independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Tue 18th Jun 2019 11:39am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > 3-disc Rave release coming in March 2019?
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 4 of 10 <123456789>Last »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #90 posted 01/07/19 2:29am

kindofblue

One of the lost gems of this era is the sampler cassette for Man O War:

http://www.princevault.com/index.php?title=Sampler:_Man_O_War_(Remix)_Nine_Deep_Trax_Sampler


To my knowledge this never even made it onto a bootleg CD? For some of these songs I have not even heard the excerpts that are on this promo tape...

This would make a great inclusion on the deluxe package!

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #91 posted 01/07/19 2:42am

RODSERLING

EmmaMcG said:

BartVanHemelen said:



EmmaMcG said:


feeluupp said:



No. It has been confirmed already CD 1 RAVE UN2, CD 2 RAVE IN2, CD 3 RAVE UN2 THE YEAR 2000 DVD.



Is it at least on Blu Ray or is it just regular DVD. I know expecting a 4k release is a step too far but surely they can manage a Blu Ray release for the concert.

.


You lot are hilarious. That POS was filmed with SD cameras because a) it was 1999 and b) Prince was cheap.



Are you really that stupid or do you just say things for a laugh? Ghostbusters, filmed in 1984 was shot on SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. The Good The Bad and The Ugly, filmed in 1966 and shot in SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. Top Gun, shot in SD in 1986. I have that movie in 3D Blu Ray. I could go on but I'd be here for a while. I own thousands of movies on Blu Ray (and even some on 4k blu ray) that were made well before Rave and were originally shot in SD.

So go on, explain how you find it so hilarious to expect a DVD release in 2019 to receive a high definition transfer. The only thing that's hilarious is how full of shit you are.


Of course, if Sony could locate the original negatives of RAVE, they could make a transfer to blu ray.
.
But that doesn't mean the pictures would look better. In fact, many movies or TV show from the late 90's/ beginning of 2000s have been transferred to Blu-ray, but most of them are only that : transfer, without a real enhancement of the pictures.
.
Frankly, the RAVE dvd doesn't really deserve a blu ray quality picture. The lives from the 80's, yes of course, but the quality picture of RAVE isn't t that bad. We don t need a better quality to follow the concert (in the contrary of the horrid 1985 live released in PR deluxe)
.
The quality of the concert in itself is the real problem, it s an embarrassment, and doesn't deserve an enhancement of the picture.
.
It would seem odd to put money on remaster for this crap.
.
And the main problem with a blu ray release, is that this format never took off. Most people owns a dvd player than a blu ray player. It would make this release even more of a niche
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #92 posted 01/07/19 2:44am

RODSERLING

databank said:



EmmaMcG said:


BartVanHemelen said:


.


You lot are hilarious. That POS was filmed with SD cameras because a) it was 1999 and b) Prince was cheap.



Are you really that stupid or do you just say things for a laugh? Ghostbusters, filmed in 1984 was shot on SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. The Good The Bad and The Ugly, filmed in 1966 and shot in SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. Top Gun, shot in SD in 1986. I have that movie in 3D Blu Ray. I could go on but I'd be here for a while. I own thousands of movies on Blu Ray (and even some on 4k blu ray) that were made well before Rave and were originally shot in SD. So go on, explain how you find it so hilarious to expect a DVD release in 2019 to receive a high definition transfer. The only thing that's hilarious is how full of shit you are.

Mmmh. I'm no expert so somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but all the motion pictures you mention have been filmed on 35mm film, which is, before being digitalized, real hardcore HD, possibly more HD than what digital HD can translate in 2018.


On the other hand IDK what Rave2000 was filmed on but my guess is video, not 35 mm film. If I understand what Bart means with SD, it is that is was shot with SD digital cameras as opposed to good ol' video tape, and honestly IDK how good or bad that can look on a Blu-ray if restored, but in any case I doubt it can be compared to 35mm film.



You re right about 35 mm and HD format.
If it wasn't t shot on film, it could be transferred on blu ray but the enhancement would be unnoticeable, besides the fact it would be a wide screen opposed to the 4/3 format
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #93 posted 01/07/19 4:13am

databank

avatar

kindofblue said:

One of the lost gems of this era is the sampler cassette for Man O War:

http://www.princevault.com/index.php?title=Sampler:_Man_O_War_(Remix)_Nine_Deep_Trax_Sampler


To my knowledge this never even made it onto a bootleg CD? For some of these songs I have not even heard the excerpts that are on this promo tape...

This would make a great inclusion on the deluxe package!

It made it to bootleg. I think it's on one of those collections Work It 2.0 or The Work.

