| Author |
Message |
| Registered: May 25, 2007 |  Posts: 453 |
| | Posted: | | | | Today I just recieved a nice DVD-Box "Enzyklopädie der Science Fiction Klassiker" with much too less detailed information.
The Cover says:
Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1 / 1.75:1 / 1.78:1 / 1.33:1
Audio DD 5.1 / 2.0
All depending on the "programm" they write, but with absolutely no forther information neighter on any of the discs nor in their menus.
I remember while voting for contribtuions that some of you credited a software they used at least for the ratio. Could anyone of you tell me a software to analyse audio and video? I'd prefer one program which could do both (to avoid installations I might not need another time) to get the profiles with correct data.
Thankx in advance for your support! |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,673 |
| | Posted: | | | | AspectGuide is a simple tool for determining aspect ratio. As for audio, most media players will report the type of audio track that is playing. If you want a tool that gives an overview of all audio tracks, take a look at mediadogg's DVDPca, which does that and much more. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: May 25, 2007 | | Posts: 453 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'll give both of them a try. The DVD-Box itself is really nice, but they saved time (and probably money) with the lack of information. One movie even isn't listed on the cover (but it has been on another disc also), no year or country of the movie is written anywhere except on the site of the DVD company and one movie is listed with a wrong title and this way a wrong year even on their site.
I am curious about their answer if it isn't an idea to create a booklet for the next release of this set :-) |
|
| Registered: March 20, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,851 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Magmadrag: Quote:
Today I just recieved a nice DVD-Box "Enzyklopädie der Science Fiction Klassiker" with much too less detailed information.
The Cover says:
Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1 / 1.75:1 / 1.78:1 / 1.33:1
Audio DD 5.1 / 2.0
All depending on the "programm" they write, but with absolutely no forther information neighter on any of the discs nor in their menus. It's easy to distinguish 2.35:1, 1.75:1/1.78:1, and 1.33:1 from one another by eye, and that's the tool I use. --------------- |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,461 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote:
...
It's easy to distinguish 2.35:1, 1.75:1/1.78:1, and 1.33:1 from one another by eye, and that's the tool I use.
 One of the reasons I like this place! Anyway, regarding DVDPca, it seems to be broken. Maybe even obsolete, but I'll take a look. | | | Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog. | | | | Last edited: by mediadogg |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,673 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote:
It's easy to distinguish 2.35:1, 1.75:1/1.78:1, and 1.33:1 from one another by eye, and that's the tool I use. Only if you trust the cover info that these are indeed the exact ratios used. Could you tell if it's actually 2.39:1 rather than 2.35:1? I don't think I could. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: May 25, 2007 | | Posts: 453 |
| | Posted: | | | | In the meantime I am done
@GSyren: AspectRatio worked fine, DVDPca didn't, but AAustria told me to use DVDShrink
This way I am through the whole set.
And: Analysing the ratio by eye actually impossible for me due to my new graphic adapter: Altough my monitor is 16:9, the adapter seems to think it is 4:3 and this way all ratios of movies look VERY confusing |
|
| Registered: March 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,851 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting GSyren: Quote:
Only if you trust the cover info that these are indeed the exact ratios used. Could you tell if it's actually 2.39:1 rather than 2.35:1?
I don't think I could. You can't imagine how much sleep I lose at night worrying about that. If you're eyes can't tell the difference it makes no difference. --------------- |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,673 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote:
If you're eyes can't tell the difference it makes no difference. I suspect that there are a few people here who would disagree with that.  | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: May 25, 2007 | | Posts: 453 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quote:
I suspect that there are a few people here who would disagree with that. Not only that, but one more time I might need to say that we have rules on the site and they are not for nothing. What sence does it make to create a probably wrong profile if there are (technical) possibilities to do it the right way? |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,461 |
| | Posted: | | | | And I have to say that it is also enjoyable to see that people still care. So much gloom and doom, it wouldn't be surprising to see people say "aw the heck with it." So, it is nice to see that some people still make the effort to get things right (yes, I know that we don't always agree on what is right). | | | Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog. |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 1,638 |
| | Posted: | | | | If you have AnyDVD or DVDFab Passkey you can capture screenshots and also use BD-Info for audio specs. |
|
| Registered: March 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,851 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Magmadrag: Quote:
Not only that, but one more time I might need to say that we have rules on the site and they are not for nothing. What sence does it make to create a probably wrong profile if there are (technical) possibilities to do it the right way? What sense does it make to question the aspect ratio on the packaging when the image looks exactly as described? It's just a waste of time. Better to spend time doing something useful, like documenting all the uncredited cast. --------------- |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,638 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote:
Quoting Magmadrag:
Quote:
Not only that, but one more time I might need to say that we have rules on the site and they are not for nothing. What sence does it make to create a probably wrong profile if there are (technical) possibilities to do it the right way?
What sense does it make to question the aspect ratio on the packaging when the image looks exactly as described? It's just a waste of time. Better to spend time doing something useful, like documenting all the uncredited cast.
--------------- The aspect ratio on the package doesn't always match the actual aspect ratio of the film on the disc. |
|
| Registered: March 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,851 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting rdodolak: Quote:
The aspect ratio on the package doesn't always match the actual aspect ratio of the film on the disc. No, it does not, and if you can tell that by looking at the film then by all means correct it. If you cannot tell by watching then it makes no difference. By any measure that matters, there is no difference between a 2.39:1 film and a 2.40:1 film, or between a 1.75:1 film and a 1.78:1 film. But if it helps people sleep at night then by all means get out the calipers and count the pixels. --------------- |
|
| Registered: May 25, 2007 | | Posts: 453 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quote:
What sense does it make to question the aspect ratio on the packaging when the image looks exactly as described? It's just a waste of time. Better to spend time doing something useful, like documenting all the uncredited cast. Did you read the first post in the thread? It's a box set, 2 or 3 movies on each disc. And the cover for all says Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1 / 1.75:1 / 1.78:1 / 1.33:1 depending on the prgoramm So there are discs which have 1.33:1 + 2.00:1. the next 2.35:1 + 1.78:1 and that's the reason why I do this. If there is a lack of information on the cover and no booklet or something similiar with the set. Or how would you interprete the look of that description? |
|