Do you get French subtitles there? I wonder what else could be different?
-
Thanks for visiting the Kaleidescape Owners' Forum
This forum is for the community of Kaleidescape owners, and others interested in learning about the system, equipment, services, and the company itself.It is run by a group of enthusiastic Kaleidescape owners and dealers purely as a service to this community.
This board is not affiliated in any way with Kaleidescape, Inc.
For official technical support, product information, or customer service, please visit www.kaleidescape.com
You can dismiss this box forever by clicking the "X" in the upper right corner of this message. -
You are currently in "Guest" mode and not logged in with a registered account.
The forum is free to use and most of the forum can be used by guests who are not registered....
... but we strongly encourage you to register for a full account. There is no cost to register for a full account.
Benefits of registering for a full account:
- Participate in the discussions! You must have a registered account to make posts on the forums. You will be able to start your own thread on a topic or question, or you can reply to other threads/discussions.
- Use the "Conversation" feature (known as "private messaging" on other forums) to communicate directly with any of the other users here.
- Access the Files area. The "resources" area of the forum contains many "Favorite Scene" and Script files that can dramatically increase the enjoyment of your Kaleidescape system. Go directly to great scenes in your favorite movies, created by other owners, and add automation to playback of your system with Scripts.
- You won't see this annoying notice at the top of every screen!😊
This box goes away for registered users.
[Buyer’s Guide] Kaleidescape Quality Compared to Blu-ray & other Digital Sources
- Thread starter Rmarci
- Start date
I realize that this is a long, long thread. But I have on multiple occasions specifically described changes to our process that we have made to improve the results of our encoding. As just one example, we developed and implemented a new automated color monitoring tool to ensure that no issues with color creep in that cause the encoded file to differ from the mezzanine. This is not a trivial undertaking, by the way. Because of the value of those mezzanine files, they are processed in a highly secure and audited environment. It requires specific tooling to be able to compare final product against those mezzanine files, and we have implemented that.
As a second example, we have also added additional validation for metadata that accompanies the mezzanine files, because we've had instances where, for example, the HDR brightness values that we were sent were invalid.
I think it's also important to note here that when we talk about "ongoing encoding issues", we need to be a bit careful. Many of the titles that have been posted here were encoded many years ago. So while you may see a new message posted here, that doesn't necessarily make that title an "ongoing encoding issue", but rather it may be a report of something that was encoded long ago. Such a report is a perfectly valid report that should be addressed, to be clear, but interpreting a report of a problem with a title that was encoded in 2017 as an "ongoing encoding issue" is not valid.
Let me quote from an earlier post by Rmarci:
That leads into my next point. As I also stated previously, we were aware that there were quality issues with some older encodes, and had scheduled work to revisit them and update them. Rmarci's reports have identified other issues as well, which we appreciate. In some cases, those reports have identified not an issue with a title, but an issue with a class of titles. And so those titles have been added to the queue of movies to revisit and update. Such work takes time and costs money, so it is necessarily an incremental process, which is why that work is also prioritized according to the popularity of the titles. However, as I also previously posted on this thread, we're undertaking an effort to accelerate that work, because it's important and we want to deliver the best experience we can to our customers.
Finally, I want to note that some of the reports here have been comparisons against other services, or against physical media. This is certainly valid, but consider: for new-release titles, we have no way to make such a comparison as part of our process, because we don't have access to any of that other media to compare against during our encoding. So while it's possible after the fact to do a comparison, it's not like we can have a pre-release QA step where we look at a finished encoded file and say, "Huh, this looks more red than what was on <your favorite service here>." A perfect example of this was the issue with "red push" on a number of recent titles from one studio. Our encodes were faithful to the mezzanine file. It turned out to everyone's surprise that there was an issue with the mezzanines, which is why our updates of those specific titles are proceeding as we receive new mezzanine files.
I hope that helps to clarify a little bit. We do appreciate the feedback that we've received. Sincerely. We take it seriously, and we have made changes to both our encoding and QA processes to prevent problems from happening again.
I don't think this is very common, but it does happen. Harry Potter is perhaps one of the most prominent examples. The US book publisher evidently decided way back in the day that American readers were not likely to be as familiar as Commonwealth readers with the legend of the Philosopher's Stone, so the book has a different title, and thus so does the movie. And, there are corresponding differences in the movie itself: whenever a character refers to the Stone, they actually shot those scenes twice, once with "Sorcerer's Stone" and once with "Philosopher's Stone", and thus there are wholly different prints of the movie depending on the market.