A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...iscog/home
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #94 posted 01/07/19 4:43am

RODSERLING

.
[Edited 1/7/19 4:48am]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #95 posted 01/07/19 5:40am

dodger

IstenSzek said:

dodger said:

IstenSzek said: Is the hip hop mix the one that was on BFTP3 labelled as 'redefined remix'? Kip Blackshire's on it and the Nasty Girl parts. That's my favourite version. That and Undisputed (The Moneyapolis Mix) are the pick of that era for me I don't think I've got the Club/Dance Mix..


i think so, i can't check right now but i'm 98% sure. it's the one with the lyric

"everytime i whistle in the key of c
girl u gotta come over n satisfy me"

smile


the club/dance mix was in one of the ahdio shows on npgmc (iirc # 11).
it's the one with the lyric:

"i wanna get my camcorder, take u by my pool
put some oil on u, film ur shiny body, underneath the water"


cool



[Edited 1/6/19 17:13pm]

OK, thanks. Yes, the 'Redefined Remix' sounds like it is the same as the 'hip hop mix'

.

I'll have to seek out the 'club/dance mix'..... mad

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #96 posted 01/07/19 5:50am

RODSERLING

BartVanHemelen said:



databank said:




TrivialPursuit said:



those TGRES remixes (even The Neptunes had trouble working on it because it was such a bad song, btw)



Did Chad and/or Pharrell ever say anything about this experience? I'm quite curious to know your source?



.


The only people I've ever heard talking about a TGRES remix were Basement Jaxx, who refused it because they had no interest on working their magic on such a craptastic song; they were interested though in doing remixes of some of his classic era tracks.


.


(Fun thing was that back then someone was hyping his Prince party by claiming he'd be playing his promo copy of the Basement Jaxx remix of TGRES.)



There is clearly more interest in working on a crappy song better than on an already good song : to make it better.
I would prefer the challenge on working on TGRES and making it more enjoyable than working on KISS, where it is impossible to enhance the song
.
If they really refused TGRES, then they are assholes, even more than Prince fucking his career by releasing it as a lead single LOL
[Edited 1/7/19 5:52am]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #97 posted 01/07/19 7:11am

BartVanHemelen

avatar

RODSERLING said:

EmmaMcG said:
Are you really that stupid or do you just say things for a laugh? Ghostbusters, filmed in 1984 was shot on SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. The Good The Bad and The Ugly, filmed in 1966 and shot in SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. Top Gun, shot in SD in 1986. I have that movie in 3D Blu Ray. I could go on but I'd be here for a while. I own thousands of movies on Blu Ray (and even some on 4k blu ray) that were made well before Rave and were originally shot in SD. So go on, explain how you find it so hilarious to expect a DVD release in 2019 to receive a high definition transfer. The only thing that's hilarious is how full of shit you are.
Of course, if Sony could locate the original negatives of RAVE

.

Since when are there "negatives" of video tape? Sheesh, it's 2019 and there are still people confused about the difference between film stock and video tape?

© Bart Van Hemelen
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
It is not authorized by Prince or the NPG Music Club. You assume all risk for
your use. All rights reserved.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #98 posted 01/07/19 7:13am

BartVanHemelen

avatar

RODSERLING said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

The only people I've ever heard talking about a TGRES remix were Basement Jaxx, who refused it because they had no interest on working their magic on such a craptastic song; they were interested though in doing remixes of some of his classic era tracks.

.

(Fun thing was that back then someone was hyping his Prince party by claiming he'd be playing his promo copy of the Basement Jaxx remix of TGRES.)

There is clearly more interest in working on a crappy song better than on an already good song : to make it better.

.

LOL. Dude, they simply didn't want to be associated with this third-rate crap that never was going to make any impact. You can't polish a turd.

© Bart Van Hemelen
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
It is not authorized by Prince or the NPG Music Club. You assume all risk for
your use. All rights reserved.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #99 posted 01/07/19 7:16am

BartVanHemelen

avatar

RODSERLING said:


You re right about 35 mm and HD format. If it wasn't t shot on film, it could be transferred on blu ray but the enhancement would be unnoticeable, besides the fact it would be a wide screen opposed to the 4/3 format

.

Ah yes, 4:3 footage magically becomes 16:9 when transferred to Blu-ray.

© Bart Van Hemelen
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
It is not authorized by Prince or the NPG Music Club. You assume all risk for
your use. All rights reserved.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #100 posted 01/07/19 7:24am

BartVanHemelen

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

You lot are hilarious. That POS was filmed with SD cameras because a) it was 1999 and b) Prince was cheap.

Are you really that stupid or do you just say things for a laugh? Ghostbusters, filmed in 1984 was shot on SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. The Good The Bad and The Ugly, filmed in 1966 and shot in SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. Top Gun, shot in SD in 1986. I have that movie in 3D Blu Ray.

