About the problem where the shift occurred: Frames are framed by large blocks of FFs with 47 1F FF 1X in them if they are large enough and X counting up. On Both sides of that IF7 they are already align. So the shift and reshift should have occurred between those. Maybe it is just enough to add a F at the end of the block before IF7 and remove one at the start of the block after IF7 (0x23cde9).
0023BB60 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF 47 1F FF 18 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF0023BB8F FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF0023BBBE FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF0023BBED FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF 7F FC FF FF FF FD 7F F4 FF 7C F6 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF DE 7F 7D 76 FC F4 EB 6D 6F F6 FF 1F FD BF0023BC1C FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FB 03 EE 76 17 E0 1B DA 08 FF EB DF 14 C0 D8 61 01 F7 5F C8 3F FE 7B FF F8 7D 53 57 70 34 EB DC F3 3F 5C 82 FF F3 FE 3E
If you zoom in on 6, it seems to me that 17:12 is sea foam, not the leg. The color and texture isn't right. (It'd be handy to have a magnifying glass on Slapbet for stuff like this.)
Then, I suspect 15:11 is actually 15:10.
Can't be. 4:10 to 42:10 is a solid good piece of data anchored by the smudge on 26:10
So I tried to get something with iframe 4, but still a lot to do. I have to stop now for a few days so good luck to those who wish to improve it From try1.ts5:1:4200,00:03:-1,02:03:10968,10:03:-1,17:06:22427,14:11:-1,38:16:65876,19:17:-1,00:19:78514,28:20:-1,0:28:129509At 17911 and 55810 there are also valid sequences, which I do not know exactly where to put, and I did not really try to improve the bottom of the frame.Also some sequences from http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=34597.msg1195103#msg1195103 could help if put at the accurate place.
Coerced Try Offset0-4225 0-4225 0 4225-5697 4226-46912 5698-48384 1472 48384-5132846913-49856 51329-54272 4416 54272-55744 49857-66048 55745-71936 5888 71936-73408 66049-104323 73409-111683 7360 111683-114627104324-121984 114628-132288 10304121985 - 132287 132289-144485
Quote from: SwissCheese on 05/09/2014 08:11 pmSo I tried to get something with iframe 4, but still a lot to do. I have to stop now for a few days so good luck to those who wish to improve it From try1.ts5:1:4200,00:03:-1,02:03:10968,10:03:-1,17:06:22427,14:11:-1,38:16:65876,19:17:-1,00:19:78514,28:20:-1,0:28:129509At 17911 and 55810 there are also valid sequences, which I do not know exactly where to put, and I did not really try to improve the bottom of the frame.Also some sequences from http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=34597.msg1195103#msg1195103 could help if put at the accurate place.Quote from: SwissCheese on 05/09/2014 08:11 pmSo I tried to get something with iframe 4, but still a lot to do. I have to stop now for a few days so good luck to those who wish to improve it From try1.ts5:1:4200,00:03:-1,02:03:10968,10:03:-1,17:06:22427,14:11:-1,38:16:65876,19:17:-1,00:19:78514,28:20:-1,0:28:129509At 17911 and 55810 there are also valid sequences, which I do not know exactly where to put, and I did not really try to improve the bottom of the frame.Also some sequences from http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=34597.msg1195103#msg1195103 could help if put at the accurate place.I was able to add some more dubiously placed water to this. But not getting much of anything in the parts that are actually interesting. Not sure threre's a whole lot more I can do with 4.5:1:-1,11:1:5384,30:2:-1,2:3:10968,10:3:-1,13:3:14762,33:3:-1,35:3:16382,37:3:16550,34:4:-1,6:5:17911,30:5:19483,32:5:-1,36:5:20286,8:6:-1,9:6:21857,16:10:-1,17:10:36140,13:11:-1,17:11:39697,38:11:-1,1:12:41855,16:12:-1,29:12:43895,20:13:-1,13:14:51698,38:14:-1,14:15:51794,36:15:-1,37:16:65876,18:17:-1,14:18:74612,30:20:-1,24:27:127453,6:28:-1Note, this is from try1.ts. It's fairly easy to port between coerced.ts and try1.ts frames though. Just need to add/subtract an offset to account for the extra sections of data in try1.ts that aren't in coerced.ts.Here's the diff and offset for frame 4.Coerced Try Offset0-4225 0-4225 0 4225-5697 4226-46912 5698-48384 1472 48384-5132846913-49856 51329-54272 4416 54272-55744 49857-66048 55745-71936 5888 71936-73408 66049-104323 73409-111683 7360 111683-114627104324-121984 114628-132288 10304121985 - 132287 132289-144485
<snip>The following is how it should look like IMHO.There are 3 blocks of XXs which are different for each frame. The first one seems to contain a counter. The rest i dont know. But it should be mentioned in that ISO*.pdf how they should look like/what they should contain.47 43 E8 37 07 10 00 xx xx xx 7E 00 00 00 01 E0 00 00 81 80 07 21 01 xx xx xx FF FF 00 00 01 B0 03 00 00 01 B5 0D 0F 00 00 01 00 00 00 01 20 00 C4 8D C0 00 46 56 C0 1E C0 01 xx xx 9A FC 7C 2E EE 2C 08 78 28 C7 00 00 01 B2 65 6D 34 76 20 34 2E 33 2E 30 4E 31 40 C3 FF 00 00 01 B6 1x<snip>
Hmm. If you switch back and forth quickly between 'common_dirt2' (frame 8 ) and 6, 6's left leg is too long, not too short.
