View Full Version : Seichi is doing Tsukihime, is it worth the redownload?
Seichi Fansubs is playing catch-up, however, they are probably the best fansub group around... well, for the shows they're doing currently, at least...
For its competitors, we have Anime-Cookies (very small group), Empire/Keep (a big fansub coalition), AnimeOne (another big fansub group), ANBU (a gigantic fansub group that does everything), Newlife Anime (rather good), and Saikou Fansubs (also good).
Seichi Fansubs is playing catch-up, however, they are probably the best fansub group around... well, for the shows they're doing currently, at least...
For its competitors, we have Anime-Cookies (very small group), Empire/Keep (a big fansub coalition), AnimeOne (another big fansub group), ANBU (a gigantic fansub group that does everything), Newlife Anime (rather good), and Saikou Fansubs (also good).
I'm the project head of this fansub, and let me try to give an unbiased assessment from what I've seen from here: (and from random tsuki prologue encodes my friend showed me)
http://www.errorful.com/tsukihime/
I haven't actually had time to fully watch the other groups' works because I was extremely busy.
Based on those comparison pictures alone, I would say our translation is probably not better than ANBU, but decent enough.
As for encode, well, our encodes are 856x480, so this makes an interesting dilemma. Overall, I think detail wise, our encodes may be one of the top encodes, BUT to play these encodes you'd need to have a computer capable of displaying a resolution greater than 800x600 (1024x768 is fine, or a slightly lower one, if you have a 16:9 monitor).
I can't make an unbiased opinion on the typesetting design itself (whether ours is better), since I was responsible for designing a lot of the typesetting, but I will say ours is comparable to ANBU's in terms of legibility. Our text borders aren't very heavy compared to AOne and NLA's, so I don't know exactly what effect it will have on TV's and older CRTs (I have an LCD, and it's legible enough).
As for other stuff, we translated the opening credits and all the cast in the ending credits plus information on the ending song.
We also made an effort to make our subs be as less obtrusive as possible, and our group staff credits are blended in with the rest of the long ending credits (outside of the cast).
Oh, and the signs if possible, were blended into scene as much as we could. I am of the opinion that how legible your sign should be should be as legible as the original show. Therefore, if there's a subtle sign somewhere, it shouldn't jump out at you, but should be there if you want to look for it.
I certainly recommend any constructive criticisim on our work, as we believe there's always some way to improve our releases.
PS: Why did 1400+ people download our translation notes? o_O;;
OK, I'm pretty sure now that BS-Jin is simply a raws group in Japan that has the annoying habit of putting huge watermarks on everything they encode. AnimeOne and Saikou raws suffer from BS-Jin animations and watermarks.
Out of the translations, Saikou's and ANBU's are the only ones that I think are acceptable. I haven't finished downloading your version (this connection has gone bonklers) so I don't know how it compares :/
I was certainly interested in your translation notes... :)
OK, I'm pretty sure now that BS-Jin is simply a raws group in Japan that has the annoying habit of putting huge watermarks on everything they encode. AnimeOne and Saikou raws suffer from BS-Jin animations and watermarks.
Out of the translations, Empire/Keep's and ANBU's are the only ones that I think are acceptable. I haven't finished downloading your version (this connection has gone bonklers) so I don't know how it compares :/
That logo is the BS-i logo and is the name of a satellite channel in Japan. All captures from that channel have the logo. It is possible to delogo it afterwards, but unless you have a perfectly clean source, and a good idea of what they did, you won't be able to remove it completely without blurring/smoothing. I haven't seen any delogoed raws that are 150mb or above. It is possible the show was also shown on another station other than BS-i.
Oh, and the DVD (which we didn't use, both out of ethical reasons and work duplication), of course doesn't have the watermark, features sharper dark areas (compared to the BS-i high quality raws), doesn't have the anti-piracy warning on the bottom, and doesn't have the fictional characters warning at the end (the scene just fades to black).
holyangel
2003-12-18, 23:44
As for encode, well, our encodes are 856x480, so this makes an interesting dilemma. Overall, I think detail wise, our encodes may be one of the top encodes, BUT to play these encodes you'd need to have a computer capable of displaying a resolution greater than 800x600 (1024x768 is fine, or a slightly lower one, if you have a 16:9 monitor).
