Remake versus Remaster

Arigatomina · Post by **Arigatomina** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 10:57 pm

I have a question regarding the difference between these two - Phade explained the difference as 'remastered = same video but better quality' and 'remake = different clips and change in editing but same idea'.

Do I have these right? And if so, are 'remakes' allowed? I know remasters get in trouble (they're identical except for size/capture in most cases, so they should be replaced rather than having a new vid description). But is it 'fine/allowable' to remake videos? The reason I ask is that they're everywhere "This video" and then "This video Remastered" - but they have new clips/editing as well as better quality.

Is there a difference when it comes to uploading vids to the donut?

SQ · Post by SQ » Sat Nov 08, 2003 9:53 am

As far as I know, you should contact Phade if you remaster a video to replace the original link. Remakes are allowed a new page in the archive. Don't ask me why it works that way. =\

I know I made a remake(although I call it a remaster, since I didn't really remake the WHOLE thing), and I emailed Phade to delete the link to my old one. I never got an answer, so two weeks later I was just like "Fine, be that way", and made a new page for my remake and uploaded it.

About a month later I emailed Phade again and still didn't get a response, so I'm assuming that remakes are fine with new pages and links but remasters arn't. =\

Eek-1 · Post by **Eek-1** » Sat Nov 08, 2003 9:36 pm

I did remaster one of my AMV. I just added a new download link within the existing info instead of making new page for it, not to clutter my profile.

Arigatomina · Post by **Arigatomina** » Sat Nov 08, 2003 9:42 pm

ek1 wrote:I did remaster one of my AMV. I just added a new download link within the existing info instead of making new page for it, not to clutter my profile.

That's the ideal way, but you can't do that if you have the original on a local link. That's why I wanted to know the policy for locally hosted amvs. ^.~

icedaemon69 · Post by **icedaemon69** » Sat Nov 08, 2003 10:41 pm

0_0 is that - is that hiei and [i]kurama??? [/i]
i don't get why people have it in their little heads that hiei and kurama could be yaoi...i mean, true, kurama may be a bit girly and they're close, but uhh....

icedaemon69 · Post by **icedaemon69** » Sat Nov 08, 2003 10:44 pm

....i know, i know, i pay way too much attention to people's avatars (that's what you call them?) just can't help it.....

Arigatomina · Post by **Arigatomina** » Sat Nov 08, 2003 11:22 pm

icedaemon69 wrote:0_0 is that - is that hiei and kurama???
i don't get why people have it in their little heads that hiei and kurama could be yaoi...i mean, true, kurama may be a bit girly and they're close, but uhh....

Who said it was Kurama?

It's just a pretty picture of someone who *looks* like Hiei, and a redhaired person. ^_^

[And don't worry, I'll have another 'Kurama-look-alike' pic back up before daybreak.]

icedaemon69 · Post by **icedaemon69** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 6:26 pm

no, no, i like it though...aside from who they are it really is a pretty picture. is it fanart? who did it?

Arigatomina · Post by **Arigatomina** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 8:08 pm

icedaemon69 wrote:no, no, i like it though...aside from who they are it really is a pretty picture. is it fanart? who did it?

It was a doujinshi - I don't remember which one for sure, but probably either Arina Toshimi or Fuji Shinichi. ^_^

Arcane Azmadi · Post by **Arcane Azmadi** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 10:25 pm

My groups first video was a purely learning experience- our source footage was poor quality fansub, we didn't bother doing anything about the subtitles, the timing was imprecise, a lot of the shots were frankly poorly chosen, and I couldn't stop Marradin from sticking 30 seconds of pretentious credits on the end. Nevertheless, we gave it a small distribution to some friends on a forum I visit to get some feedback. After a lot of delays, our second AMV and first professional production was a remake of the first with DVD-rip footage, much more precise timing, more carefully thought out shots and a better layout. There's nothing wrong with remaking something you aren't satisfied with, is there?

Besides, I don't believe there's anybody out there who is capable of remastering an AMV without succumbing to the temptation to at least tweak a few things- "It was a good AMV and I'm happy with it, but I still think I should have done this at that point, and just tightened that up a bit..." Unless you can make an AMV which you are completely 100% happy with on the first try, there's nothing wrong with making a few changes. Anyway, if the only difference is in the video quality, is there really that much point to remastering?