Jump to content

Britney Spears Live From Las Vegas 2001 REMASTERED


Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, ThisMeowBiteback said:

Man I just smoke some w**d & im blown away about how a lot of music she made back then  came to be really her life in the future. Overprotected performance just creep the F out me. We already know how song is pretty much what her life has become, but in that performance you see on the screen her bald head :ohmygawd_britney_omg_shocked_wow_holy_crap_gasp_shocked_itz_in_the_zone_white: she knew what her life was going to be or god/universe tried to warned her. it’s really scary. She’s in a cage too on that same screen.

Nothing like watching Britney after a bl**t and go to the mirror and do the work ***** choreo.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, CJMCH said:

I really don't know if that user used a VHS rip to do it, since the digital DVD file looks better. @Stifler's Mom could totally pull it off and in 4K, can't wait for him to do this show.

The worst part is a native HD 16:9 recording of the show exists. A watermarked video of the Oops performance has been on Youtube for years and it has a wider resolution, therefore wasn't cropped from the 4:3 DVD file. HBO poured so much money into producing the special, and they started offering HD content in January of 2001. There is no way the show wasn't recorded with HD Cameras. I hope if it ever ends up on HBO Max or some streaming service we will see it in its full native resolution. A concert this spectacular deserves spectacular resolution for its official recording. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, ToxicMadness said:

the footage on the final credits are from the show the day before, sooo....that show exists in full...hope one day leaks!!! (the same with onyx showtime special rehearsal) 

Wait what? I thought it was just random clips from the show, and I didn't catch anything alluding to it being from the November 17 show. I assumed that they had just woven in shots from both to make the editing more seamless. 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, F.a.u.zish said:

Wait what? I thought it was just random clips from the show, and I didn't catch anything alluding to it being from the November 17 show. I assumed that they had just woven in shots from both to make the editing more seamless. 

Nop, check yourself, of course the differences are minimal.. Hair and for example, the stronger outfit button ;) compare. 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, ToxicMadness said:

Nop, check yourself, of course the differences are minimal.. Hair and for example, the stronger outfit button ;) compare. 

Oh shoot you're right. Now that i think about it, i'm 99% sure this was originally broadcast live as the second show was happening  on HBO so it makes sense the credits would have been made with footage from the previous night. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, F.a.u.zish said:

Oh shoot you're right. Now that i think about it, i'm 99% sure this was originally broadcast live as the second show was happening  on HBO so it makes sense the credits would have been made with footage from the previous night. 

Exactly!  :) 

And even for some miliseconds she appears to be more energetic (she didn't have the pressure of the live broadcast) so... i want to see it 

Link to comment
12 hours ago, F.a.u.zish said:

The worst part is a native HD 16:9 recording of the show exists. A watermarked video of the Oops performance has been on Youtube for years and it has a wider resolution, therefore wasn't cropped from the 4:3 DVD file. HBO poured so much money into producing the special, and they started offering HD content in January of 2001. There is no way the show wasn't recorded with HD Cameras. I hope if it ever ends up on HBO Max or some streaming service we will see it in its full native resolution. A concert this spectacular deserves spectacular resolution for its official recording. 

Not sure if a widescreen shot has ever been published, but I'm sure it was recorded that way. The one on YouTube was just stretched.

 

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, floopy22 said:

What is this blurry mess? Remastered implies that it's sourced from the original master. Stop misusing this term.

Actually, many remasters (like music videos) are also (AI powered) upscales, and yet they use the "remastered" term. Remastering doesn’t always mean it was "restored" or "rescanned" from original films masters. I personally don’t see any problem of using the term "remastered" here, but I get what you mean.

Link to comment
On 3/7/2021 at 7:39 PM, CJMCH said:

I really don't know if that user used a VHS rip to do it, since the digital DVD file looks better. @Stifler's Mom could totally pull it off and in 4K, can't wait for him to do this show.

my next goal was actually DWAD. I did remaster one or two. thing is that just the whole show it will take like weeks. I really need someone else to help me with it since its almost 2h of show.

  • Love 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, Stifler's Mom said:

my next goal was actually DWAD. I did remaster one or two. thing is that just the whole show it will take like weeks. I really need someone else to help me with it since its almost 2h of show.

Too bad YT taken down Slave and Boys :embarrassney_embarrassed_shame_guilt_hide_britney_karaoke_head_shake_no_smh:

I upscaled Anticipating in 4K and YouTube blocks the video so it’s impossible for me to upload DWAD performances! :howdareyou_meme_cat:

Link to comment
21 hours ago, MSTAR said:

Actually, many remasters (like music videos) are also (AI powered) upscales, and yet they use the "remastered" term. Remastering doesn’t always mean it was "restored" or "rescanned" from original films masters. I personally don’t see any problem of using the term "remastered" here, but I get what you mean.

But they're still almost always sourced from an original master or raw footage.

When the master has been lost, the highest quality source available would be used. A VHS recording or a low-quality compressed digital video doesn't qualify.

It's literally in the name: re-MASTER.

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, floopy22 said:

But they're still almost always sourced from an original master or raw footage.

When the master has been lost, the highest quality source available would be used. A VHS recording or a low-quality compressed digital video doesn't qualify.

It's literally in the name: re-MASTER.

I mean, even big labels like SONY use the worst sources ever and yet use the remastered term or even "Official HD Video", just like those:

Not saying that labels have right or not to use those terms, maybe the meaning of the word have changed, but indeed, the original meaning of Remastering is to take the highest quality source to master it again in higher resolution. But I think it’s not a bad use of the term if we say "AI Remastered". 