.

"Shot in SD" says someone who clearly has absolutely no clue.

.


I could go on but I'd be here for a while. I own thousands of movies on Blu Ray (and even some on 4k blu ray) that were made well before Rave and were originally shot in SD. So go on, explain how you find it so hilarious to expect a DVD release in 2019 to receive a high definition transfer. The only thing that's hilarious is how full of shit you are.

.

Yet I know the difference between film stock and video tape. Do you?

.

Hey, did you know there actually are different types of film? https://www.vox.com/2016/...-explainer

.

Awaiting your apology. Not with bated breath, obviously.

© Bart Van Hemelen
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
It is not authorized by Prince or the NPG Music Club. You assume all risk for
your use. All rights reserved.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #101 posted 01/07/19 7:25am

EmmaMcG

avatar

RODSERLING said:

EmmaMcG said:



Are you really that stupid or do you just say things for a laugh? Ghostbusters, filmed in 1984 was shot on SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. The Good The Bad and The Ugly, filmed in 1966 and shot in SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. Top Gun, shot in SD in 1986. I have that movie in 3D Blu Ray. I could go on but I'd be here for a while. I own thousands of movies on Blu Ray (and even some on 4k blu ray) that were made well before Rave and were originally shot in SD.

So go on, explain how you find it so hilarious to expect a DVD release in 2019 to receive a high definition transfer. The only thing that's hilarious is how full of shit you are.


Of course, if Sony could locate the original negatives of RAVE, they could make a transfer to blu ray.
.
But that doesn't mean the pictures would look better. In fact, many movies or TV show from the late 90's/ beginning of 2000s have been transferred to Blu-ray, but most of them are only that : transfer, without a real enhancement of the pictures.
.
Frankly, the RAVE dvd doesn't really deserve a blu ray quality picture. The lives from the 80's, yes of course, but the quality picture of RAVE isn't t that bad. We don t need a better quality to follow the concert (in the contrary of the horrid 1985 live released in PR deluxe)
.
The quality of the concert in itself is the real problem, it s an embarrassment, and doesn't deserve an enhancement of the picture.
.
It would seem odd to put money on remaster for this crap.
.
And the main problem with a blu ray release, is that this format never took off. Most people owns a dvd player than a blu ray player. It would make this release even more of a niche


Over 80 million PlayStation 4s, 30-odd million Xbox One's, 80 million PlayStation 3s and countless millions of blu ray players sold. 3 years ago it was estimated that 44% of households in the US had a blu ray player. Blu ray player sales, plus sales of the above consoles which also double up as blu ray players, means that there are hundreds of millions of blu ray players in the world. I don't see that as being a niche audience.

I agree that Rave doesn't deserve a HD transfer but if they want to release this set, they shouldn't half ass it.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #102 posted 01/07/19 7:33am

EmmaMcG

avatar

BartVanHemelen said:



EmmaMcG said:


BartVanHemelen said:


.


You lot are hilarious. That POS was filmed with SD cameras because a) it was 1999 and b) Prince was cheap.




Are you really that stupid or do you just say things for a laugh? Ghostbusters, filmed in 1984 was shot on SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. The Good The Bad and The Ugly, filmed in 1966 and shot in SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. Top Gun, shot in SD in 1986. I have that movie in 3D Blu Ray.

.


"Shot in SD" says someone who clearly has absolutely no clue.


.




I could go on but I'd be here for a while. I own thousands of movies on Blu Ray (and even some on 4k blu ray) that were made well before Rave and were originally shot in SD. So go on, explain how you find it so hilarious to expect a DVD release in 2019 to receive a high definition transfer. The only thing that's hilarious is how full of shit you are.

.


Yet I know the difference between film stock and video tape. Do you?


.


Hey, did you know there actually are different types of film? https://www.vox.com/2016/...-explainer


.


Awaiting your apology. Not with bated breath, obviously.



SD means standard definition. Those movies were not shot in high definition. My point still stands.

Of course I know. I have been on enough movie and TV sets and around enough filmmakers to know a lot more about these things than you do.

You can wait for an apology all you want but you won't get one. Especially seeing as you continue to talk out of your arse about things you don't know about.

So go on, what's your next pearl of wisdom? I can't wait for this.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #103 posted 01/07/19 8:14am

BartVanHemelen

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

Yet I know the difference between film stock and video tape. Do you?

.

Hey, did you know there actually are different types of film? https://www.vox.com/2016/...-explainer

.

Awaiting your apology. Not with bated breath, obviously.

SD means standard definition. Those movies were not shot in high definition.

.

