Kamichu! what happened to the sub?
Iwillnev...@hotmail.com
a raw rather than a subtitled version. Still it was a enjoyable
viewing
(my only nitpick was that the animators decided to show-off and turned
the main character into a human bobble-head) and I was surprised at
what
I could pick up on in terms of language.
But what happened to the sub?
Anyways looking forward to some more Kamichu! Finally some more decent
shows
D B Malmquist
>
> I got Kamichu! ep. 1 off of the Meyrin site and it turned out to be
> a raw rather than a subtitled version. Still it was a enjoyable
> viewing
> (my only nitpick was that the animators decided to show-off and turned
> the main character into a human bobble-head) and I was surprised at
> what
> I could pick up on in terms of language.
>
> But what happened to the sub?
It's softsubbed. You need the .ssa file, and a filter capable
of overlaying it onto the video, e.g. VobSub (which I think has
been renamed to VSFilter).
"Kamichu!" Ep 2 is out from Meyrin, but they subbed the preview
as follows:
Everyone, are you ready for the next episode of Kamichu?
Oh no, bad news!
Shii and MrVacBob are going on vacation!
The next episode:
"It Will Be Done By Some Other Fansub Group!"
Until then, chu chu to you!
Curse those vacations! I hope they're not just guessing that
another fansub group will step in.
- dbm
The Eternal Lost Lurker
"D B Malmquist" <d.b.ma...@com.swap-com-and-rcn.rcn> wrote in message
news:42D16C02...@com.swap-com-and-rcn.rcn...
> "Iwillnev...@hotmail.com" wrote:
> >
> > I got Kamichu! ep. 1 off of the Meyrin site and it turned out to be
> > a raw rather than a subtitled version.
>
> of overlaying it onto the video, e.g. VobSub (which I think has
> been renamed to VSFilter).
I think fansubbers who use softsubs should be shot. Putting aside the fact
that most people just don't think it's worth the hassle to install all the
shit needed to play OGM/MKV container formats, what's the freaking POINT of
it? I mean, I could understand if you were releasing a multilingual
fansub--like Dattebayo does with Naruto--and THEY don't use softsubs--but to
do a standard, English-only fansub with softsubs? It defies logic. AND
inflates filesizes. That may not seem like much of a concern, but when you
compare a proper, hardsubbed, Xvid-encoded AVI at about 175MB to a
softsubbed OGM file at 240MB...
> "Kamichu!" Ep 2 is out from Meyrin, but they subbed the preview
> as follows:
>
> Everyone, are you ready for the next episode of Kamichu?
> Oh no, bad news!
> Shii and MrVacBob are going on vacation!
> The next episode:
> "It Will Be Done By Some Other Fansub Group!"
> Until then, chu chu to you!
>
> Curse those vacations! I hope they're not just guessing that
> another fansub group will step in.
Someone else will pop up to sub it, don't worry. It sounds to me like
"Meyrin" was a group that attempted to form, spontaneously FAILED because
they suck, and are probably never gonna be heard from again.
--
Poser Global says you're out of prepaid
Internet minutes, yo!
==============================
The Eternal Lost Lurker
(Fees, shorty, fees!)
www.lurkerdrome.com
D B Malmquist
>
> "Iwillnev...@hotmail.com" wrote:
> >
> > I got Kamichu! ep. 1 off of the Meyrin site and it turned out to be
> > a raw rather than a subtitled version. Still it was a enjoyable
> > viewing
> > (my only nitpick was that the animators decided to show-off and turned
> > the main character into a human bobble-head) and I was surprised at
> > what
> > I could pick up on in terms of language.
> >
> > But what happened to the sub?
>
> It's softsubbed. You need the .ssa file, and a filter capable
> of overlaying it onto the video, e.g. VobSub (which I think has
> been renamed to VSFilter).
Correction: Ep 1 uses a ".srt" file while Ep 2 uses a ".ssa"
file. I don't know the difference, but "VobSub" seems to handle
either. It starts up automatically when I open the .avi file in
Windows Media Player 6.4 (and later versions, I would surmise) and
correctly overlays the subtitles.
- dbm
The Eternal Lost Lurker
"D B Malmquist" <d.b.ma...@com.swap-com-and-rcn.rcn> wrote in message
> > I think fansubbers who use softsubs should be shot. Putting aside the
fact
> > that most people just don't think it's worth the hassle to install all
the
> > shit needed to play OGM/MKV container formats
>
> with a separate .ssa file. The advantge being, I guess, that they
> didn't have to re-encode the video.
....
You're freaking kidding me.
...that's just...BEYOND lazy. -_-#
> In general I agree with your dislike of installing extra software.
> The more you install, the greater the chance of some virus or
> spyware or security hole making its way onto your computer. But
> "VobSub" was very easy to install, and hasn't caused any problems
> so far.
I've got it installed too, but I can only get OGM files to work half the
time--which is why I avoid them like the plague. I don't even BOTHER
downloading MKV files. Oh, and I can only get VobSub to work with WMP, oddly
enough--my player of choice chokes on softsubs, despite supposedly having
native OGM and VobSub support.