I have a question.. are those raw capture at 856 x 480 resolution or it's a enlarged resolution from a 640 x 360 raw? Secondly, why do such an encode if you know some people most likey won't be able to support it. Downsizing from a bigger resolution can bring about a even more detailed video quality instead. Thirdly, Your encode wise would most likey be around 230mb or maybe slightly smaller given that resolution you just said, in order to preserve the most detail from such a raw. Other group's encode is around 120mb and if you try to compress that resolution encode of yours down into a same 120mb size... the quality loss will surely be greater then those group's encode.
Thanks for the info, Zalas. :)
I have a question.. are those raw capture at 856 x 480 resolution or it's a enlarged resolution from a 640 x 360 raw? Secondly, why do such an encode if you know some people most likey won't be able to support it. Downsizing from a bigger resolution can bring about a even more detailed video quality instead. Thirdly, Your encode wise would most likey be around 230mb or maybe slightly smaller given that resolution you just said. Other group's encode is around 120mb and if you try to compress that resolution encode of yours down into a same 120mb size... the quality loss will surely be greater then those group's encode.
The raws were captured at 856x480. It was not enlarged from 640x360 because you wouldn't end up getting anything, since the resolution was large enough for text anyways. I'm not completely sure of the reasons, since I left the final size to the encoder. And you're not going to get more detailed video if you squish it down. When you downsample, you'll only lose pixels, even if the video may look better (try fullscreen compares). As for incompatibility issues, we figured that a lot of people who would want to see details would have a resolution that was larger than 800x600 anyways. And yes, you will lose quality if you compress our releases down to the 120mb range, especially with our resolution. Our releases are around 170mb each, since the encoder felt that squashing it down any more would end up making the video unnecessarily blurry. And in case you're wondering, the DVD has 480 lines of video, and is anamorphic. So essentially, there is actually 480 lines worth of material to work with...
lamer_de
2003-12-19, 11:57
I haven't seen any delogoed raws that are 150mb or above.
The raws ANBU and A-E/Keep use have a pretty sophisticated logo removal. At least I'm not able to spot any blurring etc like you would get when using avisynth/vdub filters. No clue how the raw capper can get rid of it, maybe it's some sort of Hardware? I'm sure K_R can get them.
Oh, and the DVD (which we didn't use, both out of ethical reasons and work duplication), of course doesn't have the watermark, features sharper dark areas (compared to the BS-i high quality raws), doesn't have the anti-piracy warning on the bottom, and doesn't have the fictional characters warning at the end (the scene just fades to black).
Could you please elaborate the points why you didn't used the DVD as source a bit further, because I don't get them :P Where is the difference in duplicating a work when you take a HDTV raw and resize it down to 704x396 (or to any other resolution) or use a DVD ? Why is it unethical to use (R2) DVDs as source? Triad does, HQA does, A-F does, and all of these are usually considered "respected groups" (at least I do consider them as such ;) ). Many groups use HKDVDs as source aswell (Shadow Skill et al.). Oh, and I read in a post by K_R that you're going to release Sakon, which is taken from DVDs aswell (I suppose, unless you found some gorgeous TV caps from 4 years ago)[which is great news, I like Sakon ^_^]?
Downsizing from a bigger resolution can bring about a even more detailed video quality instead.
You know that if you downsize you're (usually) throwing information away? And you know aswell that you (usually) won't gain information when you upsize? I used usually in brackets because both have their exeptions. To check if you gain something by using a high resolution, simply take a version with a lower res (like your preferred raw. If you don't have one at hand, the NLA or A-E/Keep version will do (any other version will do aswell, of course, I'm just mentioning those becasue they use 640x360)), load it into vdub and use the bicubic/lanczos resize filter to blow it up to 856x480. Details you can't spot in the upsized version were lost due to downsizing (or filtering ;) ).
Oh, and some/many people have fun by upsizing their DVDs to HDTV resolutions and adding some selective noise to it to create the illusion of detail, so if youwatch those, your eyes will fool you into seeing more detail/better picture than the original DVD.
