Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Capturing and Editing Video > Avisynth Usage

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 22nd May 2020, 15:22   #361  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
doesn't matter if the end product is progressive.

these 3:3:2:2 stuff is in field don't forget in progressive we don't have fields so they have to be a power of 2.

3:2 judder in 720p60 is a used term but it is meant in progressive frames.
I don't follow. Did you see the example in my previous posts after I edited it?

I agree bobbing telecine to 60fps will generally produce a pattern of 3 and 2 repeated frames, I'm just not sure how often it'd result in 4:2:2:2. Unless I've misunderstood what you meant.
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 16:07   #362  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 6,403
i'm talking about 24p in 30p not in 60p.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 16:08   #363  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,286
Ah.....
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 17:53   #364  |  Link
JoelHruska
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 77
Katie,

Quote:
I don't know of any software that works with MP4 but not MKV.
At this point in time, DaVinci Resolve / Resolve Studio by BlackMagic will not import MKV files. It will import MP4 files (and M4V files) but not MKV. It also will not work with MPEG-2 in any format or container. It's surprisingly limited in terms of format support.

Last edited by JoelHruska; 22nd May 2020 at 18:04.
JoelHruska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 18:03   #365  |  Link
JoelHruska
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 77
Quote:
Don't you know that you can run 32-bit stuff on a 64-bit system? Or did I misunderstand you?
If you can explain to me how to prevent "Cannot load a 32-bit DLL in a 64-bit version of AviSynth" errors, I'm all ears. The reason I look for 64-bit DLLs is because StaxRip installs the 64-bit version of AviSynth+ and requires them. Attempting to load 32-bit DLLs into 64-bit AviSynth produces the following error. As I said earlier in the thread, If I need to bring up a specific 32-bit workflow without StaxRip, I'll do it -- but I'm going to use a different system for it rather than unwinding the workflow I've been implementing here.

More generally, yes, I am familiar with WOW64.
JoelHruska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 18:22   #366  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 6,403
by installing avisynth 32 bit it doesn't effect your current work flow it even has it's own plugin folder for obvious reasons..
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 18:29   #367  |  Link
JoelHruska
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 77
Manono,

I'm happy to provide clips, but I'm not sure there's a point. I've been using QTGMC to fix a 23.976 fps version of the show. The issues that I would want help with -- the issues I've already spent three months trying to repair -- are all in that version of the show. I have spent zero time with the 29.97 fps footage. I've spent hundreds of hours with the 23.976 fps footage in Sacrifice of Angels (the only episode of the show I've worked on to any significant degree besides Emissary). I am aware of all of the locations in SoA where there is evidence of 3:2 pulldown or single interlaced frames when the content is played back in a VFR MKV created via MakeMKV and/or when it's processed through Handbrake, but the content encoded at 29.97 fps is alien to me and I have attempted no method of processing the footage in the first place.

Effectively, this means starting over from scratch. I need to examine how QTGMC now treats 29.97 fps. I need to learn how TIVTC treats 29.97 fps. I need to learn how to use TIVTC in the first place, because I currently don't know at all. And I figure I'll start by running various scripts people have recommended here over the past 19 pages and see what all of the output looks like.

I haven't decided if I am starting over from scratch, but I won't be able to make that decision until I've wrangled what video output looks like here. I'm moving this upcoming week and prepping for it will take most of my time between then and now, but I'll get some tests running. Right now, I have no clips to show that would represent particular problem areas. I don't know enough about what doesn't work yet to have problem areas.

Last edited by JoelHruska; 22nd May 2020 at 18:31.
JoelHruska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 18:30   #368  |  Link
JoelHruska
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 77
Quote:
by installing avisynth 32 bit it doesn't effect your current work flow it even has it's own plugin folder for obvious reasons..
I suppose I could install AviSynth+'s 32-bit version. Can't install AviSynth and AviSynth+ on the same system, however.
JoelHruska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 18:31   #369  |  Link
videoh
Useful n00b
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
by installing avisynth 32 bit it doesn't effect your current work flow it even has it's own plugin folder for obvious reasons..
Yes, of course, as huhn perspicaciously points out, you can have both 32-bit and 64-bit Avisynth installed. Not necessarily suggesting you go to 32-bits, just responding to your initial suggestion that you would need to bring up a 32-bit system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
I suppose I could install AviSynth+'s 32-bit version. Can't install AviSynth and AviSynth+ on the same system, however.
Respectfully, that doesn't seem to make sense.