> > > Curse those vacations! I hope they're not just guessing that
> > > another fansub group will step in.
> >
> > Someone else will pop up to sub it, don't worry. It sounds to me like
> > "Meyrin" was a group that attempted to form, spontaneously FAILED
because
> > they suck, and are probably never gonna be heard from again.
>
> Their translations seem competitive with those of other groups.
> I guess they just lacked an experienced encoder, which is why they
> distributed the raw plus the SSA file.
I'll stick to waiting for some competent group to subbing it, thanks.
runpup
All waiting people, rejoice!
AnY-Spork will pick up this show.
The illustrious team bringing you futakoi.alt is busy on bringing more
LOLIs to YOU, the viewer. ^_^
So we demand your patience. Thank you.
The Eternal Lost Lurker
"runpup" <run...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1121025535....@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Woohoo!
D B Malmquist
From the same forum: "Kamichu!" is short for "Kamisama wa Chukakusei
(The God is a Middle Schooler)" and runs in "Dengeki Daioh", so is
seinen:
http://img46.echo.cx/my.php?image=daioh05063qq.jpg
Other "Dengeki Daoh" titles: "Azumanga Daioh", "Yotsuba&!", "Gunslinger
Girl", "Ichigo Mashimaro", "Starship Operators", "Stellvia", "Onegai
Teacher/Twins", "Figure 17", "HoiHoi-san".
- dbm
Arthur Kimes
<robot...@booyah.cyb.org> wrote:
] I think fansubbers who use softsubs should be shot. Putting aside the
fact
] that most people just don't think it's worth the hassle to install all
the
] shit needed to play OGM/MKV container formats, what's the freaking
POINT of
] it? I mean, I could understand if you were releasing a multilingual
] fansub--like Dattebayo does with Naruto--and THEY don't use
softsubs--but to
] do a standard, English-only fansub with softsubs? It defies logic. AND
] inflates filesizes. That may not seem like much of a concern, but when
you
] compare a proper, hardsubbed, Xvid-encoded AVI at about 175MB to a
] softsubbed OGM file at 240MB...
There's no reason a file without subtitles should be any bigger
than one with. You might be comparing a group that favors higher video
quality (the 240 meg file) with one that favors compactness (the 175 mb
file)
With softsubs you can choose your font size, style, color and
position.
Softsubs don't require exotic formats like OGM or MKV. AVI plus
SRT is easy. (srt is just a formatted text file)
You can edit the subtitle file to fix mistakes, alter the timing
or insert your own comments or jokes.
**Hello, My name is Inigo Montoya; You stole my tagline; Prepare to die.**
GregoryD
Must be your software. I can't get Xine to read the .srts for some
reason, but VLC will play virtually anything that has a subtitle file.
I don't really understand the reason for needing to encode anything as an
OGM or MKV file. Divx supports multiple subs and audio tracks just fine
for the purposes of a fansub. I'd bet that half the reason for the OGM
and MKV switch is to keep people with Divx capable DVD players from just
grabbing entire series and forgetting about the DVDs when they come to
market here. If that ain't the case, then they're just fucking stupid.
GregoryD
ender
> Must be your software. I can't get Xine to read the .srts for some
> reason, but VLC will play virtually anything that has a subtitle file.
Let's not bring Linux players into discussion - I'm all for softsubs, but
there is *no* Linux player that supports them properly (except for plain
srt softsubs, which is not what we have here).
> I don't really understand the reason for needing to encode anything as an
> OGM or MKV file. Divx supports multiple subs and audio tracks just fine
> for the purposes of a fansub.
Maybe because both Ogm and MKV came before the DivX-butchered AVI, and at
least MKV supports more features than the DivXbutchered AVI container. Not
to mention that both are open formats, which we cannot say about DivX's
container.
--
ender
begin .sig
I'm a signature virus! Copy me to your and let me spread!
end
ender
> Oh, and I can only get VobSub to work with WMP, oddly
> enough--my player of choice chokes on softsubs, despite supposedly having
> native OGM and VobSub support.
What is your player of choice?
ender
> With softsubs you can choose your font size, style, color and
> position.
Not necessarily - SSA/ASS format supports built-in formats, colors,
positioning and effects.
ender
> Correction: Ep 1 uses a ".srt" file while Ep 2 uses a ".ssa"
> file. I don't know the difference, but "VobSub" seems to handle
> either. It starts up automatically when I open the .avi file in
> Windows Media Player 6.4 (and later versions, I would surmise) and
> correctly overlays the subtitles.
SRT only lets you do some simple color changes, and bold/italic/underline
effects (and even these are rarely used and usually not supported except in
VSfilter).
SSA/ASS is the format used for fansubbing. It lets you do a lot and then a
bit more, though VSfilter is quite slo rendering when you start using a bit
more complicated effects.
Properly installed VSFilter will automatically load the subtitles from the
same directory as the video file, when both the video and subtitles have
the same name (except for extension).
BTW, if you're using Media Player 6.4, try Media Player Classic, which is
modelled after MP6.4, but adds some useful features.
