originaltrilogy.com
NEW (possibly) 2nd Generation '77-78 Bootleg
NEW (possibly) 2nd Generation '77-78 Bootleg :: 1 < 3 > 17
AntcuFaalb
This user is offline.
The Interweb is a Series of Tubesfrank678 said:
I'm not the person to ask to find technical differences, but colourwise this doesnt 'feel' related to the other bootlegs.. I can't see any instant similarity, I think its a different print to those or if not captured through a much different chain.
I agree. I don't want to get ahead of myself, but I think we may now have a full-length original '77-78 color source for color-correction!
"And I'm shocked at you Moth3r for being off-topic, Because if people off-topic you say "stay on-topic, STAY on-topic, STAY ON-TOPIC", and we are not in the Off topic section of OT.com, now are we?" –pat man
"Look again." –Moth3r
–
"whouse erica,frank???!" –pat man 2
"Whouse youse, pam man?" –TV's Frink
–
"david.i dont get it,what is "whouse"??????" –pat man 2
"Do you even look at what you write in your own posts?" –Davnes007
none
This user is offline.
AntcuFaalb wrote: I can't get much information out of him.
How did the discussion go when your cohort mentioned he had this recording?
It can't be the mono mix. Luke clearly says "Blast it, Biggs!
Ok that's good to nail down.
AntcuFaalb wrote: the source VHS cuts off right after displaying "Robert Watts".
Is it a hard cut or is there some VCR static. That's one of the problems of using this as an identification method, as tapes are just over 2 hours long, so is it cut because the original tape ran out or was it cut because it was part of the bootleg market and shortened reproduction time helped crank out the copies.
AntcuFaalb wrote: Assume it's not from a 16mm film source and we're 100% certain that it doesn't have the mono mix. What's left? That is, what might it be from?
16mm has not been ruled out. Both stereo and mono mixes were available in 16mm prints sold in the late 70s. As the vertical cropping is more then the 16mm, that's a factor which leans us in that direction. But not definitively.
Finding a flaw which could give us a sense of scale of the original print is an aspect to look out for at this point. For instance if a hair shows up, how much of the screen does it takes up will give us a sense of how large the original frame was. Another place to look for these flaws are at leaders, reel changes or where pieces of the film are missing. These pieces of the film may have been marked up by someone and the size of the pencil or pen may provide a clue.
Reel change/Cue location with pics and approximate times are mentioned here:
http://fd.noneinc.com/Reel_Changes/Reel_Changes.html
Discussed here: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Reel-lengths/topic/11666/
msycamore
This user is offline.
Just to demonstrate the cropping on it with a comparison against the GOUT transfer.
We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions.
Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com
AntcuFaalb
This user is offline.
The Interweb is a Series of TubesHow did the discussion go when your cohort mentioned he had this recording?
We were talking about Star Wars and he offhandedly mentioned that he may or may not have a bootleg from 1977-78.
Is it a hard cut or is there some VCR static. That's one of the problems of using this as an identification method, as tapes are just over 2 hours long, so is it cut because the original tape ran out or was it cut because it was part of the bootleg market and shortened reproduction time helped crank out the copies.
It's a hard cut. I forgot to mention: it has the tight (i.e., close together) JW credit.
16mm has not been ruled out. Both stereo and mono mixes were available in 16mm prints sold in the late 70s. As the vertical cropping is more then the 16mm, that's a factor which leans us in that direction. But not definitively.
I wasn't ruling out 16mm. I was trying to say: "Assume it's not 16mm for a second, what else can it be?"
Finding a flaw which could give us a sense of scale of the original print is an aspect to look out for at this point. For instance if a hair shows up, how much of the screen does it takes up will give us a sense of how large the original frame was. Another place to look for these flaws are at leaders, reel changes or where pieces of the film are missing. These pieces of the film may have been marked up by someone and the size of the pencil or pen may provide a clue.
I plan to post Parts 1 and 2 tonight to Dropbox. It'll be done no later than 8PM EST.
