Author Topic: Cardcaptor Sakura (Read 11254 times)

ClassickxD · « **Reply #40 on:** October 24, 2009, 03:31:08 AM »

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/2125/vlcsnap2009102321h02m44.png

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/3629/vlcsnap2009102400h22m17.png

The size remained the same with the resolution of 1440x900 pixels on my laptop. Any changes with the picture is due to it not being on a 1440x1080 resolution scale.

kureshii · « **Reply #41 on:** October 24, 2009, 03:59:58 AM »

Ah, finally.

Sadly though, while the images are finally in native resolution, they look just like the screenshots we've already seen in the rejected offer. At 1080p the image really starts to show its flaws. I still would rather wait for a fansub 720p encode of the source, at least that would be filtered to hide most of those flaws.

It goes without saying that once those encodes are done they will most likely be accepted here (assuming nothing else happens to get in the way of that).

namaiki · « **Reply #42 on:** October 24, 2009, 10:31:26 AM »

I thought the 1080P (4:3) video from CCS Bluray to be great. You could see the flaws of the cells etc and it definitely did not appear to be an upscale; of course not everyone's cup of tea, but I personally liked it.

The issue that I see *right here* is that the specific 'RAWs' that ClassickxD is using have some issues. Think something like "the bitrate is too low and so the framerate is lowered to preserve image quality" kind of thing, or the encoder converted the framerate in a bad way.

That is to say, QTS's RAWs did not have this above mentioned issue with framerate, (however unrelated, their BD RAWs were encoded at a final resolution of 1280x960).

kureshii · « **Reply #43 on:** October 24, 2009, 10:39:36 AM »

Possibly; I haven't seen the actual lossless Bluray raw myself (or I wouldn't need to ask for screenies) so I don't know how well-encoded it is, but I sure hope the Blurays aren't as artifacted or blocky as shown in the screenshots.

Those don't look like 'human' imperfections of 2D animation... I'm ok with noise and/or blurriness from animation cels, as long as they're real and not introduced by lossy compression.

namaiki · « **Reply #44 on:** October 24, 2009, 11:29:01 AM »

YV12 chroma upsampling shader will probably fix some things in ClassickxD's screenshots.

Having said that, I've also only seen RAWs and not the lossless Bluray.. T_T

http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/7295/raws4ucardcaptorsakuran.png

Slightly less artifacts but maybe it's an upscale with filtering? It's still kind of blurry..

Well, anyways, Sakura-Sanctuary appears to be doing both 720P(320MB episode) and 1080P(500MB episode).

kureshii · « **Reply #45 on:** October 24, 2009, 02:57:53 PM »

Yeah, definitely looks like an upscale, which won't be surprising since I doubt the studio will go through the effort of remastering all 70 episodes... but let's see how good upscales can look, eh

Can't wait for Sakura to finish. Dmonhiro has a release too, still downloading but I'll see.

hologram · « **Reply #46 on:** October 25, 2009, 11:02:27 PM »

I have the raws4u 1080p raws

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/misteranonimous/ccs.png

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/misteranonimous/ccs2.png

Dragon80 · « **Reply #47 on:** October 28, 2009, 12:11:52 AM »

Here are 3 encoded of CCS from BluRay raws for you to compare.

Raws-4u VS CalChi
http://comparescreenshots.slicx.com/comparison/19218

Sakura VS CalChi
http://comparescreenshots.slicx.com/comparison/19219

Raws-4u VS Sakura
http://comparescreenshots.slicx.com/comparison/19220

MTR · « **Reply #48 on:** October 28, 2009, 12:36:42 AM »

CalChi wins both imo.

As for Sakura vs. Raws-4u, I'd have to go with Sakura.

kureshii · « **Reply #49 on:** October 28, 2009, 01:00:13 AM »

CalChi's shots look nice, but the slight posterisation worries me; it seems to me that some of the colour gradients are being flattened.

Even though Sakura's looks less sharp and focused, I like their colour balance better.