Hilarious. They were shot on film and have gotten 4K releases: https://www.blu-ray.com/m...ay/151359/ . Meanwhile, this is what SD is generally understood as: https://en.wikipedia.org/...television . So, tell us, was Ghostbusters shot at 480i, or 576i? And if so, how come we can now enjoy a 4K version of it? How come there were 70mm showings of it back in the day?

.

Learn the difference between videotape and film.

.


My point still stands. Of course I know. I have been on enough movie and TV sets and around enough filmmakers to know a lot more about these things than you do. You can wait for an apology all you want but you won't get one. Especially seeing as you continue to talk out of your arse about things you don't know about. So go on, what's your next pearl of wisdom? I can't wait for this.

.

Oh look, a bunch of insults and self-boasts and not a single admission of being wrong.

© Bart Van Hemelen
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
It is not authorized by Prince or the NPG Music Club. You assume all risk for
your use. All rights reserved.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #104 posted 01/07/19 10:42am

RODSERLING

EmmaMcG said:

RODSERLING said:



Of course, if Sony could locate the original negatives of RAVE, they could make a transfer to blu ray.
.
But that doesn't mean the pictures would look better. In fact, many movies or TV show from the late 90's/ beginning of 2000s have been transferred to Blu-ray, but most of them are only that : transfer, without a real enhancement of the pictures.
.
Frankly, the RAVE dvd doesn't really deserve a blu ray quality picture. The lives from the 80's, yes of course, but the quality picture of RAVE isn't t that bad. We don t need a better quality to follow the concert (in the contrary of the horrid 1985 live released in PR deluxe)
.
The quality of the concert in itself is the real problem, it s an embarrassment, and doesn't deserve an enhancement of the picture.
.
It would seem odd to put money on remaster for this crap.
.
And the main problem with a blu ray release, is that this format never took off. Most people owns a dvd player than a blu ray player. It would make this release even more of a niche


Over 80 million PlayStation 4s, 30-odd million Xbox One's, 80 million PlayStation 3s and countless millions of blu ray players sold. 3 years ago it was estimated that 44% of households in the US had a blu ray player. Blu ray player sales, plus sales of the above consoles which also double up as blu ray players, means that there are hundreds of millions of blu ray players in the world. I don't see that as being a niche audience.

I agree that Rave doesn't deserve a HD transfer but if they want to release this set, they shouldn't half ass it.


Very interesting, I didn't think about it.
But still, dvd format sells more than Blu-ray
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #105 posted 01/07/19 11:16am

LittlePurpleYo
da

What a waste. The only way I'd care for a release like this would be if it were to include the earliest configuration of this album from the late 1980s he gave up on to focus on Batman.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #106 posted 01/07/19 12:39pm

darkroman

Well as always with Prince projects, we can believe this is a 3 disc set with a DVD when it is available for purchase.

As for the Rave Concert DVD, I'm surprised there is still so much ignorance regards video formats but I suppose if you don't know, then there is no point in speculating.

I'm not going to document analogue and digital video and film production processes (again) but maybe look at some older posts for this.

So going way back to 1999 this would more than likely have been shot with a digital broadcast camera in NTSC onto tape. As this is studio based I would have done a live mix yet I can imagine each camera source was recorded individually, which is fine.

The tapes will have then been digitized into a format for editing.

It is extremely likely this will have been edited using a digital non-linear edit suite, such as Avid, as those had been well estabilished as an industry standard since the early '90s.

Well before 1999, Avid suites were capable of offline assembly and online conforming for broadcast.

In fact in the mid '90s even Paisley Park published their own Avid specification as being:Avid 8000 system (Quadra 950 28/230; 2 Mitsubishi 20M monitors) / 3 Gigabyte hard drives / Panasonic MO (Magneto-Optical) drive.

The output would have been a very nice digital broadcast master.

If those at Paisley Park wanted, they could look to see if all the EDL data still exists. This would allow the project to be resurrected and re-conformed into a new master. This master could be anything from 50Gb to 100Gb in size (and in some cases upto 200Gb and beyond).

A DVD only holds 4.38Gb of data so to get this master onto a DVD it would have to be phenomenally compressed. This will compromise the contrast of the image, the chroma and luminance levels and the audio and therefore it's ultimate quality.

It's important to think of a CD, DVD and Blu Ray as just storage media, so no different to any other format. For example you can record silence in mono and put this onto a DVD if you wish, but it will still be a poor mono recording.

Blu Ray as a storage medium currently has a capacity of 50Gb which is a whopping increase from the DVD format.

Therefore this Rave2000 concert would massively benefit from going onto Blu Ray as the data will be vastly less compressed compared to the DVD so it will look sharper and brighter. An uncompressed PCM audio track could also be added as the current DVD audio is a very compressed AC3 2 channel, 6 channel and DTS format.