Last edited by videoh; 23rd May 2020 at 01:13.
videoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 18:59   #370  |  Link
JoelHruska
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 77
Videoh,

If you attempt to install StaxRip with Avisynth installed, you will receive an error message telling you that you cannot have AviSynth and AviSynth+ installed on the same machine. Perhaps you can, and the software merely tells people not to do this to limit problems. Since one of the most common problems people have with AviSynth is keeping 32-bit and 64-bit plugins straight (based on messages I've read), and since I was using 32-bit AviSynth and StaxRip installs 64-bit AviSynth+, I swapped from one to another. You'll have to forgive me for believing a literal "You cannot and should not attempt to configure both of these programs on a system simultaneously" warning.

Quote:
You admitted that you are a noob, so clips allow us to duplicate/verify your noobish claims. All clear?
Right. And had you only continued reading past that single sentence, you would have read my explanation for why I do not have clips to share. This type of response contains no useful information whatsoever, ignores the explanation I already wrote, and then attempts to mock me by emphasizing how new I am. As conversational tactics go, it's kind of a dick thing to do, and I don't know what kind of performance or rise you think you're going to get out of me by being a jerk.

What I wrote amounts to: "I have no claims to make and no pain points identified, because I need to reevaluate all my footage."

What you wrote amounts to: "I will ignore everything you actually said in your response so I can demean you by emphasizing a point you've already acknowledged."

What did that get you, exactly? Do you feel better? Do you feel bigger?

I'm not playing this game with you. And I'm not impressed.

Last edited by JoelHruska; 22nd May 2020 at 19:07.
JoelHruska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 19:33   #371  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 6,403
Quote:
If you attempt to install StaxRip with Avisynth installed, you will receive an error message telling you that you cannot have AviSynth and AviSynth+ installed on the same machine.
excuse me?
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 19:43   #372  |  Link
Katie Boundary
Registered User
 
Katie Boundary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
At this point in time, DaVinci Resolve / Resolve Studio by BlackMagic will not import MKV files. It will import MP4 files (and M4V files) but not MKV.
Well there ya go!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
It also will not work with MPEG-2 in any format or container.
MPEG-2 support is a bit weird in general because I think some parts of it are still under patent, whereas MPEG-1 and MPEG-4 are "open". That's why, for example, XviD (which is MPEG-4) is a thing that you can use for free, and Tsunami can export to MPEG-1 for free, but Tsunami only gives you a 30-day trial for MPEG-2 encoding, after which you have to pay to keep using it. But I could be wrong on that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
StaxRip installs the 64-bit version of AviSynth+
Oh wow, okay, yes, that could definitely be a problem. And yeah, 32-bit AVIsynth requires 32-bit plugins and 64-bit AVIsynth requires 64-bit plugins. That's the main reason why I stick with 32-bt AVIsynth. All the 64-bit plugins have 32-bit versions, but there are tons of 32-bit plugins without 64-bit ports.

This is why I use plain old original 32-bit AVIsynth, not "AVIsynth 2: Electric Boogaloo", or "The AVIsynth Strikes Back", or "My Own AVIsynth with Blackjack and Hookers"...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
I've been using QTGMC to fix a 23.976 fps version of the show. The issues that I would want help with -- the issues I've already spent three months trying to repair -- are all in that version of the show. I have spent zero time with the 29.97 fps footage. I've spent hundreds of hours with the 23.976 fps footage
The 23.976 fps footage doesn't need to be "fixed". It's already perfect. The only thing that QTGMC can do to it is screw it up. If you want to play around with a version of the episode where the 23.976 content is perfectly preserved and needs no processing or even restoration whatsoever, and you don't give a damn what happens to the 29.97 footage, then just run DGindex in Forced Film mode, load the d2v file into AVIsynth, and... and nothing. That's it. You're done. There are also several methods for perfectly restoring it after it's been through Honor Pulldown Flags, but none of those methods involve QTGMC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
I need to learn how TIVTC treats 29.97 fps.
That depends entirely on what's actually in those 29.97 frames. If it's hard pulldown, then TIVTC (or really any kind of IVTC) will fix it right back up. If it's some mixed-framerate crap or true 60 hz content, then IVTC will do very horrible things to it that you don't want to see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
I need to learn how to use TIVTC in the first place
It's pretty easy.

tfm().tdecimate()

If you want to save a few CPU cycles and reduce your chances of inexplicably and obviously wrong behavior, then it's:

tfm(mode=0,pp=0,mchroma=false,micmatching=0).tdecimate()

(and those should REALLY be tfm's default settings)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
had you only continued reading past that single sentence... This type of response contains no useful information whatsoever, ignores the explanation I already wrote, and then attempts to mock me by emphasizing how new I am... it's kind of a dick thing to do, and I don't know what kind of performance or rise you think you're going to get out of me by being a jerk.

