you apparently didn't do.

How dealing with 'copyright thieves' is relevant to the question if unpublished old material should automatically fall into the public domain after a certain time is beyond me.

It's a silly idea anyway. When something goes into the public domain has nothing to do with whether or not something has been made available to the public but only the length of copyright for that particular material in that particular country, as much as we might wish it otherwise. Warner Brothers could lock up Gone With The Wind in a vault and never release it and there's nothing you or I or anyone could do about it.

Clearly the material under discussion is from a pirated source...

No argument there. I don't know how long copyright lasts in Italy but would guess it's longer than the age of the fim. If it were a Pakistani film it would already be in the public domain as copyright lasts for fifty years there. In the US, as jagabo pointed out, the situation borders on the ridiculous.

[jagabo]

I posted and my pics were in your post above mine. A glitch I guess, it's fine now.

Yes, I've seen the forum software do that on occasion. Reloading the page usually clears it up.

[newpball]

In the US, as jagabo pointed out, the situation borders on the ridiculous.

At least Sonny Bono did not get his way:

Actually, Sonny wanted the term of copyright protection to last forever. I am informed by staff that such a change would violate the Constitution. ... As you know, there is also [then-MPAA president] Jack Valenti's proposal for term to last forever less one day. Perhaps the Committee may look at that next Congress.[9]


Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act

By the way, be careful using a cowbell in a funky rhythm:

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/12/after_%E2%80%9Cblurred_lines%E2%80%9D_verdict_gaye%E2%...closer_listen/

Idiotic! (IMHO).

[Coffindan]

OK I resized the clip with AvsPmod and that worked. I tried to smooth but cant get that to work. I also tried Deblock but Im not sure why that is not accepting the command. With that said I have saved the session and the script. Now how do I save the avi clip with these adjustments?

[Coffindan]

Oh and after resizing there is no sound. But I think someone mentioned something about that earlier.

[_MrC_]

@Coffindan (and others)

if it may help, to convert (legal) 25 fps files to NTSC format with AVStoDVD:

1. open AVStoDVD
2. go to 'Preferences'/'Video'
3. select 'NTSC' as 'DVD Video Standard'
4. toggle on 'Save current preferences as default' and press OK
5. add your title
6. press 'No' to the message box asking you to change the Video Standard
7. start the project

If you get errors or troubles, post here the project .log file you can find in the AVStoDVD output folder.



Bye

[LMotlow]

Not quite right. This video is film-based. It should be 23.976 with 3:2 pulldown for 29.97 fps.

[manono]

Not quite right. This video is film-based. It should be 23.976 with 3:2 pulldown for 29.97 fps.

Yes, it began life as a 24fps film before being speeded up to 25fps for PAL DVD. And I also slow such sources to film speed (video and audio) before making DVDs. I believe AvsToDVD encodes it as 25fps and then applies 3:2:3:2:2 pulldown to bring it to 29.97fps. That way the film length and audio length doesn't have to be changed. It may not be optimal but avoids such worse ways as field-blending, ChangeFPS, ConvertFPS or hard pulldown.

[newpball]

I know it bothers some people but I still like to raise the common sense question:

What is the benefit to degrade this video even more in order to get this on a NTSC format DVD?

It's just like people give up resolution, quality, and perhaps even their mother in law, to just have something on a DVD.

This "DVD fetish" is frankly flabbergasting to me.

[JVRaines]

Some people just can't cope with the abstract idea of a computer file. They need to have "a video" on "a disk" or "a tape." There is something to be said for this insistence, as computer files are ephemeral and far more susceptible to damage if one doesn't know what one is doing.

[LMotlow]

I know it bothers some people but I still like to raise the common sense question:

What is the benefit to degrade this video even more in order to get this on a NTSC format DVD?

It's just like people give up resolution, quality, and perhaps even their mother in law, to just have something on a DVD.

This "DVD fetish" is frankly flabbergasting to me.

Some people just can't cope with the abstract idea of a computer file. They need to have "a video" on "a disk" or "a tape." There is something to be said for this insistence, as computer files are ephemeral and far more susceptible to damage if one doesn't know what one is doing.

Some people really get wrapped too tight inside their own shtick.



Gets tiresome after a certain amount of O.T. repetition.

[Coffindan]

I know it bothers some people but I still like to raise the common sense question:

What is the benefit to degrade this video even more in order to get this on a NTSC format DVD?

It's just like people give up resolution, quality, and perhaps even their mother in law, to just have something on a DVD.

This "DVD fetish" is frankly flabbergasting to me.

I'd like it on a DVD so I can watch it. I do not like to sit and watch something on the computer. That's my main reasoning.

[newpball]

I know it bothers some people but I still like to raise the common sense question:

What is the benefit to degrade this video even more in order to get this on a NTSC format DVD?