This Prince concert (as with Syracuse) would be great on Blu Ray but I doubt the Estate would be bothered to do anything that takes a little effort.

So please don't assume only HD content can go onto a Blu Ray as anything can but this doesn't work vice versa. The Blu Ray lazer technology and thick HDMI cables are essential for massive data transfers to support the high bitrates of HD and 4K content.

wink














  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #107 posted 01/07/19 1:00pm

EmmaMcG

avatar

BartVanHemelen said:



EmmaMcG said:


BartVanHemelen said:


.


Yet I know the difference between film stock and video tape. Do you?


.


Hey, did you know there actually are different types of film? https://www.vox.com/2016/...-explainer


.


Awaiting your apology. Not with bated breath, obviously.




SD means standard definition. Those movies were not shot in high definition.

.


Hilarious. They were shot on film and have gotten 4K releases: https://www.blu-ray.com/m...ay/151359/ . Meanwhile, this is what SD is generally understood as: https://en.wikipedia.org/...television . So, tell us, was Ghostbusters shot at 480i, or 576i? And if so, how come we can now enjoy a 4K version of it? How come there were 70mm showings of it back in the day?


.


Learn the difference between videotape and film.


.




My point still stands. Of course I know. I have been on enough movie and TV sets and around enough filmmakers to know a lot more about these things than you do. You can wait for an apology all you want but you won't get one. Especially seeing as you continue to talk out of your arse about things you don't know about. So go on, what's your next pearl of wisdom? I can't wait for this.

.


Oh look, a bunch of insults and self-boasts and not a single admission of being wrong.



Sound familiar?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #108 posted 01/07/19 1:02pm

EmmaMcG

avatar

RODSERLING said:

EmmaMcG said:



Over 80 million PlayStation 4s, 30-odd million Xbox One's, 80 million PlayStation 3s and countless millions of blu ray players sold. 3 years ago it was estimated that 44% of households in the US had a blu ray player. Blu ray player sales, plus sales of the above consoles which also double up as blu ray players, means that there are hundreds of millions of blu ray players in the world. I don't see that as being a niche audience.

I agree that Rave doesn't deserve a HD transfer but if they want to release this set, they shouldn't half ass it.


Very interesting, I didn't think about it.
But still, dvd format sells more than Blu-ray


It probably does. I think all physical format media sells more to an older crowd so it stands to reason that regular DVD would outsell Blu Ray. But I'd still like the option.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #109 posted 01/07/19 1:55pm

RODSERLING

darkroman said:

Well as always with Prince projects, we can believe this is a 3 disc set with a DVD when it is available for purchase.

As for the Rave Concert DVD, I'm surprised there is still so much ignorance regards video formats but I suppose if you don't know, then there is no point in speculating.

I'm not going to document analogue and digital video and film production processes (again) but maybe look at some older posts for this.

So going way back to 1999 this would more than likely have been shot with a digital broadcast camera in NTSC onto tape. As this is studio based I would have done a live mix yet I can imagine each camera source was recorded individually, which is fine.

The tapes will have then been digitized into a format for editing.

It is extremely likely this will have been edited using a digital non-linear edit suite, such as Avid, as those had been well estabilished as an industry standard since the early '90s.

Well before 1999, Avid suites were capable of offline assembly and online conforming for broadcast.

In fact in the mid '90s even Paisley Park published their own Avid specification as being:Avid 8000 system (Quadra 950 28/230; 2 Mitsubishi 20M monitors) / 3 Gigabyte hard drives / Panasonic MO (Magneto-Optical) drive.

The output would have been a very nice digital broadcast master.

If those at Paisley Park wanted, they could look to see if all the EDL data still exists. This would allow the project to be resurrected and re-conformed into a new master. This master could be anything from 50Gb to 100Gb in size (and in some cases upto 200Gb and beyond).

A DVD only holds 4.38Gb of data so to get this master onto a DVD it would have to be phenomenally compressed. This will compromise the contrast of the image, the chroma and luminance levels and the audio and therefore it's ultimate quality.

It's important to think of a CD, DVD and Blu Ray as just storage media, so no different to any other format. For example you can record silence in mono and put this onto a DVD if you wish, but it will still be a poor mono recording.

Blu Ray as a storage medium currently has a capacity of 50Gb which is a whopping increase from the DVD format.

Therefore this Rave2000 concert would massively benefit from going onto Blu Ray as the data will be vastly less compressed compared to the DVD so it will look sharper and brighter. An uncompressed PCM audio track could also be added as the current DVD audio is a very compressed AC3 2 channel, 6 channel and DTS format.