What did that get you, exactly? Do you feel better? Do you feel bigger?

I'm not playing this game with you.
Be careful. If you continue to point out the dickish and/or unhelpful behavior of certain people on this forum, they'll accuse you of having a "bad attitude" every time they try to "help" you

Let me know when you get a chance to try my latest blend/converttorgb/convolution/converttoyv12 approach. I think you'll be blown away by the image quality, even if the frame rate goes to hell in what used to be the 60 hz parts.
__________________
If I ask "How do I do X?" or "what happens if I do X?", and X is a very bad thing that no one would ever normally do, assume that I already know this, and that I have Katie reasons for asking anyway.

Last edited by Katie Boundary; 22nd May 2020 at 19:54.
Katie Boundary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 19:48   #373  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
I'm happy to provide clips, but I'm not sure there's a point. I've been using QTGMC to fix a 23.976 fps version of the show. The issues that I would want help with -- the issues I've already spent three months trying to repair -- are all in that version of the show. I have spent zero time with the 29.97 fps footage. I've spent hundreds of hours with the 23.976 fps footage in Sacrifice of Angels (the only episode of the show I've worked on to any significant degree besides Emissary). I am aware of all of the locations in SoA where there is evidence of 3:2 pulldown or single interlaced frames when the content is played back in a VFR MKV created via MakeMKV and/or when it's processed through Handbrake, but the content encoded at 29.97 fps is alien to me and I have attempted no method of processing the footage in the first place.
It's not that complicated.
TFM() both field matches film and de-interlaces video (29.97fps).
The film sections end up 29.97fps with one frame in a group of five being a duplicate, and the video is de-interlaced to 29.97fps. "Video" in this context means interlaced, as each field is a unique moment in time. You can't just combine them for a progressive frame.

In the case of the DS9 sample we've been playing with, there's hard telecined CGI that fades from one shot to the next, but the telecine pattern overlaps. Due to the pattern of combed frames changing, TFM can detect the overlaps is interlaced instead of telecine and de-interlace them rather than field match (de-interlacing means it combines the frames while removing the combing). That's a good thing as makes the transitions smooth, potentially at the expense of a little blurring due to the de-interlacing, but what was technically telecined film becomes progressive film with tiny sections of 29.97fps progressive during the fades between shots.

TDecimate is then mostly to used convert the 29.97fps TFM output to 23.976 by removing the duplicate frames in the film sections. For the video sections it removes frames using frame blending to keep the motion smooth. That's Hybid=1.
Hybrid=3 does it the other way around and removes the duplicate frames from the film sections, then adds frames using frame blending to make the motion in the film sections look smooth at 29.97fps and the "video" frames are untouched.
Without a Hybrid mode, TDecimate assumes everything is film and removes one in five frames, making any 29.97fps video sections "choppy".

VFR mode decimates the film sections to 23.976fps while keeping the video sections at 29.97fps. It's VFR but effectively a combination of two constant frame rates. That's similar to what Handbrake does for a VFR output.

Katie's method works by combining two instances of TFM matching different fields, restoring the original frames in the telecined sections (field matching), duplicating them for 59.94fps, and deinterlacing the video sections to 59.94fps. The transition sections during the fades in the CGI probably end up as 59.94fps progressive. The film sections have frames that repeat in a pattern of two frames, then three frames etc. Any "video" interlaced sections probably have unique frames at 59.94fps progressive.

That's how the original video should display on a 60Hz display. The 23.976fps film sections are field matched and decimated (for hard telecine), with the film frames displaying for two screen refreshes, then three, then two etc. The video frames display for a single refresh. The end result, on a 60Hz display, should look virtually identical to a VFR encode. On a display with a different refresh rate, not so much, and Katie's yet to explain how to take the 59.94fps output and decimate it to a VFR combination of 23.976fps and 59.94fps, assuming that's the end goal, athough she's mentioned it's an option several times.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
Effectively, this means starting over from scratch. I need to examine how QTGMC now treats 29.97 fps. I need to learn how TIVTC treats 29.97 fps. I need to learn how to use TIVTC in the first place, because I currently don't know at all. And I figure I'll start by running various scripts people have recommended here over the past 19 pages and see what all of the output looks like.
QTGMC on it's own, de-interlaces the 29.97fps interlaced video sections by expanding each field to a full frame, making it progressive at 59.94fps. It's not that simple, but that's the upshot. QTGMC(FPSDivisor=2) does the same, but only outputs every second frame for 29.97fps instead of 59.94fps.