<http://sf.net/projects/guliverkli/>
The Eternal Lost Lurker
"ender" <ec...@arnes.si> wrote in message
news:1hxk5ndnzshny$.1fhnapuak4lwu$.dlg@40tude.net...
> > I don't really understand the reason for needing to encode anything as
an
> > OGM or MKV file. Divx supports multiple subs and audio tracks just fine
> > for the purposes of a fansub.
>
> Maybe because both Ogm and MKV came before the DivX-butchered AVI, and at
> least MKV supports more features than the DivXbutchered AVI container.
And yet, strangely enough, DivX/Xvid AVI manages to get the job done rather
nicely...
It might just be that you're an idiot?
ender
>>> OGM or MKV file. Divx supports multiple subs and audio tracks just fine
>>> for the purposes of a fansub.
>> Maybe because both Ogm and MKV came before the DivX-butchered AVI, and at
>> least MKV supports more features than the DivXbutchered AVI container.
> And yet, strangely enough, DivX/Xvid AVI manages to get the job done rather
> nicely...
It doesn't, at least when it comes to high quality releases. AVI (and Ogm)
don't support variable framerate, so you'll always have stuttering in
certain scenes (especially pans).
> It might just be that you're an idiot?
...this coming from somebody who can't even set up his player properly.
Luckily, you're a minority, but unfortunately this minority is loud enough
that it affects the majority of us who'd like to leave the whole AVI
business behind.
ender
>>> OGM or MKV file. Divx supports multiple subs and audio tracks just fine
>>> for the purposes of a fansub.
>> Maybe because both Ogm and MKV came before the DivX-butchered AVI, and at
>> least MKV supports more features than the DivXbutchered AVI container.
> And yet, strangely enough, DivX/Xvid AVI manages to get the job done rather
> nicely...
It doesn't, at least when it comes to high quality releases. AVI (and Ogm)
don't support variable framerate, so you'll always have stuttering in
certain scenes (especially pans).
(BTW, maybe I didn't make myself clear, by DivX-butchered AVI, I meant the
DivX's propriertary container format introduced with DivX6).
> It might just be that you're an idiot?
...this coming from somebody who can't even set up his player properly.
Luckily, you're a minority, but unfortunately this minority is loud enough
that it affects the majority of us who'd like to leave the whole AVI
business behind.
--
GregoryD
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 16:45:13 -0500, GregoryD wrote:
>
>> Must be your software. I can't get Xine to read the .srts for some
>> reason, but VLC will play virtually anything that has a subtitle file.
>
> Let's not bring Linux players into discussion - I'm all for softsubs, but
> there is *no* Linux player that supports them properly (except for plain
> srt softsubs, which is not what we have here).
VLC supports them perfectly.
>
>> I don't really understand the reason for needing to encode anything as an
>> OGM or MKV file. Divx supports multiple subs and audio tracks just fine
>> for the purposes of a fansub.
>
> Maybe because both Ogm and MKV came before the DivX-butchered AVI, and at
> least MKV supports more features than the DivXbutchered AVI container. Not
> to mention that both are open formats, which we cannot say about DivX's
> container.
Uh... no. The formats may be open, but they are nowhere near as
widespread in use, and they aren't any better than a properly encoded DivX
file.
GregoryD
ender
>>> Must be your software. I can't get Xine to read the .srts for some
>>> reason, but VLC will play virtually anything that has a subtitle file.
>> Let's not bring Linux players into discussion - I'm all for softsubs, but
>> there is *no* Linux player that supports them properly (except for plain
>> srt softsubs, which is not what we have here).
> VLC supports them perfectly.
No, it doesn't. Both mplayer and VLC strip away all style from ssa/ass
subtitles, and VLC will often overlap subtitles when there are multiple
displayed at once.
>>> I don't really understand the reason for needing to encode anything as an
>>> OGM or MKV file. Divx supports multiple subs and audio tracks just fine
>>> for the purposes of a fansub.
>> Maybe because both Ogm and MKV came before the DivX-butchered AVI, and at
>> least MKV supports more features than the DivXbutchered AVI container. Not
>> to mention that both are open formats, which we cannot say about DivX's
>> container.
> Uh... no. The formats may be open, but they are nowhere near as
> widespread in use, and they aren't any better than a properly encoded DivX
> file.
I probably wasn't clear enought, what I meant with DivX-butchered-AVI were
the propriertary DivX6.0 extensions made to the AVI format, which are
nowhere near as widespread as Ogm and MKV files. Normal DivX/XviD in AVI
does not support multiple audio tracks and softsubs (there are hacks to
make this possible with the standard AVI container, however if you think
Ogm/MKV are hard to use, you'll find those a nightmare).
BTW, when referring to video files, you deal with at least 3 different
formats mixed together:
- the container format (AVI, Ogm, MKV, MP4, RM, "DivX6/AVI", ...)
- video codec (DivX, XviD, h.264, RealVideo, WMV9, ...)
- audio codec (MP3, Vorbis, AAC, WMA, ...)
- subtitles (SRT, SSA, ASS, USF, ...)