This Prince concert (as with Syracuse) would be great on Blu Ray but I doubt the Estate would be bothered to do anything that takes a little effort.

So please don't assume only HD content can go onto a Blu Ray as anything can but this doesn't work vice versa. The Blu Ray lazer technology and thick HDMI cables are essential for massive data transfers to support the high bitrates of HD and 4K content.

wink
















Of course blu ray has more capacity than dvd ! LOL !
.
But to see a difference in a quality picture would suppose a costly work of restoration, otherwise it would be a useless simple transfer.
.
So in the end, it would be science fiction that Sony would invest time and money :
- to locate the tapes
- to restore the picture
.
All of that for a joke of a live...That would make my day, but let s be serious.
.
But they should have done that for the Syracuse live whose picture is the most terrible thing I ever saw on video format, including VHS.
.
They should have done that for the live at 1st avenue.
.
Concerning Rave2000, they could make it into 4k/3D,I couldn't care less.
.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #110 posted 01/08/19 1:37am

darkroman

RODSERLING said:

darkroman said:

...

Of course blu ray has more capacity than dvd ! LOL ! . But to see a difference in a quality picture would suppose a costly work of restoration, otherwise it would be a useless simple transfer. . So in the end, it would be science fiction that Sony would invest time and money : - to locate the tapes - to restore the picture . All of that for a joke of a live...That would make my day, but let s be serious. . But they should have done that for the Syracuse live whose picture is the most terrible thing I ever saw on video format, including VHS. . They should have done that for the live at 1st avenue. . Concerning Rave2000, they could make it into 4k/3D,I couldn't care less. .


Why do you think by applying less compression won't enhance the picture quality?

Maybe you are watching content on an old 28inch TV?

Streching highly compressed content from a DVD to watch on a 55inch+ TV looks shockingly bad due to the lack of data.

As you don't like this concert I presume you won't be buying it anyway so you don't need to worry about it.

wink

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #111 posted 01/08/19 2:55am

jdcxc

EmmaMcG said:

BartVanHemelen said:



EmmaMcG said:


feeluupp said:



No. It has been confirmed already CD 1 RAVE UN2, CD 2 RAVE IN2, CD 3 RAVE UN2 THE YEAR 2000 DVD.



Is it at least on Blu Ray or is it just regular DVD. I know expecting a 4k release is a step too far but surely they can manage a Blu Ray release for the concert.

.


You lot are hilarious. That POS was filmed with SD cameras because a) it was 1999 and b) Prince was cheap.



Are you really that stupid or do you just say things for a laugh? Ghostbusters, filmed in 1984 was shot on SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. The Good The Bad and The Ugly, filmed in 1966 and shot in SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. Top Gun, shot in SD in 1986. I have that movie in 3D Blu Ray. I could go on but I'd be here for a while. I own thousands of movies on Blu Ray (and even some on 4k blu ray) that were made well before Rave and were originally shot in SD.

So go on, explain how you find it so hilarious to expect a DVD release in 2019 to receive a high definition transfer. The only thing that's hilarious is how full of shit you are.


Lol. And for him to imply that Basement Jaxx, who worshipped P, thought a remix job wasn’t up to their standards is ridiculous...I’ve always said Bart has a tin ear.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #112 posted 01/08/19 4:26am

RODSERLING

darkroman said:



RODSERLING said:


darkroman said:

...



Of course blu ray has more capacity than dvd ! LOL ! . But to see a difference in a quality picture would suppose a costly work of restoration, otherwise it would be a useless simple transfer. . So in the end, it would be science fiction that Sony would invest time and money : - to locate the tapes - to restore the picture . All of that for a joke of a live...That would make my day, but let s be serious. . But they should have done that for the Syracuse live whose picture is the most terrible thing I ever saw on video format, including VHS. . They should have done that for the live at 1st avenue. . Concerning Rave2000, they could make it into 4k/3D,I couldn't care less. .


Why do you think by applying less compression won't enhance the picture quality?

Maybe you are watching content on an old 28inch TV?

Streching highly compressed content from a DVD to watch on a 55inch+ TV looks shockingly bad due to the lack of data.

As you don't like this concert I presume you won't be buying it anyway so you don't need to worry about it.

wink



I will buy it, since I Never could buy RAVEIN2.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #113 posted 01/08/19 11:03am

jaypotton

RODSERLING said:

darkroman said:

Well as always with Prince projects, we can believe this is a 3 disc set with a DVD when it is available for purchase.

As for the Rave Concert DVD, I'm surprised there is still so much ignorance regards video formats but I suppose if you don't know, then there is no point in speculating.

I'm not going to document analogue and digital video and film production processes (again) but maybe look at some older posts for this.