It's yet to be shown any purely interlaced content exists in DS9 anyway.

For the film sections, on it's own QTGMC does exactly the same thing, expanding the telecined fields to full height and you end up with the same pattern of repeated frames (2:3). The fades in the CGI sections would be treated the same way and therefore look quite smooth.
For film though, it's a bit like taking a progressive frame, separating the fields and then expanding them to full height, doubling the frame rate, and making a duplicate for each original frame as a result. It's better to keep the original progressive frames at the lower frame rate, but for combinations of telecined film and video, simply bobbing the whole lot to 59.94fps is an option. In the case of DS9 though, which appears to be mostly telecined, it's probably better to use TFM to restore the original progressive frames. You then have to decide how to deal with any sections that are de-interlaced to 29.97fps in order to keep motion smooth. VFR, decimation using frame blending, or increasing the whole lot to 59.94fps by duplicating frames etc (effectively Katie's method).

The arguing over TFM's settings mainly come down to how to configure it, so it detects the film sections and field matches them, while de-interlacing any combed sections that can't be properly field matched, ensuring it makes the correct decisions as to what it should do, and how it should de-interlace (or fix any combing) when it needs to. If you increase the likelihood it'll detect combing it can de-interlace a progressive film frame unnecessarily, or decide a section of telecined film must be video, when really it's not. If it's combing detection isn't strong enough, it can leave combing unrepaired. The default settings work quite well for the DS9 sample. I just added micmatching=0 (read the help file) and changed it's de-interlacing method to one that works better with the CGI.

If you run QTGMC as a deinterlacer over the lot, bobbing it all to 59.94fps, there's not all that much to argue about.

Specifying the D2V file for TFM allows it to use the repeat flags in the source to treat soft telecine as film. The progressive frames are reconstructed according to the repeat flags in the source (I think). Specifying a D2V file also comes with new options to argue over, such as what TFM should do if it does detect combing in the soft telecined film sections, and whether it should even check etc.

Last edited by hello_hello; 22nd May 2020 at 21:30.
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 19:57   #374  |  Link
huhn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 6,403
Quote:
The film sections end up 29.97fps with one frame in a group of five being a duplicate, and the video is de-interlaced to 29.97fps.
well it sounds dumb but if you don't want the best result this can still be improved by running a hardware frame adaptive deinterlacer over the file instead of TFM. nvidia and intel do field matching when deint is used and you should end up with the far superior 3:2 judder (which i think is bad but what ever).

the question is how buggy are they these days. i know nvidia places the chroma wrong by half a subpixel and AMD uses bilinear bob now but no clue about intel.

in the past all 3 where really good at this job.

i did a fast test.
nvidia DXVA2 is still field matching fine and produces what i'm talking about but CUVID is not field matching for some reason...
intel quick sync field matches but destroys the levels. both didn't age very well but they didn't reach AMD levels yet.
on OLD nvidia card with windows 7 combined with very old driver could do the trick but that's more then i'm willing to test...

Last edited by huhn; 22nd May 2020 at 20:29.
huhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 20:36   #375  |  Link
manono
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 7,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by videoh View Post
manono didn't say there were disadvantages, only that he has no personal use for it.
And KB put it a little more colorfully:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katie Boundary View Post
I don't give a tenth of a rat's ass about VFR, and have been advocating against VFR from the very beginning.
These days I don't see these mixed film/video television series' as I work on old films with constant framerates.
manono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 20:48   #376  |  Link
scharfis_brain
brainless
 
scharfis_brain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,632
If I might chime in here:

I'd personally would skip VFR / 120Hz, just for these reasons:

1) compatibility: a 59.94p video file (despite codec/container) will work on almost any given hardware out there.

2) smart TVs: newish TVs are capable to detect 3:2 pulldown, 2:2 pulldown and video almost instantaneously. Thus no 3:2 judder will occur. Additional frame interpolation might be done for the 3:2 parts by the TV on the fly, if the user has set it up.

3) retention of the original frame sequence/cadence: no messing around with frame timings. No false judder being introduced. Just sticking to field-matching and proper deinterlacing.
__________________
Don't forget the 'c'!