DivX6 brought some confusion into this, since it calls it's enhanced AVI
container (the one that supports menus among other things) DivX, and the
video codec is still called DivX.
scott...@yahoo.com
The Eternal Lost Lurker wrote:
> "D B Malmquist" <d.b.ma...@com.swap-com-and-rcn.rcn> wrote in message
> news:42D16C02...@com.swap-com-and-rcn.rcn...
> > "Iwillnev...@hotmail.com" wrote:
> > >
> > > I got Kamichu! ep. 1 off of the Meyrin site and it turned out to be
> > > a raw rather than a subtitled version.
> >
> > It's softsubbed. You need the .ssa file, and a filter capable
> > of overlaying it onto the video, e.g. VobSub (which I think has
> > been renamed to VSFilter).
>
> I think fansubbers who use softsubs should be shot. Putting aside the fact
> that most people just don't think it's worth the hassle to install all the
> shit needed to play OGM/MKV container formats, what's the freaking POINT of
> it? I mean, I could understand if you were releasing a multilingual
> fansub--like Dattebayo does with Naruto--and THEY don't use softsubs--but to
> do a standard, English-only fansub with softsubs? It defies logic. AND
> inflates filesizes. That may not seem like much of a concern, but when you
> compare a proper, hardsubbed, Xvid-encoded AVI at about 175MB to a
> softsubbed OGM file at 240MB...
>
The Kabuchi soft subs take up 13.6 kb. They're an srt file, Mr.
Rudness.
scott...@yahoo.com
Arthur Kimes wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 18:58:44 GMT, "The Eternal Lost Lurker"
> <robot...@booyah.cyb.org> wrote:
>
> ] I think fansubbers who use softsubs should be shot. Putting aside the
> fact
> ] that most people just don't think it's worth the hassle to install all
> the
> ] shit needed to play OGM/MKV container formats, what's the freaking
> POINT of
> ] it? I mean, I could understand if you were releasing a multilingual
> ] fansub--like Dattebayo does with Naruto--and THEY don't use
> softsubs--but to
> ] do a standard, English-only fansub with softsubs? It defies logic. AND
> ] inflates filesizes. That may not seem like much of a concern, but when
> you
> ] compare a proper, hardsubbed, Xvid-encoded AVI at about 175MB to a
> ] softsubbed OGM file at 240MB...
>
> There's no reason a file without subtitles should be any bigger
> than one with. You might be comparing a group that favors higher video
> quality (the 240 meg file) with one that favors compactness (the 175 mb
> file)
He's probably also confused because OGM's are usually used for files
with dub tracks.
scott...@yahoo.com
scott...@yahoo.com wrote:
> The Kabuchi soft subs take up 13.6 kb. They're an srt file, Mr.
> Rudness.
>
That should read "Kamichu!"
The Eternal Lost Lurker
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:43:09 GMT, The Eternal Lost Lurker wrote:
>
> >>> OGM or MKV file. Divx supports multiple subs and audio tracks just
fine
> >>> for the purposes of a fansub.
> >> Maybe because both Ogm and MKV came before the DivX-butchered AVI, and
at
> >> least MKV supports more features than the DivXbutchered AVI container.
> > And yet, strangely enough, DivX/Xvid AVI manages to get the job done
rather
> > nicely...
>
> It doesn't, at least when it comes to high quality releases. AVI (and Ogm)
> don't support variable framerate, so you'll always have stuttering in
> certain scenes (especially pans).
That would only matter if the fansub was intended to be a permanent DVD
replacement...which it is NOT. :P
> (BTW, maybe I didn't make myself clear, by DivX-butchered AVI, I meant the
> DivX's propriertary container format introduced with DivX6).
*shrug* Most fansubbers use Xvid now anyway.
> > It might just be that you're an idiot?
>
> ...this coming from somebody who can't even set up his player properly.
Um...my player's set up just fine. It's not my fault OR the player's fault
that some media just doesn't want to behave. :P
> Luckily, you're a minority, but unfortunately this minority is loud enough
> that it affects the majority of us who'd like to leave the whole AVI
> business behind.
Dude?
I hate to break it to you?
But the people pushing for the phasing out of AVI are very much a
minority--at least, in the anime fandom.
Most of the rest of us are just fine with AVI. It gets the job done, and it
doesn't have to be perfect--just good enough to let us watch the show until
the commercial R1 DVDs come out.
The Eternal Lost Lurker
> I probably wasn't clear enought, what I meant with DivX-butchered-AVI were
> the propriertary DivX6.0 extensions made to the AVI format, which are
> nowhere near as widespread as Ogm and MKV files. Normal DivX/XviD in AVI
> does not support multiple audio tracks and softsubs
Anime fansubs DO NOT NEED TO SUPPORT MULTIPLE AUDIO TRACKS, you obtuse piece
of flotsam. Nor do they need to support softsubs--there's no reason for it
except the subbers being self-impressed, sneering technophiles such as
yourself who think they're better than everyone else just because they favor
a more complex way of doing things than everyone else.
ender
> But the people pushing for the phasing out of AVI are very much a
> minority--at least, in the anime fandom.
How many encoders have you talked to? I know quite a few, and many of them
would switch to MKV if they didn't fear loosers like you coming at them.