So going way back to 1999 this would more than likely have been shot with a digital broadcast camera in NTSC onto tape. As this is studio based I would have done a live mix yet I can imagine each camera source was recorded individually, which is fine.

The tapes will have then been digitized into a format for editing.

It is extremely likely this will have been edited using a digital non-linear edit suite, such as Avid, as those had been well estabilished as an industry standard since the early '90s.

Well before 1999, Avid suites were capable of offline assembly and online conforming for broadcast.

In fact in the mid '90s even Paisley Park published their own Avid specification as being:Avid 8000 system (Quadra 950 28/230; 2 Mitsubishi 20M monitors) / 3 Gigabyte hard drives / Panasonic MO (Magneto-Optical) drive.

The output would have been a very nice digital broadcast master.

If those at Paisley Park wanted, they could look to see if all the EDL data still exists. This would allow the project to be resurrected and re-conformed into a new master. This master could be anything from 50Gb to 100Gb in size (and in some cases upto 200Gb and beyond).

A DVD only holds 4.38Gb of data so to get this master onto a DVD it would have to be phenomenally compressed. This will compromise the contrast of the image, the chroma and luminance levels and the audio and therefore it's ultimate quality.

It's important to think of a CD, DVD and Blu Ray as just storage media, so no different to any other format. For example you can record silence in mono and put this onto a DVD if you wish, but it will still be a poor mono recording.

Blu Ray as a storage medium currently has a capacity of 50Gb which is a whopping increase from the DVD format.

Therefore this Rave2000 concert would massively benefit from going onto Blu Ray as the data will be vastly less compressed compared to the DVD so it will look sharper and brighter. An uncompressed PCM audio track could also be added as the current DVD audio is a very compressed AC3 2 channel, 6 channel and DTS format.

This Prince concert (as with Syracuse) would be great on Blu Ray but I doubt the Estate would be bothered to do anything that takes a little effort.

So please don't assume only HD content can go onto a Blu Ray as anything can but this doesn't work vice versa. The Blu Ray lazer technology and thick HDMI cables are essential for massive data transfers to support the high bitrates of HD and 4K content.

wink
















Of course blu ray has more capacity than dvd ! LOL !
.
But to see a difference in a quality picture would suppose a costly work of restoration, otherwise it would be a useless simple transfer.
.
So in the end, it would be science fiction that Sony would invest time and money :
- to locate the tapes
- to restore the picture
.
All of that for a joke of a live...That would make my day, but let s be serious.
.
But they should have done that for the Syracuse live whose picture is the most terrible thing I ever saw on video format, including VHS.
.
They should have done that for the live at 1st avenue.
.
Concerning Rave2000, they could make it into 4k/3D,I couldn't care less.
.


Wait a minute - are you the same rodserling who called me out on the 1999 Deluxe thread for criticising the PR deluxe release? Is that YOU criticising the PR deluxe release...hmmmm!

As I said over there, I was criticising WB for the quality (sound and vision) not the content despite you making an assumption. Never do that mate, it makes an ASS out of U and ME
'I loved him then, I love him now and will love him eternally. He's with our son now.' Mayte 21st April 2016 = the saddest quote I have ever read! RIP Prince and thanks for everything.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #114 posted 01/08/19 2:27pm

RODSERLING

jaypotton said:

RODSERLING said:



Of course blu ray has more capacity than dvd ! LOL !
.
But to see a difference in a quality picture would suppose a costly work of restoration, otherwise it would be a useless simple transfer.
.
So in the end, it would be science fiction that Sony would invest time and money :
- to locate the tapes
- to restore the picture
.
All of that for a joke of a live...That would make my day, but let s be serious.
.
But they should have done that for the Syracuse live whose picture is the most terrible thing I ever saw on video format, including VHS.
.
They should have done that for the live at 1st avenue.
.
Concerning Rave2000, they could make it into 4k/3D,I couldn't care less.
.


Wait a minute - are you the same rodserling who called me out on the 1999 Deluxe thread for criticising the PR deluxe release? Is that YOU criticising the PR deluxe release...hmmmm!

As I said over there, I was criticising WB for the quality (sound and vision) not the content despite you making an assumption. Never do that mate, it makes an ASS out of U and ME


Hell no, I never criticized PR deluxe. I love it, despite the dvd being a thievery in itself, but for the price it s ok.
.
I only said it was a flop, which is sadly true
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #115 posted 01/08/19 3:07pm

luvsexy4all

why make it 2 cds ..why not just add the remixes /bonus track onto 1 cd

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #116 posted 01/08/19 9:34pm

databank

avatar

luvsexy4all said:

why make it 2 cds ..why not just add the remixes /bonus track onto 1 cd

They wouldn't fit. Only 4 tracks are identical on both records.