Don't PM me for technical support, please.
scharfis_brain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 21:01   #377  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,286
My video card (Nvidia) doesn't display the short Andromeda sample Katie uploaded correctly. It takes a few frames to pick up the telecine pattern (probably because it fades to white between shots) and they display combed. From there it displays the telecined CGI with the overlaid text quite smoothly.
I think for that one, TFM required a bit of coaxing to get through the section with overlaid text smoothly, probably using settings I wouldn't use for the rest of it, but I'd have to check.
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 21:07   #378  |  Link
JoelHruska
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 77
Quote:
If you attempt to install StaxRip with Avisynth installed, you will receive an error message telling you that you cannot have AviSynth and AviSynth+ installed on the same machine.

excuse me?
I'm assuming you are objecting to the ambiguity in what I said regarding "installing" StaxRip. StaxRip, of course, does not have an installer. But StaxRip *does* have a set of filters, scripts, and tools that it ships with, and it ships with AviSynth+. After working with 32-bit AviSynth 2.6.0 for some time, I decided to test StaxRip. StaxRip requires AviSynth+ 64-bit.

https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=172068&page=3

"Stax76: "StaxRip from now on requires AviSynth+ 64-Bit."

When I ran the AviSynth+ 64-bit installer, it informed me I would have to remove my 32-bit AviSynth 2.6.0 installation due to non-compatibility. The text of the message is not ambiguous. A legacy installation can be preserved in case you wish to downgrade / uninstall later. It explicitly states that this is not equivalent to a side-by-side operational mode.

How to Repro This Warning

1). Download and install AviSynth 2.6.0
2). Download StaxRip 2.0.8-Stable
3). Navigate to the C:\Users\Username\Downloads\StaxRip-x64-2.0.8.0-stable\Apps\Installers folder.
4). Run the AviSynthPlus_3.5.0_20200302.exe file.
5). Observe the following message.

https://i.imgur.com/7olF7K6.png

If you're telling me that this is untrue and that AviSynth+ and AviSynth can co-exist just fine, that's great to know. But that's not what the AviSynth+ installer says.

Last edited by JoelHruska; 22nd May 2020 at 21:15.
JoelHruska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 21:08   #379  |  Link
manono
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 7,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoelHruska View Post
Manono,

I'm happy to provide clips, but I'm not sure there's a point. I've been using QTGMC to fix a 23.976 fps version of the show.
This caught my eye before I saw the videoh curt response (but with humor - you took it the wrong way) and KB's more elaborate response.

I think you unwittingly provided the rationale for the need for samples. Other, more experienced eyes and AviSynth users might suggest a different and easier and much faster workflow. On the face of it, your reasons for using QTGMC on these film portions make no sense. But maybe there are other reasons for filtering some soft telecine.

One possible way is to return it all to 23.976fps via the script suggested by Stereodude earlier, and then replace the non-film portions later with something specially created to convert video to film. I'm referring to the idea (your idea?) of interpolating the video CGI portions to 119.88fps followed by decimating it to 23.976fps. Never know till you try. Replacing bad portions of a video with a better version is a simple matter. It's easy to use Trims for the job. All that's if the series has to be made a constant 23.976fps. Again though, bobbing to 59.94fps is an easy solution. scharfis_brain (whom you don't know but who is greatly respected around here) also seems to be advocating for 59.94fps.
manono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2020, 21:08   #380  |  Link
hello_hello
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,286
Quote:
Originally Posted by huhn View Post
well it sounds dumb but if you don't want the best result this can still be improved by running a hardware frame adaptive deinterlacer over the file instead of TFM. nvidia and intel do field matching when deint is used and you should end up with the far superior 3:2 judder (which i think is bad but what ever).
TFM outputting one duplicate frame in a group of five would look awful, but that's before TDecimate removes it for 23.976fps to give you the same 3:2 judder on a 60Hz display.

The problem is how to handle hybrid sources when re-encoding. Personally I prefer VFR most of the time.

Not a typical example, but I re-encoded some old Doctor Who NTSC DVDs a while back. The video sections had been converted to interlaced NTSC using one method (I can't remember what it's called) and the film sections converted with field blending. I pulled them apart, de-interlaced the video to 59.94fps with QTGMC, and deblended the film sections to 25fps progressive. It was a fair bit of work, and manually creating a timecodes file was a chore, but the end result was quite good.

Each to his own, but I haven't had any problem playing them yet, although I've probably only used my PC and the TVs built in media player.

Last edited by hello_hello; 22nd May 2020 at 21:13.
hello_hello is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 17:10.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.