ADTRW is one of the few fansubbing groups that does use MKV, and they're
constantly having problems with people that keep nagging to use AVI - not
only because they don't know how to set up their player, but also because
it's much easier to reencode AVI to DVD and sell on e-bay.
Face it - fansubs are a replacement for DVD to some.
scott...@yahoo.com
The Eternal Lost Lurker wrote:
> "ender" <ec...@arnes.si> wrote in message
> news:3rrw8hk3ghoq$.1ofqy1zx7hn4r$.dlg@40tude.net...
> > I probably wasn't clear enought, what I meant with DivX-butchered-AVI were
> > the propriertary DivX6.0 extensions made to the AVI format, which are
> > nowhere near as widespread as Ogm and MKV files. Normal DivX/XviD in AVI
> > does not support multiple audio tracks and softsubs
>
> Anime fansubs DO NOT NEED TO SUPPORT MULTIPLE AUDIO TRACKS,
Indeed, and they don't have multiple audio tracks. Anything you're
downloading with multiple audio tracks is a rip, not a fansub.
ender
> "ender" <ec...@arnes.si> wrote in message
>> I probably wasn't clear enought, what I meant with DivX-butchered-AVI were
>> the propriertary DivX6.0 extensions made to the AVI format, which are
>> nowhere near as widespread as Ogm and MKV files. Normal DivX/XviD in AVI
>> does not support multiple audio tracks and softsubs
> Anime fansubs DO NOT NEED TO SUPPORT MULTIPLE AUDIO TRACKS, you obtuse piece
> of flotsam. Nor do they need to support softsubs--there's no reason for it
> except the subbers being self-impressed, sneering technophiles such as
> yourself who think they're better than everyone else just because they favor
> a more complex way of doing things than everyone else.
Please read what I'm replying to - I was countering GregoryD's argument
about DivX's proprietary format that supports this. As for softsubs, I
guess you've never seen files subtitled in multiple languages? They can be
pretty fun projects to work on, and we've never had any complaints about
them.
The Eternal Lost Lurker
> How many encoders have you talked to? I know quite a few, and many of them
> would switch to MKV if they didn't fear loosers like you coming at them.
*plonk*
The Wanderer
And for that matter, even if only one subtitle language is provided,
there can still be two reasons to prefer soft subs: because the end-user
can edit them if desired, and because they can be *turned off*. The
latter feature is very useful for, say, making music videos which do not
have subtitles in them.
--
The Wanderer
Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.
A government exists to serve its citizens, not to control them.
Lena B Katz
Ever try reencoding a hardsubbed encode?
That should be enough reason to softsub.
But, if that's not, perhaps you'd like the hard drive savings better. I
certainly do (and, I enjoy the ability to turn the sub off).
lena
staring at dvd sources makes my head ache.... so fucking noisy. all that
wasted space (and we're not even beginning to talk about the stupid
half-frames).
Lena B Katz
Yo! Lurk! Pony up with the facts, please. Tell me the quantization on
the avi, and on the OGM.
What I'm askin is, is the ogm better quality or not?
Lena
The Wanderer
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, ender wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 19:19:06 GMT, The Eternal Lost Lurker wrote:
>>> Anime fansubs DO NOT NEED TO SUPPORT MULTIPLE AUDIO TRACKS, you
>>> obtuse piece of flotsam. Nor do they need to support
>>> softsubs--there's no reason for it except the subbers being
>>> self-impressed, sneering technophiles such as yourself who think
>>> they're better than everyone else just because they favor a more
>>> complex way of doing things than everyone else.
>>
>> Please read what I'm replying to - I was countering GregoryD's
>> argument about DivX's proprietary format that supports this. As for
>> softsubs, I guess you've never seen files subtitled in multiple
>> languages? They can be pretty fun projects to work on, and we've
>> never had any complaints about them.
>
> Ever try reencoding a hardsubbed encode?
>
> That should be enough reason to softsub.
>
> But, if that's not, perhaps you'd like the hard drive savings better.
> I certainly do (and, I enjoy the ability to turn the sub off).
Speaking of which, since no one's specifically noted it yet: all else
being equal, the additional complication of having to encode subtitles
permanently in the video stream should make the video harder to compress
- meaning that it will either be larger filesize or lower quality. Doing
that processing separately, by overlay of non-hardcoded subtitles at
playback time, avoids that problem entirely.
> lena
>
> staring at dvd sources makes my head ache.... so fucking noisy. all
> that wasted space (and we're not even beginning to talk about the
> stupid half-frames).
You're the first person I've heard mention that type of problem outside
of the MPlayer mailing lists... the consensus is that the vast majority
of DVDs are badly mastered, some of them horribly so.
ender
> Ever try reencoding a hardsubbed encode?
I don't see any reason for doing this.
> But, if that's not, perhaps you'd like the hard drive savings better. I
> certainly do (and, I enjoy the ability to turn the sub off).
Umm, what savings? A competent encoder will make the file the same size
with and without the hardsubs, and with practically no visible quality
difference. If you really want hard drive savings (and don't mind a bit
higher CPU usage), go for h.264.
ender
>> staring at dvd sources makes my head ache.... so fucking noisy. all
>> that wasted space (and we're not even beginning to talk about the
>> stupid half-frames).
