MICHAEL GIACCHINO

I will welcome one of any length assuming it contains all the worthwhile cues from the season opposed to a bunch of stuff we already have. Infact, just give me a CD loaded with Jacob's theme and I'll be happy. The best darn thing to come from the season and probably my #2 theme after the Oceanic Six one.

The finale had good music. There were also themes that haven't been released in the past that could be included on the release.

Maybe if we say his name often enough he'll appear on the forum?

Quickly taped it from TV - thanks for the heads-up! Nice little interview.
I think Michael may have seen too much Lost though: "Whatever happens, happens."

(Oh, and what's with all the youtube-quality fragments on the news the last couple of years!)

Well the BBC have kindly edited it out of the broadcast, but Michael has won the bafta for Up.

I watched Up tonight as it happens.* Definitely a worthy score for awards, I'm pleased Giacchino is getting the recognition he deserves.


*For a student house, we don't have a bad set up: PS3, 42" HDTV with Motion Flow, a proper 5.1 surround sound system through an optical connection and blue LED lights to put the lounge into cinema mode. We had Up in 1080p with motion flow on and it looked AWESOME.

Motion Flow? Doesn't that make a film look like video? I've seen Motion Flow demos and, IMHO, it looks like crap when watch movies. Motion Flow might look great for live events but if I'm watching a movie I don't want the added frames to smooth things out.

-Erik-

Yeah, that's pretty lousy. How can you stand watching movies on that crap system?

I agree. For live action movies, we turn it off. But for animated movies, it's excellent! Having it turned on with live action films makes it look like the whole thing was filmed on a digital camera, and it looks very odd. But it works well with games and CGI movies.

Ah, that's certainly a very interesting thing to observe but also a risky one. Adding extra data in an already digitized signal through the standard techniques (zero interpolation, averaging, linear interpolation, etc) can be very complex and dangerous at places. And which part of hardware does this work? Is it on the tv? In the blu-ray / dvd player?

Scientifically risky. Not commercially obviously.

Can you elaborate on "Scientifically risky"?

Creating extra frames (in video) or creating more data in digitized audio data, equals extra bits. The analogue (physical) version of the audio-visual phenomenon is captured / recorded and then originally digitalized once, through Fourier spectral analysis and quantization and that's it, it's turned into a series of zeros and ones for further editing, transmitting and storage.

Now, with this technique, you're taking the digitized representation of the physical (analogue) event and adding extra zeros and ones which are artificial. Whilst the original 0-1 (bits) were extracted from the fourier spectral analysis and quantization of the real physical event itself, now instead of that, the extra data has to be artificially manufactured and injected in-between the already existent series of 0-1. Now there's complex algorithms and procedures such as zero interpolation, linear interpolation, averaging, etc, which calculate and decide whether to place new samples as 0 or a 1 and when to place it. That's not natural. It can have a great effect in games and stuff which isn't a documentation of a physical phenomenon (like a movie: sound and light) in the first place and it's basically artificial and computer-built, but i guess it's obvious in which applications it can be problematic. Especially if the hardware / algorithm that's performing it isn't good enough, i.e. expensive.

Blame Steven Practically, a wild parallelism to understand the philosophy is to extend it to that of taking a 192kbps mp3 and converting it into a 320kbps (without resorting to the original uncompressed wav of course, you only have the 192kbps mp3 in your hands). The result will be the same (at best, if you have an expensive software with a good algorithm for mp3 conversion) or even worse than the 192kbps one. 'Cause the extra digital data that has to be created (the zeros and ones) in order to fill the gap, will be artificially created through algorithms that calculate where to place those extra bits, i.e in non physical ways which can result to quantization noise (usually a high-pitched soft sound, high frequencies' added distortion, etc).

If only, if only.