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, MSTAR said:

I mean, even big labels like SONY use the worst sources ever and yet use the remastered term or even "Official HD Video", just like those:

Not saying that labels have right or not to use those terms, maybe the meaning of the word have changed, but indeed, the original meaning of Remastering is to take the highest quality source to master it again in higher resolution. But I think it’s not a bad use of the term if we say "AI Remastered". 

It's simply dishonest. These aren't even claimed to be remasters. But no, they're not by any means HD.

Most music videos, even if shot on film were scanned and edited on digital workstations at the resolutions they were intended for. Not to mention any CGI was also rendered at that resolution. Making true HD remasters can be very expensive as you'd potentially have to recreate a lot from scratch.

By slapping "HD" and "Remastered" on everything, this is the result. We get crappy "HD" videos from official channels, because nobody knows what these words mean anymore.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, floopy22 said:

It's simply dishonest. These aren't even claimed to be remasters. But no, they're not by any means HD.

Most music videos, even if shot on film were scanned and edited on digital workstations at the resolutions they were intended for. Not to mention any CGI was also rendered at that resolution. Making true HD remasters can be very expensive as you'd potentially have to recreate a lot from scratch.

By slapping "HD" and "Remastered" on everything, this is the result. We get crappy "HD" videos from official channels, because nobody knows what these words mean anymore.

Yeah they claimed those videos as remasters, check the title and description. They added "Official HD Video" on the music video of "3". And they added the hashtags #Remastered and #HD on the description of the videos that I showed you. Whereas they aren’t true HD remasters, this term is now usued to design a re-master in 1080p of the old SD master, which basically means for the label: "just render those SD videos in 1080p but don’t forget to add some blurring and sharpening".

I know they have to remake all digital effects and CGI in HD (natively) and re-edit the whole video from zero which is expensive. That’s what I always say on other topics.
After all, it’s just digitally upscaled in fact.

I personally use two terms: Upscaled and Remastered. When I release my upscales of Britney’s videos, I put on the thumbnail of the video "4K Upscaled" and on the title "4K Remastered" because the title would be too long (due to the limit) if I put "4K Upscaled Remaster". But you will say, it’s not a real remaster, that’s clickbaitint! Actually no, because I use ProRes Masters for upscaling them. So in my case, it’s remastering, am I right? :idkney_britney_glory_carpool_karaoke_unsure_idk_nervous:

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, MSTAR said:

Yeah they claimed those videos as remasters, check the title and description. They added "Official HD Video" on the music video of "3". And they added the hashtags #Remastered and #HD on the description of the videos that I showed you. Whereas they aren’t true HD remasters, this term is now usued to design a re-master in 1080p of the old SD master, which basically means for the label: "just render those SD videos in 1080p but don’t forget to add some blurring and sharpening".

I know they have to remake all digital effects and CGI in HD (natively) and re-edit the whole video from zero which is expensive. That’s what I always say on other topics.
After all, it’s just digitally upscaled in fact.

I personally use two terms: Upscaled and Remastered. When I release my upscales of Britney’s videos, I put on the thumbnail of the video "4K Upscaled" and on the title "4K Remastered" because the title would be too long (due to the limit) if I put "4K Upscaled Remaster". But you will say, it’s not a real remaster, that’s clickbaitint! Actually no, because I use ProRes Masters for upscaling them. So in my case, it’s remastering, am I right? :idkney_britney_glory_carpool_karaoke_unsure_idk_nervous:

Yeah, agreed (I didn't see the tags). That's very bad of them to do that.

I would stick with "Upscaled", "Enhanced" or whatever. If the source isn't terrible and the AI upscale is done in a good way I don't really care.

With this one I could hardly tell the difference from the various low quality versions. I couldn't even tell there was any AI upscaling used or even a simple sharpening filter.

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, floopy22 said:

It's simply dishonest. These aren't even claimed to be remasters. But no, they're not by any means HD.

Most music videos, even if shot on film were scanned and edited on digital workstations at the resolutions they were intended for. Not to mention any CGI was also rendered at that resolution. Making true HD remasters can be very expensive as you'd potentially have to recreate a lot from scratch.

By slapping "HD" and "Remastered" on everything, this is the result. We get crappy "HD" videos from official channels, because nobody knows what these words mean anymore.

To be fair, it only says "REMASTERED" in my post on Breatheheavy.com. It doesn't say "remastered" anywhere on the actual Youtube video or in the caption for the video.

I clearly know nothing about how any of this works - My bad!

Link to comment
28 minutes ago, floopy22 said:

Yeah, agreed (I didn't see the tags). That's very bad of them to do that.

I would stick with "Upscaled", "Enhanced" or whatever. If the source isn't terrible and the AI upscale is done in a good way I don't really care.

With this one I could hardly tell the difference from the various low quality versions. I couldn't even tell there was any AI upscaling used or even a simple sharpening filter.

Yeah I agree with you. I still don’t understand why big Labels are claiming those music videos were remastered in HD, where they just took Low Quality Composite masters, over sharpened them and added a lot of blurring... They could’ve used ProRes Masters at least...

I mean, here’s the official "HD Remaster":

ILove-Rock-NRoll-HD-Official.png
And that’s my 4K Remaster, upscaled from ProRes Master:

rock3.png
You can notice all skin imperfections on my 4K remaster, while the official HD video don’t have any detail, just blurred.

 

Link to comment
  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

We noticed you're using an ad blocker  :badthoughts_gun_kris_genner_thinking_debating:

Thanks for visiting Exhale! Your support is greatly appreciated 💜  

Exhale survives through advertising revenue. Please, disable your ad block extension to help us and continue browsing Exhale. 🙏

I've disabled ad block