"And I'm shocked at you Moth3r for being off-topic, Because if people off-topic you say "stay on-topic, STAY on-topic, STAY ON-TOPIC", and we are not in the Off topic section of OT.com, now are we?" –pat man
"Look again." –Moth3r
–
"whouse erica,frank???!" –pat man 2
"Whouse youse, pam man?" –TV's Frink
–
"david.i dont get it,what is "whouse"??????" –pat man 2
"Do you even look at what you write in your own posts?" –Davnes007
TServo2049
This user is offline.
This space for rentThere's another explanation for why it would be cropped on the top and bottom, other than being 16mm-sourced. On film, before the 2x anamorphic stretch, Panavision actually has an aspect ratio of about 1.20:1, not 1.33:1. If it's from a 35mm print, then since it was transferred straight from the print without any anamorphic adjustment, it would have been vertically cropped by about 10% in order to fill the screen.
The adjusted pic bears this out, it has an AR of about 2.63:1.
If only the bootlegger had had the foresight to do a pillarboxed transfer...oh well. I'm just amazed we have a bootleg of this high a generation.
AntcuFaalb
This user is offline.
The Interweb is a Series of TubesI'm just amazed we have a bootleg of this high a generation.
Me too! Even if it's from a 16mm source, I'd really like to record this with a Panasonic AG-1980, as I think it'd be useful for color-correction. Do you agree?
"And I'm shocked at you Moth3r for being off-topic, Because if people off-topic you say "stay on-topic, STAY on-topic, STAY ON-TOPIC", and we are not in the Off topic section of OT.com, now are we?" –pat man
"Look again." –Moth3r
–
"whouse erica,frank???!" –pat man 2
"Whouse youse, pam man?" –TV's Frink
–
"david.i dont get it,what is "whouse"??????" –pat man 2
"Do you even look at what you write in your own posts?" –Davnes007
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda
This user is offline.
legendary but little-known Jedi MasterYou mention "flicker". Do you mean the type of flicker that happens when you videotape a screen and the frame rates don't match?
AntcuFaalb
This user is offline.
The Interweb is a Series of TubesPuggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
You mention "flicker". Do you mean the type of flicker that happens when you videotape a screen and the frame rates don't match?
No, I mean variation in the brightness; e.g., more bright, less bright, more bright, less bright, and so on. It's inconsistent, but tends to happen more during bright scenes, such as when C-3PO is walking in the desert in the beginning.
I've seen plenty of what you're asking about and it doesn't look like that at all.
"And I'm shocked at you Moth3r for being off-topic, Because if people off-topic you say "stay on-topic, STAY on-topic, STAY ON-TOPIC", and we are not in the Off topic section of OT.com, now are we?" –pat man
"Look again." –Moth3r
–
"whouse erica,frank???!" –pat man 2
"Whouse youse, pam man?" –TV's Frink
–
"david.i dont get it,what is "whouse"??????" –pat man 2
"Do you even look at what you write in your own posts?" –Davnes007
Mavimao
This user is offline.
Padawan LearnerSounds like a hastily made telecine making adjustments to brightness in real time. I've seen my fair share of those.
What's the internal temperature of a TaunTaun? Luke warm.
AntcuFaalb
This user is offline.
The Interweb is a Series of TubesThe adjusted pic bears this out, it has an AR of about 2.63:1.
So are you saying that the adjusted image is consistent with what you were talking about?
"And I'm shocked at you Moth3r for being off-topic, Because if people off-topic you say "stay on-topic, STAY on-topic, STAY ON-TOPIC", and we are not in the Off topic section of OT.com, now are we?" –pat man
"Look again." –Moth3r
–
"whouse erica,frank???!" –pat man 2
"Whouse youse, pam man?" –TV's Frink
–
"david.i dont get it,what is "whouse"??????" –pat man 2
"Do you even look at what you write in your own posts?" –Davnes007
TServo2049
This user is offline.