> You're the first person I've heard mention that type of problem outside
> of the MPlayer mailing lists... the consensus is that the vast majority
> of DVDs are badly mastered, some of them horribly so.
Download a DVD rip (in MKV preferrably) of any anime you have on R1 DVD and
compare the quality. (R2 DVDs are usually much higher quality). (R1 Anime)
DVDs being badly mastered doesn't even begin to cover the issue.
Lena B Katz
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, The Wanderer wrote:
>> staring at dvd sources makes my head ache.... so fucking noisy. all
>> that wasted space (and we're not even beginning to talk about the
>> stupid half-frames).
>
> You're the first person I've heard mention that type of problem outside
> of the MPlayer mailing lists... the consensus is that the vast majority
> of DVDs are badly mastered, some of them horribly so.
Right now I'm working on a motion detection algorithm that will work both
for AVI's and DVD sources, so that I can model translation and reduce
noise by canceling small changes that weren't really supposed to be there.
DVD's make my head hurt. Remastering AVIs is easy in comparison, but
they've got ghosting issues...
(I'm probably the only one out there who's devised a perceptual scale of
changes, as well. It works in HSV, and it's what I'm using to look at the
frame to frame variation in DVD pixels).
Lena
you on the xvid mailing list?
Lena B Katz
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, ender wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:20:46 -0400 (EDT), Lena B Katz wrote:
>
>> Ever try reencoding a hardsubbed encode?
>
> I don't see any reason for doing this.
I do. Most encoders are idiots. Besides, if i've got a filter to improve
image quality, won't I want to run it on all my videos? (imho including
dvds?)
>> But, if that's not, perhaps you'd like the hard drive savings better. I
>> certainly do (and, I enjoy the ability to turn the sub off).
>
> Umm, what savings? A competent encoder will make the file the same size
> with and without the hardsubs, and with practically no visible quality
> difference.
A "competent" encoder will use softsubs.
An incompetent encoder fails to realize the cost in noise and quantization
that hardsubs cost.(the wanderer's post on the subject explains...).
If you don't notice quality differences between videos, you haven't sat
and compared them side by side.
I've got a full scale of crappiness (indexed on various levels, including
overuse of spatial filters, and excessive verbosity) for my anime
collection. Not that any of it has a rating, I generally do side by side
comparisons.
> If you really want hard drive savings (and don't mind a bit
> higher CPU usage), go for h.264.
and... why would I mind that? If you're doing encoding on a machine,
there's no bloody reason why you shouldn't be using the most advanced
codecs out there.
Lena
Ideaware: the policy of submitting new algorithms instead of paying money
to freeware and shareware.
The Wanderer
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, The Wanderer wrote:
>
>>> staring at dvd sources makes my head ache.... so fucking noisy.
>>> all that wasted space (and we're not even beginning to talk about
>>> the stupid half-frames).
>>
>> You're the first person I've heard mention that type of problem
>> outside of the MPlayer mailing lists... the consensus is that the
>> vast majority of DVDs are badly mastered, some of them horribly so.
(In case it wasn't clear enough: although I haven't observed the problem
in person, I've seen enough arguments on the subject that I myself tend
to support this consensus.)
> Right now I'm working on a motion detection algorithm that will work
> both for AVI's and DVD sources, so that I can model translation and
> reduce noise by canceling small changes that weren't really supposed
> to be there.
I thought that motion detection was a general problem, solutions to
which could be applied regardless of the codec (or other format) used?
> DVD's make my head hurt. Remastering AVIs is easy in comparison, but
> they've got ghosting issues...
>
> (I'm probably the only one out there who's devised a perceptual scale
> of changes, as well. It works in HSV, and it's what I'm using to
> look at the frame to frame variation in DVD pixels).
That might be the case; most of the comparisons I've seen made either
use "visual diff" images (i.e., manually examination of pictures which
consist only of the difference between two versions of a given frame in
different encodes of the source material) or rely on PSNR values, and
the latter are not directly relevant to perceived quality.
> you on the xvid mailing list?
No, I'm not - just the MPlayer and FFmpeg lists. (For what it's worth,
I'm - I'd guess you'd say one of the primary second-tier documentation
maintainers there.) Any particular reason you ask?
ender
>>> But, if that's not, perhaps you'd like the hard drive savings better. I
>>> certainly do (and, I enjoy the ability to turn the sub off).
>> Umm, what savings? A competent encoder will make the file the same size
>> with and without the hardsubs, and with practically no visible quality
>> difference.
> A "competent" encoder will use softsubs.
They can't - unfortunately there's too many loud ELL's around. There are a
few groups who do softsubs, and they keep having problems with losers who
can't set up their players properly (and with people who accuse them of
trying to replace DVDs).
> An incompetent encoder fails to realize the cost in noise and quantization
> that hardsubs cost.(the wanderer's post on the subject explains...).
Do you think this matters to people who just want their free anime fast?
