Coming back from reading the article. (Got a tweet from 005/SWrevisited a few minutes ago).

Really cool you're getting the recognition you deserve Harmy!

Maybe the extra note you sent the guy about owning the original licensed releases should be posted within the article and not in a comment that can easily be missed IMO. Wouldn't harm at all if you asked the guy to move it up I think.

But anyway, great article! You deserve it!

PS. Not mentioning ANH:R at the end when he mentions other efforts was kind of weird but maybe he hasn't seen it (doubt it) or just didn't like it. i just thought it was funny it wasn't mentioned.

Wonderful article. You deserve all the recognition for a truly wonderful restoration job. For me, this is on par with the restorations of Vertigo and Lawrence of Arabia. I'm seeing things in the OT that I never noticed before, all because of the amazing HD quality of the image.

Cheers from Los Angeles.

The blue saber fix in the training on the falcon scene has some black flicker towards the hilt in several shots.

I noticed this black flickering near the bottom of the blade during the Falcon training scene a few years ago while watching the 2004 dvd.  If you look at the same scene in the GOUT, you'll see that the original effects did not have this error; it's a screwup caused by glitchy digital re-composites.  Accordingly, I think it would be a good idea to fix it for the new version.

What is absolutely in need of fixing, though, is that the colours of the interior of Vader's TIE fighter cockpit are wildly inconsistent.  In the original every shot had the lighting as a strong red with the same saturation level, but in the 2004 version about half these shots have become pink, and some of them are so desaturated that they're almost colourless.  Usually this is just for the Vader shots, but sometimes it happens to his wingman also.  I would very much like to see these corrected for the new version.

By the way, I'm considering making a new version of the 70mm mix, so assuming that it turns out to be a worthwhile improvement, it would be cool to have it included on the next release.  ;)

Just read the article. That is some great stuff.  Congratulations.

Excellent video Harmy.

Hi Harmy,

I first posted in the ESB thread after watching your edit and it was a great thrill.

I have now completed all 3 movies and just want to congratulate you again on a job well done!  Also happy to see your getting more recognition!

These films look beautiful.  I didn't miss ANY of the SE changes.  I had heard of the color-timing on the 2004 dvds but it didn't occur to me how much had changed until I saw your releases.

thank you so much for making this happen!

The link to the disc art doesn't seem to be functioning:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=R4UWXWY8

Anyone have an alternate path to them?

edit:  found 'em in another thread.  Lovely!

Hi Harmy,

someone should get you a better computer. There should happen some fundraising at originaltrilogy.com. I would throw in some bucks! ;)

Since I enjoy your effort very much, I have to tell you the one thing, that throws me out, when I see the edit: The mattes.

The problem is: It's always visible when you use a still picture, because suddenly there is no more movement in the picture. I thought about it.. it's very hard to give a still image the feeling, that it's part of the moving film.. little movement would be needed, that is happening in the normal shots.. maybe more grain, but I don't know if that would help.

Sometimes I am not sure, if it's always for the best looking experience to go for "as much HD as possible".. maybe it would sometimes be better to use as much "moving picture" as possible, even if it is from lower resolution..

An example is the shot at Mos Eisley. It's very obvious that it's a still frame, because it has a lot less movement, than the shots before and after..

Maybe you could try playing with some "old movie" filter for afx. Do you have some of those? Just putting a bit of film jitter on it obviously with very small ammounts could help. For the subconcious eye its not just about the grain, it's always about this those tiny shakes and movements of the picture, that come from scanning original 35mm films. Obviously in completely digital movies, there are sometimes shoots like that, but that's what this editions shouldn't look like: digital! ;)

I don't know if others see this too. Maybe I recognize it more, since I watch it enlarged over a projector.

Otherwise: Good work, and I hope the recognition for you will be rising!

You don't need an "old movie effect" in AfterEffects to make the image look less still. Just use the "wiggle" expression to give it a bit of shake, and some animated grain and you're good.