Besides, there's hopefully some kind of respect for the artist's original vision involved, too.

A COMPREHENSIVE PRINCE DISCOGRAPHY (work in progress ^^): https://sites.google.com/...iscog/home
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #117 posted 01/09/19 2:32pm

ChocolateBox31
21

avatar

I'm SUPER excited. Prince's(r.i.p.) post 90's/2000's muziq(my favorite btw) is getting the attention it deserves now. MANY didn't know Prince(r.i.p.) released so many albums in his long 40 year career. He probably headed straight to studio once he entered the pearly gates of heaven.

[Edited 1/10/19 6:21am]

So Prince, whom fought 4 his first record deal & got it, fought 4 a movie deal & got it, fought 4 freedom from his WB contract & got it, fought 4 his masters & got them.Gets a curable illness & says 2 himself ok, I'm done. "Life is a Box Of Chocolates"
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #118 posted 01/10/19 5:21am

McD

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

BartVanHemelen said:



EmmaMcG said:


BartVanHemelen said:


.


You lot are hilarious. That POS was filmed with SD cameras because a) it was 1999 and b) Prince was cheap.




Are you really that stupid or do you just say things for a laugh? Ghostbusters, filmed in 1984 was shot on SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. The Good The Bad and The Ugly, filmed in 1966 and shot in SD. I have the movie on Blu Ray. Top Gun, shot in SD in 1986. I have that movie in 3D Blu Ray.

.


"Shot in SD" says someone who clearly has absolutely no clue.


.




I could go on but I'd be here for a while. I own thousands of movies on Blu Ray (and even some on 4k blu ray) that were made well before Rave and were originally shot in SD. So go on, explain how you find it so hilarious to expect a DVD release in 2019 to receive a high definition transfer. The only thing that's hilarious is how full of shit you are.

.


Yet I know the difference between film stock and video tape. Do you?


.


Hey, did you know there actually are different types of film? https://www.vox.com/2016/...-explainer


.


Awaiting your apology. Not with bated breath, obviously.



SD means standard definition. Those movies were not shot in high definition. My point still stands.

Of course I know. I have been on enough movie and TV sets and around enough filmmakers to know a lot more about these things than you do.

You can wait for an apology all you want but you won't get one. Especially seeing as you continue to talk out of your arse about things you don't know about.

So go on, what's your next pearl of wisdom? I can't wait for this.


Whilst saying Ghostbusters wasn’t shot in high definition is a contender for the stupidest thing ever said ever on the information stupidhighway, anyone who trolls Bart is performing a public service.

So I’m scoring you about even.

Ghostbusters. Standard Definition. Beautiful.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #119 posted 01/11/19 5:16am

darkroman

McD said:

EmmaMcG said:
SD means standard definition. Those movies were not shot in high definition. My point still stands. Of course I know. I have been on enough movie and TV sets and around enough filmmakers to know a lot more about these things than you do. You can wait for an apology all you want but you won't get one. Especially seeing as you continue to talk out of your arse about things you don't know about. So go on, what's your next pearl of wisdom? I can't wait for this.
Whilst saying Ghostbusters wasn’t shot in high definition is a contender for the stupidest thing ever said ever on the information stupidhighway, anyone who trolls Bart is performing a public service. So I’m scoring you about even. Ghostbusters. Standard Definition. Beautiful.


Good Lord I'm confused! You are all either having a joke, being serious or taking the piss - I just can't tell anymore!!!

However, for the record, any feature film or other content SHOT ON FILM is classed as OPTICAL! It is not SD, it is not HD, it is not even UHD! IT IS OPTICAL. Yet even different types of film will have different grades; such as superfine 70mm and 35mm, 16mm and granier 8mm (plus many others). There are also the 'S' versions of these film formats which will change the ratio of the frame. For example 16mm is 16:9 and S16 is 4:3.

For those interested, this was shot on 35mm film therefore has a 4:3 frame, but sadly compressed on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VV1XWJN3nJo

Currently it is NOT possible to shoot digital to the same definition as optical however, mathematically, we are getting closer and closer. With 8K already being used, we still have a long way until digital recording is near optical.

But many films are now actually shot digitally!

HOWEVER, do bear in mind, if any content is recorded on film, which you all now know is optical, this will be compressed down as it is telecined for editing and then compressed again for 4K release, then compressed again for Blu Ray released and compressed again for DVD released.

Personally I find the DVD format to be disgusting and I am shocked people buy this still and I'm very shocked the film industry still produced highly compressed DVDs.

We need to move away from DVDs!!!!!

wink

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 4 of 10 <123456789>Last »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > 3-disc Rave release coming in March 2019?