Has anybody seen any of The Creator rips? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 10 months ago by FartsUnited@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I've only seen screen shots so far, but something looks very amiss about all these rips (irrespective of the file size)

This is supposed to be an epic sci-fi blockbuster, but all the posted images appear to look very 'cropped' and/or low res.

Is the film supposed to look like it only takes up half of the available screen?

all 15 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] mateomaui@reddthat.com 17 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I have the one from yts. Stats are

1920x696
24 fps frame rate
2248 kbps data rate
2632 kbps total bitrate

It looks like they just went with an unusual aspect ratio to artificially make it seem “even more widescreen”, which isn’t unheard of. Lawrence of Arabia was 2.20:1 or 2.35:1 depending on 70mm vs 35mm.

If you look at this cheat sheet, 2.20:1 isn’t even on there, and 2.35:1 is an oddball 1920x817.

So, could be normal, or maybe not.

edit: the wikipedia page for it says

”To give the film the feel of classic Hollywood epics like Ben-Hur, the filmmakers opted to shoot the film in 2.76:1 ultra-wide aspect ratio.”

which also isn’t on that cheat sheet.

[-] Molecular0079@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

Lol, you know you're getting old when other people start questioning cinema aspect ratios.

[-] Faceman2K23@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 10 months ago

Gareth Edwards just seems like a fan of ultra wide formats, Rogue One was shot in a 2.76:1 format before being cropped slightly to 2.39:1 for release.

As much as I love that a lot of movies have been coming out in taller formats, which look great at home on our 16:9 TVs, there's something special about the wider formats, at least when you see them on a suitably large screen at a proper theatre.

[-] crossover@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

The film uses an intentionally wide aspect ratio. It also has a lot of added film grain, also intentional. But the grain messes with low bitrate rips. Grab the 20gb+ 4K Web-DL rip to get it in the best possible quality.

[-] the_third@feddit.de 4 points 10 months ago

AV1 and film-grain synthesis solves this.

[-] crossover@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Oh nice. Didn’t know about this. Seems like an interesting solution!

[-] the_third@feddit.de 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Works fine for me. One has to take care not to overdo it, so the enconding filter sticks to erase noise and doesn't start to remove fine details. I usually iterate over steps of five for the setting in FFmpeg/SVTAV1 on a 10 second sample of the source to find the best setting.

The player will then reproduce the noise pattern the encoder has identified during playback.

[-] Faceman2K23@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 10 months ago

It is in a super wide format, so perhaps you are not used to seeing that because it isn't all that common these days with a lot of big spectacle films moving back to taller formats

[-] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago

I just watched a bit on popcorn time and I see what you're talking about, but wouldn't it be more meaningful to ask if the broadcast looked similar? It just seemed like of "antique" in a way to me, as though it was putting you into a different time or a different dimension.

If so it could be intentional.

[-] 1984@lemmy.today 1 points 10 months ago

I lost interest in it after 10 minutes. Really boring plot and bad actors..

[-] phx@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago

Honestly yeah. Saw it in theatres. Somehow the US has the most powerful military tech, with the enemy having advanced AI but also living in barely better than mud huts. Effects wise it's good, but the plot just doesn't stick together in any meaningful way and the acting reminds me of a bad TV drama