And the right leg is a little short. So maybe 15:11 is more like 16:12? Then everything else shifts down and to the left one. The lower part of the leg isn't set in stone, I don't think. Or 15:12/13? Not sure, though. Wish I was more nimble with the MPEG format.
Here's what it would look like if it was shifted 1 block to the right. Pretty weird, but kind of fits. Plus this change would lighten the columns under it and darken the ones to the left. And the leg tips look pretty weird on iframe 5 as well. But again, I do not know if that such a misalignment of blocks in macroblocks is even theoretically possible.
I changed 11:1:5384 to 22:1:5384 to properly align the dark dirt in top center... I really should give them numbers And also 30:2:-1 to 3:0:-1Now a lot of dirt blobs start to align... Now I really gonna number them.. 5:1:-1,22:1:5384,0:3:-1,2:3:10968,10:3:-1,13:3:14762, 33:3:-1,35:3:16382,37:3:16550,34:4:-1,6:5:17911, 30:5:19483,32:5:-1, 36:5:20286,8:6:-1,9:6:21857, 16:10:-1,17:10:36140,13:11:-1,17:11:39697,38:11:-1, 1:12:41855,16:12:-1,29:12:43895,20:13:-1,13:14:51698, 38:14:-1,14:15:51794,36:15:-1, 37:16:65876,18:17:-1,14:18:74612,30:20:-1,24:27:127453,6:28:-1
Working on those headers I found that some errors are single bit flips, but there are also stripes of bytes which are simply garbage/randomly turned bits one after an other. In an image you cant repair this I think. Substitute MBs maybe. Headers can also be fixed, but if part of an frame MB itself is messed up like this you cant really hope to fixed it by flipping random bits.
Quote from: Shanuson on 05/10/2014 01:57 pmWorking on those headers I found that some errors are single bit flips, but there are also stripes of bytes which are simply garbage/randomly turned bits one after an other. In an image you cant repair this I think. Substitute MBs maybe. Headers can also be fixed, but if part of an frame MB itself is messed up like this you cant really hope to fixed it by flipping random bits.Yeah, been working on the raw and the corruption is much worse than I had assumed. Not only are there huge swaths of garbage, but also probable missing bits (like the 4-bit offset that was found for sure). Now I see where the aeroquartet guy was coming from - it *should* be impossible to repair this video - but all the more reason why the work being done here is so amazing. At the current pace, we'll have silky smooth HD video before the next launch I'm going to continue playing with michaelni's tsfix, but I don't see a way that this can be brute-force cleaned. Missing (and possibly added) bits expand the search space well beyond computational feasibility. We might be able to tidy up some of the intermediate frames some, but the masters will have to be done by hand. So keep up the awesome work bit flippers and block movers!One note to the maintainer of slapbet - it would probably be very easy to integrate my ffmpeg log parsing code into the webapp to enable bad-block highlighting with a checkbox. See ~499 of http://pastebin.com/bKgzCRqD and following - just string and integer parsing in Java which is a trivial port to js. Edit: also, a mouseover showing the x:y would be nice
iframe 6 (try1)Left leg is not fully deployed yet, but i'm perplexed by the tip of it. At least I think it's the tip because it doesn't look like a cloud or a foam spot on the sea. It kind of resembles the tip of the right leg on iframe 5, which shows the right leg in similar stage of deployment as left leg on this frame. The thing is it doesn't align. It's off by one block (half of macroblock). Is such an alignment error even possible?
Quote from: saliva_sweet on 05/10/2014 10:09 pmIt's off by one block (half of macroblock). Is such an alignment error even possible? If I understand your question correctly: yes. It is possible the data from one block (not macroblock) is used by another block within the same macroblock. This would for example happen if somehow a bad bit was interpreted as a "stop-bit" of the data of a block. This way the next block (within the same macroblock) would use the data from its previous block. The other way around is also possible I believe.
It's off by one block (half of macroblock). Is such an alignment error even possible?