CU,
lamer_de
The raws ANBU and A-E/Keep use have a pretty sophisticated logo removal. At least I'm not able to spot any blurring etc like you would get when using avisynth/vdub filters. No clue how the raw capper can get rid of it, maybe it's some sort of Hardware? I'm sure K_R can get them.
Like I said, I haven't really found any good ones, and neither has K_R. The ones we've been using generally are as good as we get in the detail department and are significantly better than the ones with the logos removed. I haven't watched through one of your complete releases, so I don't know if anything else is different in the raw. For example, what's the point of taking the extra time of removing that watermark when you have a big fat piracy warning scrolling on the bottom anyways?
Oh and I _do_ have some ideas on how to remove them. You would basically need either some sort of hardware hack or get the raw mpeg2 stream and delogo it using that. (MPEG4 will suffer compression artifacts).
Could you please elaborate the points why you didn't used the DVD as source a bit further, because I don't get them :P Where is the difference in duplicating a work when you take a HDTV raw and resize it down to 704x396 (or to any other resolution) or use a DVD ? Why is it unethical to use (R2) DVDs as source? Triad does, HQA does, A-F does, and all of these are usually considered "respected groups" (at least I do consider them as such ;) ). Many groups use HKDVDs as source aswell (Shadow Skill et al.). Oh, and I read in a post by K_R that you're going to release Sakon, which is taken from DVDs aswell (I suppose, unless you found some gorgeous TV caps from 4 years ago)[which is great news, I like Sakon ^_^]?
Basically, we already finished encoding epsiodes 1-2 waaay before we got the DVD. So to resync everything and recalibrate for colors would be a waste of time. Furthermore, changing over to R2 DVD source when nothing significant can be gained (except for some quality increases, lack of logo, etc) doesn't really strike me as something ethical. Yeah, we can boast we have "DVD" releases, but what is the point of that? Just to get more leechers? If people REALLY want to watch the DVD, they should just GET the DVD, especially if encoding it into MPEG4 would destroy some of the color and detail information. I know it's expensive and all that, but I do not think making DVD rips available just for the fact that it's a DVD rip is really worth it. There are some groups who are redoing their releases using DVD raws, and I really only appreciate the projects where they're actually ADDING something other than just the DVD source. Translation corrections, extra translations, etc would be at least a step in the right direction. I mean, the point of fansubs is not to _replace_ DVDs right? =P
And no, we haven't got the Sakon DVDs because 1) Neither I nor anybody else in the group can afford the DVDs right now and 2) We do have recently aired raws of Sakon (Sakon was recently reaired on Animax, there was a commercial in one of the episodes of Ultramaniac talking about it, which was why I thought Sakon looked cool).
gabbababbahey
2003-12-23, 19:52
http://d0x.dyndns.org/bt/img/tsuki01segfault-seichi.jpg
What the...
Ignore the neko-arc-avatar'd baka...
Lol, silly gabba. Don't mind him folks...he escaped from our prison the other day. We've been on his trail for a while. Rest assurred, he WILL be caught and put back into his cell at #seichi.
Lol, silly gabba. Don't mind him folks...he escaped from our prison the other day. We've been on his trail for a while. Rest assurred, he WILL be caught and put back into his cell at #seichi.
Hey, its the lemming king! Get him boys!!!
guynextdoor
2003-12-26, 20:58
and it was his first post :heh:
btw, so what's the bottom line ? should we get seichi's or just stick with those we've been watching already, or is it just up to personal preference ?
I haven't been able to finish any of the downloads for their subs ;.;
I haven't been able to finish any of the downloads for their subs ;.;
I think a lot of our seeders went home for break. See if you can get a send from one of our XDCC bots in the channel. And a lot of the seeders probably disconnected when the tracker crashed or something.
And as for preference, it's really a matter of personal preference. It's the type of styling you like, the speed you want them out (we take our time to make sure we did our best in the accuracy department, but it doesn't mean we're perfect), the translation quality, the "goodies," etc.
I leeched and seeded :3
Get your Tsukihime here!
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.