Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[al cos.]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

because of our mutual love of Buffy and the real Battlestar.

Speaking of Battlestar 78, I've noticed a few releases of TV stuff from that era getting widescreen treatment (Carpenter's TV movies and both original V miniseries). Is it possible for an eventual blu of Galactica to include the "telemovie" versions in widescreen (I believe they stitched together 2 episodes to create a movie and even showed a few in theaters overseas). Universal still had the source material for the TV version of Dune, so maybe they still have it for those long gone versions of Galactica.

[DaViD Boulet]

Just a bit of additional info: the dialogue channel and surround channels are mixed -3dB down (lower level, about half the power) so that's a big reason why people complain in non Pro-Logic setups it's difficult to hear the dialogue. So it's always handy to listen to even the lowliest of Dolby Surround tracks with a center channel because the decoder boosts the center channel back to the proper level.

"Mono" information contained in both L and R channels ('center dialogue' in ProLogic mixes and what you'd just call "center" or "mono" content in 2.0 stereo mixes) is *always* mixed at a lower level. That's true for standard 2-channel stereo recordings too. That's not a function to assist with ProLogic decoding... it's a practice to make the 2-channel mix sound balanced in 2 channel form because the additive nature of having the same (mono) content in two speakers makes it sound subjectively louder than the rest of the mix. You need to do that with 2.0 stereo recordings (even standard 2 channel music recordings) because when you have the same information (center mixed info) coming from both left and right speakers it sounds subjectively louder because it's coming from two source points... so they always lower mono/center information by a few DB so that it will balance out overall to the same subjective level when played back in 2 channel. Every 2.0 stereo recording properly mixed/mastered is done this way with the "center" or mono content dropped by a few db to keep the mix sounding balanced to your ear.

The reason that ProLogic decoding requires you to boost the center info is because if you filter out that mono/center info and play it through a center speaker instead of leaving it in the L/R channels, now instead of *two* point sources the sound only has one... so the drop in db in the mix is now noticeable because you don't get the compounding effect of the same center info being doubled via the left and right speaker. That's why you have to raise the center mix by a few DB with playing back in ProLogic so that coming from a single point source the center/mono information will sound in balance with the left/right mains.

Bottom line: the drop in dialogue db (center info) in a 2.0 stereo mix is always the case... surround encoded or not, and is actually done that way to make the 2.0 mix sound balanced in 2.0 playback... it's not something to assist with surround decoding or anything particular to ProLogic. Even in 2.0 dialogue is just as intelligible in un-decoded 2.0 form as in full decoded ProLogic form. The only advantage of a center speaker is to lock dialogue imageing in the center of the L/C/R configuration for off-axis listeners. Listeners sitting in the center sweet-spot would get the same presentation with or without a dedicated center speaker.

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by NL197

This is why I'm glad I ended my interest in StarGate with the 1994 film. No need to go beyond that "The End" card before the credits rolled.

SG1 is far better than the feature film. The feature film is just a moderately accurate account of what happened to some members of the team before SG1 started.

[SpaceDog]

Originally Posted by Alan Gordon

HOWEVER, I'm once again appalled by your views on SG:A. Back when it was on side by side with SG1, I was always more excited by the prospect of SG:A than SG1.

~Alan

I'm wondering if you watched SG-1 before SG-A debuted? I find that people who were with SG-1 from the start though that SG-A was just warmed over SG-1, and people who started with SG-A found SG-1 to be a less exciting & flashy SG-A.

I liked a few more characters than Jeff did, but I agree - SG-A never found a direction, never built anything new to make me think it was anything but Stargate in a different place.

[Jeff Kleist]

Speaking of Battlestar 78, I've noticed a few releases of TV stuff from that era getting widescreen treatment (Carpenter's TV movies and both original V miniseries). Is it possible for an eventual blu of Galactica to include the "telemovie" versions in widescreen (I believe they stitched together 2 episodes to create a movie and even showed a few in theaters overseas). Universal still had the source material for the TV version of Dune, so maybe they still have it for those long gone versions of Galactica.

Actually they were released on DVD in Europe. Yes, all the 2 parter Tv movies were protected for widescreen for foreign theatrical. This was standard practice at the time like with V. The TV movie versions are....awful. They stitch together unrelated episodes with badly shot body double inserts (here Apollo, look at this picture while not showing our faces). It's certainly possible for the series to come out widescreen at least, but I think most fans want them to leave it 4:3

[SquidPuppet]

Jeff,

I only recently (last couple years) started to watch and appreciate Anime. I have noticed something that makes me very curious, and I know you are very knowledgeable on the subject, and I gather the Japanese culture as well.

It appears that very few characters are drawn as Japanese/Asians. Why is that?

[jd213]

Here, watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKTvFhRbBt8

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by jd213

Here, watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKTvFhRbBt8

Thank you, but that was tooooo fast for me to read and the music was killing me.

[Jeff Kleist]

Well, don't think I can add to that

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Well, don't think I can add to that

Seriously? I am genuinely fascinated and curious.