Xiong Chiamiov · « **Reply #50 on:** October 28, 2009, 01:03:37 AM »

Hmm, CalChi's colors bother me a bit, but they are significantly sharper than the other two.

Quote from: MTR on October 28, 2009, 12:36:42 AM

As for Sakura vs. Raws-4u, I'd have to go with Sakura.

kristen · « **Reply #51 on:** October 28, 2009, 01:13:07 AM »

I didn't compares Raws4U vs. Sakura Sanctuary, but holy carp, Calchi's is awarpsharped. That looks close to what my first encodes were.

Definitely Sakura over Calchi, in my opinion.

cloudstrife · « **Reply #52 on:** January 22, 2010, 12:48:35 AM »

Currently making a torrent for the CalChi 1080p version with English subs if anyone's interested.

namaiki · « **Reply #53 on:** January 22, 2010, 12:59:15 AM »

Quote from: kristen on October 28, 2009, 01:13:07 AM

but holy carp, Calchi's is awarpsharped.

^ Not a good thing..

Lillymon · « **Reply #54 on:** January 22, 2010, 09:38:41 PM »

I emphatically agree with kristen on this one. The Sakura-Sanctuary version appears to increase the contrast a bit (which I think is acceptable, the raw looks a bit muddy) but otherwise leave the raw pretty much as-is, which is fine since the raw seems to be a good master. Meanwhile, the CalChi version is ridiculously oversharpened. I'm beginning to think overuse of warpsharp has turned into a disease, it's the new 'magic filter'.

Desbreko · « **Reply #55 on:** January 23, 2010, 09:32:45 PM »

After comparing Sakura's and KAA's 720p releases, and the screens posted above, this is what I've noted.

Sakura's...
• Retains less grain and fine detail than KAA (this is the case even with KAA's 720p vs. Sakura's 1080p), but more than Raws-4u and CalChi.
• Is antialiased.
• Cleans up the chroma bleeding around lines a bit.

So, out of the three comparison shots posted, Sakura's is the clear winner. CalChi's is way over-sharpened and Raws-4u retains less detail than Sakura's with none of the benefits of antialiasing or chroma cleanup.

Also, here's a comparison of Sakura's 720p Spline36Resized to 1080p vs. the native 1080p shot that was posted. And here's a comparison of KAA's 720p Spline36Resized to 1080p vs. Sakura's 1080p.

As you can see, KAA's retains more grain and fine detail, like I mentioned. More surprising, though, is that Sakura's 720p actually seems to retain more grain and detail than the 1080p. Which makes me think even more that there's no point in uploading a 1080p version at all.

namaiki · « **Reply #56 on:** January 24, 2010, 05:32:06 AM »

So, KAA > Sakura Sanctuary > RAWS-4U?

*Namaiki was clarifying just what Desbreko had come to as a conclusion..

Southrop · « **Reply #57 on:** January 24, 2010, 09:03:42 AM »

I think we can safely say that CalChi and Raws-4U are out of the picture.

Lillymon · « **Reply #58 on:** January 24, 2010, 07:14:29 PM »

Quote from: namaiki on January 24, 2010, 05:32:06 AM

So, KAA > Sakura Sanctuary > RAWS-4U?

I wavered back and forth on this myself, but I think in the end I have to agree. KAA looks better than Sakura-Sancturary, but only by a very small margin. Sakura-Sanctuary 720p and 1080p are effectively indistinguishable (for a moment, I thought the second screenshot hadn't loaded, that's how similar they are), and both KAA and Sakura-Sanctuary look better than Raws-4U or CalChi. In that case, I think it'd be KAA unless there's some other compelling reason to accept Sakura-Sanctuary's release over it.

namaiki · « **Reply #59 on:** January 24, 2010, 09:37:14 PM »

SS: 5.1 Surround AAC (765 kBit/s)
23.976 fps H264/AVC (1189 kBit/s)

KAA: 5.1 Surround AAC (428 kBit/s)
23.976 fps H264/AVC (2230 kBit/s)

I haven't 'heard' either yet, but sound quality I will definitely have to check out for myself sometime..