This space for rentAntcuFaalb said:
So are you saying that the adjusted image is consistent with what you were talking about?
Exactly. Either this is a 16mm that was already vertically cropped, or a 35mm print vertically cropped by the telecine operator.
Not sure how we'd be able to tell which it is. I will say that the two English anamorphic 16mm transfers I've seen - Puggo Grande, and the bootleg that Catnap found - had a lot of dirt and damage in common. For example, the pan-down to Tatooine had a lot of emulsion damage (shows up as green blobs) and a couple of bad splices.
I was surprised that this kind of damage would be printed in from the previous generation, but unless the Puggo Grande print is the exact same print transferred in the "Catnap bootleg" many years earlier, it seems that at least one run of 16mm prints came from a rather beat-up source.
When I see this bootleg, I'll probably be able to provide more insight.
frank678
This user is offline.
AntcuFaalb said:
I'm just amazed we have a bootleg of this high a generation.
Me too! Even if it's from a 16mm source, I'd really like to record this with a Panasonic AG-1980, as I think it'd be useful for color-correction. Do you agree?
As long as none of the skin tones make a person look like they had an accident inside a tanning bed it should be useful/informative I think.
AntcuFaalb
This user is offline.
The Interweb is a Series of Tubesfrank678 said:
AntcuFaalb said:
I'm just amazed we have a bootleg of this high a generation.
Me too! Even if it's from a 16mm source, I'd really like to record this with a Panasonic AG-1980, as I think it'd be useful for color-correction. Do you agree?
As long as none of the skin tones make a person look like they had an accident inside a tanning bed it should be useful/informative I think.
The colors are very nice. I don't see any lobsters :-)
"And I'm shocked at you Moth3r for being off-topic, Because if people off-topic you say "stay on-topic, STAY on-topic, STAY ON-TOPIC", and we are not in the Off topic section of OT.com, now are we?" –pat man
"Look again." –Moth3r
–
"whouse erica,frank???!" –pat man 2
"Whouse youse, pam man?" –TV's Frink
–
"david.i dont get it,what is "whouse"??????" –pat man 2
"Do you even look at what you write in your own posts?" –Davnes007
AntcuFaalb
This user is offline.
The Interweb is a Series of TubesMinor update: The porn store was (is?) in downtown Baltimore, MD.
"And I'm shocked at you Moth3r for being off-topic, Because if people off-topic you say "stay on-topic, STAY on-topic, STAY ON-TOPIC", and we are not in the Off topic section of OT.com, now are we?" –pat man
"Look again." –Moth3r
–
"whouse erica,frank???!" –pat man 2
"Whouse youse, pam man?" –TV's Frink
–
"david.i dont get it,what is "whouse"??????" –pat man 2
"Do you even look at what you write in your own posts?" –Davnes007
frank678
This user is offline.
The Baltimore Boot or BB?
You ought to pick a name because if someone's deep in some heavy anaylsis later on they're going to need a handy nickname
AntcuFaalb
This user is offline.
The Interweb is a Series of Tubesfrank678 said:
The Baltimore Boot or BB?
You ought to pick a name because if someone's deep in some heavy anaylsis later on they're going to need a handy nickname
I think I may just go with something boring: Star Wars -- The PS78 (Porn Shop 1978) Edition.
"And I'm shocked at you Moth3r for being off-topic, Because if people off-topic you say "stay on-topic, STAY on-topic, STAY ON-TOPIC", and we are not in the Off topic section of OT.com, now are we?" –pat man
"Look again." –Moth3r
–
"whouse erica,frank???!" –pat man 2
"Whouse youse, pam man?" –TV's Frink
–
"david.i dont get it,what is "whouse"??????" –pat man 2
"Do you even look at what you write in your own posts?" –Davnes007
1990osu
This user is offline.
How you get so big, eating food of this kind?PS78 Baltimore.
This sounds exciting!!