Besides, the overall difference isn't that big, and it only matters to a
small group of people.
> If you don't notice quality differences between videos, you haven't sat
> and compared them side by side.
I know the difference, I've seen how proper filtering and encoding can
improve video (worked with a fanatic encoder who didn't mind spending weeks
tuning the video).
> I've got a full scale of crappiness (indexed on various levels, including
> overuse of spatial filters, and excessive verbosity) for my anime
> collection. Not that any of it has a rating, I generally do side by side
> comparisons.
Latest trend seems to be blur, then oversharpen.
>> If you really want hard drive savings (and don't mind a bit
>> higher CPU usage), go for h.264.
> and... why would I mind that? If you're doing encoding on a machine,
> there's no bloody reason why you shouldn't be using the most advanced
> codecs out there.
You and I don't mind, but there are some people who do (not to mention
they'll be even louder when they find out they need yet another decoder
even though "everything else works just fine").
> Ideaware: the policy of submitting new algorithms instead of paying money
> to freeware and shareware.
Hm?
The Wanderer
I think that goes a little bit too far... for instance, I certainly
wouldn't recommend using either snow or Theora at this point, although
the latter is far closer to true stability than the former is; the main
reason is that snow requires an *insanely* fast CPU for realtime
decoding of any reasonably-sized video; it produces smaller filesize
overall, but in its current stage of development (even ignoring the
possibility of future compatibility issues) it is not practical to
assume that most people will be able to decode it fast enough for normal
playback.
H.264 doesn't go to nearly the same extreme, but IIRC it does also
require slightly more CPU power to decode than do the more widespread
codecs, so the same basic principles apply.
Not to mention that the same "harder to compress" problem will still
exist for H.264, just as much as it did for the original codec; there
will still be possible space-vs.-quality savings to be had by removing
the hard subtitles.
Note also that I'm not saying "hardsubs are evil", especially not in the
current era where no Linux player has full support for the various
complications of the advanced soft-sub formats (multiple colors, size
changes, karaoke, that sort of thing) - just that softsubs have definite
advantages, so saying "softsubs are evil" doesn't make sense either.
Lena B Katz
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, The Wanderer wrote:
> Lena B Katz wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, The Wanderer wrote:
>>
>>>> staring at dvd sources makes my head ache.... so fucking noisy.
>>>> all that wasted space (and we're not even beginning to talk about
>>>> the stupid half-frames).
>>>
>>> You're the first person I've heard mention that type of problem
>>> outside of the MPlayer mailing lists... the consensus is that the
>>> vast majority of DVDs are badly mastered, some of them horribly so.
>
> (In case it wasn't clear enough: although I haven't observed the problem
> in person, I've seen enough arguments on the subject that I myself tend
> to support this consensus.)
I've seen it in person, and I'll back you on this.
>> Right now I'm working on a motion detection algorithm that will work
>> both for AVI's and DVD sources, so that I can model translation and
>> reduce noise by canceling small changes that weren't really supposed
>> to be there.
>
> I thought that motion detection was a general problem, solutions to
> which could be applied regardless of the codec (or other format) used?
The problem is that AVI sources tend to be "cleaner"... where there's
noise or actual motion, it shows up against a background of calm pixels.
DVDs, on the other hand... the background is so noisy that it's hard to
figure out where motion ends (as it fades into "vacuum" noise).
In physics terms, DVDs have a higher temperature, and so more small
particles (in this case gradual changes) appear on the screen. Some of
these gradual changes are important, but most are noise.
>> you on the xvid mailing list?
>
> No, I'm not - just the MPlayer and FFmpeg lists. (For what it's worth,
> I'm - I'd guess you'd say one of the primary second-tier documentation
> maintainers there.) Any particular reason you ask?
just curious.
Lena
Damnit jim, I'm a coder, not a designer.
Lena B Katz
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, ender wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 08:41:18 -0400 (EDT), Lena B Katz wrote:
>
>>>> But, if that's not, perhaps you'd like the hard drive savings better. I
>>>> certainly do (and, I enjoy the ability to turn the sub off).
>>> Umm, what savings? A competent encoder will make the file the same size
>>> with and without the hardsubs, and with practically no visible quality
>>> difference.
>> A "competent" encoder will use softsubs.
>
> They can't - unfortunately there's too many loud ELL's around. There are a
> few groups who do softsubs, and they keep having problems with losers who
> can't set up their players properly (and with people who accuse them of
> trying to replace DVDs).
Pity that people can't do dual releases, at least. (or, just release the
script by itself. even if that's only really useful with a later dvd
source).
>> An incompetent encoder fails to realize the cost in noise and quantization
>> that hardsubs cost.(the wanderer's post on the subject explains...).
>
> Do you think this matters to people who just want their free anime fast?
> Besides, the overall difference isn't that big, and it only matters to a
> small group of people.
The overall difference between noisy video and "cleaner" video can be...
very dramatic. But hardsubs aren't all of the problem.
>> If you don't notice quality differences between videos, you haven't sat
>> and compared them side by side.
>
> I know the difference, I've seen how proper filtering and encoding can
> improve video (worked with a fanatic encoder who didn't mind spending weeks
> tuning the video).