[Jeff Kleist]

I think you'll appreciate it more after you search morning musume or akb48 and recover from diabetic shock

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I think you'll appreciate it more after you search morning musume or akb48 and recover from diabetic shock

OK. Theater/idol all girl pop groups. I see that. Cool.

Can you clue me in on my Anime question?

[Jeff Kleist]

Seriously? I am genuinely fascinated and curious.

Well, the video pretty much covers everything on the topic, in far more detail actually than I could have off the top of my head. People in anime don't don't white to Japanese people, and people who are supposed to be westerners are portrayed very differently

Macross for example

Roy Fokker, presumably American of German descent (and often mispelled hilariously in Japan as "Focker", but when I asked Shoji Kawamori about it he said it was always supposed to be Fokker, as in the planes)

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e1...er_0_large.jpg

Tanned, small eyed square jawed, blond, loud American GI Joe type

Hikaru Ichijo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hikaru_VF-X-4.jpg

Supposed to be Japanese. Round ears, round face, big eyes, black hair

So to Japanese people, they don't look non-Japanese at all, and if you asked the character designers that question they'd look at you funny. Watch the video again with your hand on the pause button, it explains it all in great detail

[NL197]

Originally Posted by SpaceDog

SG1 is far better than the feature film. The feature film is just a moderately accurate account of what happened to some members of the team before SG1 started.

Considering the show was based on the film, like it or not it's the other way around - "moderately accurate" is a term that should be applied to the TV show. Now obviously people change things when adapting movies into shows but this isn't "Buffy" where the movie simply didn't count because the creator himself said - because the SG-1 show was made by different people who didn't create it.

It's just like anything someone adapts from someone else. It can never be more accurate than what was originally done, it can only be different. Star Trek 2009 is a good example. They adapted the original concept but no one would consider it to be more accurate than what Roddenberry had created, just different. No need to invalidate the original because you like the adaptation more.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Well, the video pretty much covers everything on the topic, in far more detail actually than I could have off the top of my head. People in anime don't don't white to Japanese people, and people who are supposed to be westerners are portrayed very differently

Macross for example

Roy Fokker, presumably American of German descent (and often mispelled hilariously in Japan as "Focker", but when I asked Shoji Kawamori about it he said it was always supposed to be Fokker, as in the planes)

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e1...er_0_large.jpg

Tanned, small eyed square jawed, blond, loud American GI Joe type

Hikaru Ichijo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hikaru_VF-X-4.jpg

Supposed to be Japanese. Round ears, round face, big eyes, black hair

So to Japanese people, they don't look non-Japanese at all, and if you asked the character designers that question they'd look at you funny. Watch the video again with your hand on the pause button, it explains it all in great detail

Thanks. I watched the video as suggested. And in searching the web, it seems to be a strange phenomenon that many caucasians see the characters as non-Japanese, and most Japanese people dont.

At least I can take comfort in knowing I am not alone in my insanity.

[Jeff Kleist]

It's just like anything someone adapts from someone else. It can never be more accurate than what was originally done, it can only be different. Star Trek 2009 is a good example. They adapted the original concept but no one would consider it to be more accurate than what Roddenberry had created, just different. No need to invalidate the original because you like the adaptation more.

*screech*, umm, no.

Stargate SG-1 stretched the existing mythology, in the "from a certain point of view" aspect. The Goa'uld were dying until they found the Ancient technology. Ra was a "headmaster" Go'auld with many serving under him like Anubis was later in the series. They added to and expanded on things that were in the movie, and did a few nips and tucks to make it viable as a continuing series. In addition they established the Goa'uld as egotistical liars, and ithat they split up Earth originally as an early conquest, and that many cultures had the different names for the same person (like Aphrodite).

There was no betrayal of the core values or character dynamic of the movie. Nor did it throw the original out by blowing up Abydos before they could arrive. Several people did return to play their parts, and the original movie happened in their continuity, and continues to happen (alternate universe episodes/movies aside) to this day. The only signifigant change they made was lightening O'Neil up, but then again, he might have done so after the mission, and Kurt Russell seemed happy with what RDA was doing when he stopped into the set.

So the two are completely incomperable, not different takes on the same material.

[Bolty]

Jeff,

I know it's less than a year, but any word on the Star Trek director's cuts?

Sure hope it isn't held as a tie-in for the next movie in 2012.

Also, any chance you can find out if the new Spartacus Blu-ray will be an upgrade from the HDDVD? A real shame if the movie doesn't get the attention it deserves.

Thanks.

[SpaceDog]

Stargate SG-1 also changed the physical nature of what the Go'auld appeared to be from a glowing traditional alien somehow living inside of a person to a symbiotic being that fuses with the nervous system of the person, but again, good and simple change.

To me, the minor changes simply reflect that O'Neil's report might have been a little haphazard, as in the first episode where he admits that Abydos might not have been destroyed and Daniel might not be so dead.

[Q?]

You guys are talking about the old Macross series?
Wow, I would go bananas if that was ever released on blu!

[Jeff Kleist]

I know it's less than a year, but any word on the Star Trek director's cuts?

No new Trek movie discs till JJTrek 2 comes out

Macross wll come out on Blu in Japan, in the US, not for a good long while. if ever, sadly