It's just like people give up resolution, quality, and perhaps even their mother in law, to just have something on a DVD.

This "DVD fetish" is frankly flabbergasting to me.

I'd like it on a DVD so I can watch it. I do not like to sit and watch something on the computer. That's my main reasoning.

Your TV does not have a USB connection, or you do not have a blu-ray player with a USB connection?

[Coffindan]

I have both but last time I tried with both I still had to convert the avi to a different type of file......at least I think I did. Hell I can't remember off the top of my head.

[newpball]

I have both...

Then would you prefer to see it higher quality on USB or lower quality through DVD?

I mean you posted a comment about artifacts so I assumed you are quality conscious and try to view the movie at the best possible quality.

[LMotlow]

Then would you prefer to see it higher quality on USB or lower quality through DVD?

I mean you posted a comment about artifacts so I assumed you are quality conscious and try to view the movie at the best possible quality.

Of course he's concerned about quality. I'd follow newpball on this: everything looks better on a USB, everything looks worse on any kind if disc. If newpball's intimate knowledge and lifelong study of physics is anything to go by, a disc vibrates in the player, and even the player vibrates on those plastic feet, and the vibrations send quality-killing vibes thru the whole signal. You and I know that DVD is crap anyway, or else Disney and engineers and politicians wouldn't keep them on the market instead of letting people sell videos on USB thumb drives. DVD's make your TV picture look worse and might even ruin the display.You'd better stay away from those TV things anyway. They're low-quality to begin with, thanks to the engineers and the politicians. Nice thing about a USB device is that it just kinda sticks in there in the plug and doesn't do anything or go anywhere or vibrate or anything, and the politicians can't do anything about it.

One thing you can make and store on a USB that you can't keep on any kind of disc is to deinterlace that dude to play at 50fps and upsample to about 7092x3940 (gives you more pixels to work with. Trust newpball on this). Then load it as lossless media on your USB stick. Use a stick, now, don't use a USB HDD because they vibrate and even hum sometimes, and they need fans designed by engineers to keep them cool. Then throw away your TV and get one of those Smart desktop jobs that plays anything from any source. Thinner is better (Thinner displays make the video look better). Get a big superwide job that you can pile into the back of your pickup with all the ammunition boxes filled with USB sticks, and drive thru the neighborhood showing grandma your videos and amazing your ignorant and backward friends.

C'mon, newpball. The O.P. knows what he wants, and we figure what he wants is within the range of possibility.

Jeez, man. Annoying.

[jagabo]

I have both but last time I tried with both I still had to convert the avi to a different type of file......at least I think I did. Hell I can't remember off the top of my head.

TV's with built in media players usually like h.264 video and aac audio in an MP4 container. Try LMotlow's MP4 file in post #13.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/370722-artifacting?p=2379565&viewfull=1#post2379565

[Coffindan]

Nice post on USB! I really don't know how to take it. Yes I would like it in the best quality available but really didn't realize DVD was considered "bad". LOL I find Blu Ray to be very nice and better quality than DVD. I like having artwork, Im just like that so can I make a USB drive case for it?

What I would really like to do is release my own titles at some point. I feel like here I can start learning more about different types of software and film transferring etc. Probably only a pipe dream but a guy can dream right?

[Cornucopia]

Other problem with DVD's & BD's that newpball would have mentioned: they need to be rewound, so you'd need to take time using a disc rewinder!

Scott

[LMotlow]

Nice post on USB! I really don't know how to take it. Yes I would like it in the best quality available but really didn't realize DVD was considered "bad". LOL I find Blu Ray to be very nice and better quality than DVD. I like having artwork, Im just like that so can I make a USB drive case for it?

What I would really like to do is release my own titles at some point. I feel like here I can start learning more about different types of software and film transferring etc. Probably only a pipe dream but a guy can dream right?

I guess you know that post of mine was a complete joke. By 2-AM I find it difficult to hold back sometimes.

The BluyRay/AVCHD spec does have provision for standard definition video similar to 4:3 and 16:9 DVD. Advantage with the newer formats is a choice of h264 or MPEG2 and much higher bitrates. https://www.videohelp.com/hd#tech. Which is "best"? It depends. Really. Bad quality video won't look any "better" either way, but you can get longer videos on BD disc. Meanwhile, we still don't know what your "original" video looks like.

Kidding aside, newpball did have a valid point: With bad transfers, you can do only so much. Face it, you don't have a lot of video data bits to work with. MediaInfo on your original "DVD" lists only 2000 kbps bitrate, which is pretty low even for standard def. Many encoders consider 2000 to be lowest bitrate allowed for DVD. And, yeah, with some players you can put a video structure on a USB drive or hard drive instead of disc (but if your drive crashes, say bye-bye to every spec of video on it). I've done some of that myself for really important stuff, but there's no way I'm backing up my 2500+ DVD movies onto hard drives!