Working with XVID sucks. No one, not even the designers, knows how to
tweak things right.
>> I've got a full scale of crappiness (indexed on various levels, including
>> overuse of spatial filters, and excessive verbosity) for my anime
>> collection. Not that any of it has a rating, I generally do side by side
>> comparisons.
>
> Latest trend seems to be blur, then oversharpen.
and when i get back to downloading, and stop coding, maybe i'll get a
chance to see... ::sigh::
>>> If you really want hard drive savings (and don't mind a bit
>>> higher CPU usage), go for h.264.
>> and... why would I mind that? If you're doing encoding on a machine,
>> there's no bloody reason why you shouldn't be using the most advanced
>> codecs out there.
>
> You and I don't mind, but there are some people who do (not to mention
> they'll be even louder when they find out they need yet another decoder
> even though "everything else works just fine").
Not to mention there'll be a hoot and a holler when they figure out they
need 64bit computers to do XY or Z.
>> Ideaware: the policy of submitting new algorithms instead of paying money
>> to freeware and shareware.
>
> Hm?
A friend of mine does it a lot. You like a program, you point out bugs,
suggest fixes, and otherwise suggest improvements. He's got free copies
of a lot of shareware lying around (licensed and unpaid for), because he
keeps on giving people new ideas on how to improve their products.
It's just another way of showing you care.
lena
ender
>>>>> But, if that's not, perhaps you'd like the hard drive savings better. I
>>>>> certainly do (and, I enjoy the ability to turn the sub off).
>>>> Umm, what savings? A competent encoder will make the file the same size
>>>> with and without the hardsubs, and with practically no visible quality
>>>> difference.
>>> A "competent" encoder will use softsubs.
>> They can't - unfortunately there's too many loud ELL's around. There are a
>> few groups who do softsubs, and they keep having problems with losers who
>> can't set up their players properly (and with people who accuse them of
>> trying to replace DVDs).
> Pity that people can't do dual releases, at least. (or, just release the
> script by itself. even if that's only really useful with a later dvd
> source).
That's something to take up to fansubbers - most of them don't want to
release their scripts because they're afraid somebody'd use them without
proper credits or in bootlegs (not that this stops anybody - they just have
to retype and retime the subs, which is still much easier than translating
anew).
>>> An incompetent encoder fails to realize the cost in noise and quantization
>>> that hardsubs cost.(the wanderer's post on the subject explains...).
>> Do you think this matters to people who just want their free anime fast?
>> Besides, the overall difference isn't that big, and it only matters to a
>> small group of people.
> The overall difference between noisy video and "cleaner" video can be...
> very dramatic. But hardsubs aren't all of the problem.
Exactly. It appears that at least some groups (even those doing licenced
releases) try to prevent their encodes from becoming DVD replacements by
purposely encoding badly.
>>> Ideaware: the policy of submitting new algorithms instead of paying money
>>> to freeware and shareware.
>> Hm?
> A friend of mine does it a lot. You like a program, you point out bugs,
> suggest fixes, and otherwise suggest improvements. He's got free copies
> of a lot of shareware lying around (licensed and unpaid for), because he
> keeps on giving people new ideas on how to improve their products.
Hehe, I got my free copies by translating (and sometimes betatesting) the
programs :)
Tobias Diedrich
> staring at dvd sources makes my head ache.... so fucking noisy. all
> that wasted space (and we're not even beginning to talk about the
> stupid half-frames).
Well, I for one like film-grain noisyness. It also helps masking artifacts.
For example the 8 bits of luminance resolution you get with a normal PC is not
enough in dark scenes (mpeg2 optionally supports 10bit AFAIK).
And if you filter away the noise you usually loose a bit of detail.
As for half-frames, I guess this legacy is there to stay (i.e. HDTV has 1080i).
For the record, AFAIK half-frames were introduced as a simple human-perception
based 2:1 compression scheme to reduce the television bandwidth requirements.
640x480@30fps would have flickered too much and 640x240@60fps would have had too
low resolution, so it was a good compromise at the time.
(And IMHO it still is, if you have a proper interlaced display, not one of those
fancy 120Hz TVs, which do a _lot_ of processing to convert the video)
--
Tobias PGP: http://9ac7e0bc.uguu.de
.
pikatxu
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 16:45:13 -0500, GregoryD wrote:
>
>
>>Must be your software. I can't get Xine to read the .srts for some
>>reason, but VLC will play virtually anything that has a subtitle file.
>
>
> Let's not bring Linux players into discussion - I'm all for softsubs, but
> there is *no* Linux player that supports them properly (except for plain
> srt softsubs, which is not what we have here).
I just downloaded the first kamichu mkv episode and it works fine with
mplayer, as usual, I never had any problem with
softsubs
Tobias Diedrich
> I just downloaded the first kamichu mkv episode and it works fine with
> mplayer, as usual, I never had any problem with
> softsubs
That's the fine difference between basically working and working properly.
:-)
For example, mplayer does not support colored subtitles and advanced
subtitling features (Like different fonts with different sizes and Karaoke
effect in SSA).