I wish that I could just wish my feelings away...but I can't. Wishful wishing can only lead to wishes wished for in futile wishfulness, which is not what I wish to wish for.
AntcuFaalb
This user is offline.
The Interweb is a Series of TubesI'm joining the two losslessly-compressed AVIs into a single one right now. Let me tell you: the quality of this recording does not do the VHS justice.
"And I'm shocked at you Moth3r for being off-topic, Because if people off-topic you say "stay on-topic, STAY on-topic, STAY ON-TOPIC", and we are not in the Off topic section of OT.com, now are we?" –pat man
"Look again." –Moth3r
–
"whouse erica,frank???!" –pat man 2
"Whouse youse, pam man?" –TV's Frink
–
"david.i dont get it,what is "whouse"??????" –pat man 2
"Do you even look at what you write in your own posts?" –Davnes007
frank678
This user is offline.
AntcuFaalb said:
I'm joining the two losslessly-compressed AVIs into a single one right now. Let me tell you: the quality of this recording does not do the VHS justice.
I suspect it might not be possible to get the captures looking quite as vivid on computer as they do through the TV monitor, currently the stills you've posted look a bit soft/washed out compared to the photos of the TV display, but keep in mind you probably won't get a perfect result right off the bat. You could always double check settings and stuff, or else get access to a better set up later on. On the plus side the current stills look clean and undistorted and don't obscure the sense of whats there.
frank678
This user is offline.
IB Tech
PS78 tweaked to look like the above
frank678
This user is offline.
except...
Pre ANH Bootleg also tweaked
So back to square one
frank678
This user is offline.
AntcuFaalb
This user is offline.
The Interweb is a Series of TubesPMs sent. Please let me know if I forgot about you!
"And I'm shocked at you Moth3r for being off-topic, Because if people off-topic you say "stay on-topic, STAY on-topic, STAY ON-TOPIC", and we are not in the Off topic section of OT.com, now are we?" –pat man
"Look again." –Moth3r
–
"whouse erica,frank???!" –pat man 2
"Whouse youse, pam man?" –TV's Frink
–
"david.i dont get it,what is "whouse"??????" –pat man 2
"Do you even look at what you write in your own posts?" –Davnes007
none
This user is offline.
And as you watch, consider dropping into the OT.com IRC:
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Does-the-IRC-channel-still-exist/post/458805/
Server: irc.scifi-fans.net
Ports 6660-6668,7000
Try joining "OriginalTrilogy"
none
This user is offline.
Here are some of the initial findings.
General: Cropping all sides, heaviest top/bottom. The lower part of the top line of the Greedo subs gets shaved, the second line is cut. Print is shifted generally right. With a black shape on the left, right is vertically cut. Generally bright. In daylight shots the top 1/8th of frame gets blown out a bit. Colors are pale but pretty good. (but i'm no colorologist) Periodic tracking lines but they are brief, usually a few horizontal lines of static for a frame or two. At shot changes which have a bright spot, there is a color balance/contrast readjustment. Flicker is noticeable in bright shots, but it's not there all the time.
Specifics: The first reel change over is short. Missing the second set of dots. The Reel 3-4 change over is long. Extended black screen. As previously reported, it's the stereo* mix and has the John Williams tight credit and the switch to scrolling credits has an overlap with John Barry, as seen in mthr and PuggoGrande.
Questions: As the first reel change has been modified, is there a 16mm release which followed the theatrical release reel changes? Or are most/all 16mm similar to PuggoGrande in which two theatrical reels are one 16mm reel?
Current Search: Looking for ideas of other things to help identify. Collecting frame numbers which have frame errors like the Tantive Orange Errors which can be used to cross compare with other captures. These errors are few (maybe one every two minutes, probably will become less frequent, still haven't left Tatooine in my viewing) and are generally a small percentage of the screen frame. Of the ones checked with mthr it's about 50/50. Will post examples tomorrow.
Everything is surprisingly clean, considering what it is and it's age.
NEW (possibly) 2nd Generation '77-78 Bootleg