Oh boy…
"As far as I know, there’s only one person who could make this happen and he hasn’t seemed all that interested."
I don’t think he’s talking about George. I think he’s referring to a studio big wig. That’s just my two cents on
that. Anyways, the Episode III extra has spoken
Why would Lucas’ opinion matter? If he sold it Disney, it’s up to them and Fox.
It’s already official. We’re getting them 2020 at the earliest, and that’s if Disney can iron out a deal with Fox.
There’s nothing official about that. Frink is right. Absolutely no one has provided any refutation or affirmation of this rumor in any remote way. Just wait until Celebration and see what they say, if anything.
Hey, I’d give my eye teeth to be wrong. But The Digital Bits makes it sound pretty damned unlikely.
I think the wisest thing to do would be to just ignore anything related to all this business until it’s officially announced. Who cares what anyone tweets or what rumors are out there? It’s all meaningless until something real happens.
The closest thing to official data we have is negative.
If you say so.
Bill Hunt does.
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”
Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death
Bill Hunt has just found out that the negative was conformed to the Special Edition. The man on the Steve Hoffman Forums that worked on the DVD back in 2004 said after reading Bill Hunt’s piece, “I’ve been saying that since 2004”.
The Person in Question
Bill Hunt has just found out that the negative was conformed to the Special Edition. The man on the Steve Hoffman Forums that worked on the DVD back in 2004 said after reading Bill Hunt’s piece, “I’ve been saying that since 2004”.
Well, atleast we have official confirmation that the original clippings have been maintained.That’s something
How is that something? Doesn’t it mean that the negatives have been hacked to hell?
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”
Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death
Bill Hunt has just found out that the negative was conformed to the Special Edition. The man on the Steve Hoffman Forums that worked on the DVD back in 2004 said after reading Bill Hunt’s piece, “I’ve been saying that since 2004”.
Well, atleast we have official confirmation that the original clippings have been maintained.That’s something
Who said the original clippings have been maintained? That’s not what was said at all.
He said they’re still around. Also, I’m pretty sure that the negative was disassembled in the first place as part of the restoration process, Special Edition aside.
The Person in Question
What exactly does it mean for the negative to be disassembled?
What exactly does it mean for the negative to be disassembled?
The first thing they did for the Special Edition was clean up the original negative shot by shot and frame by frame. This process was started in 1994. The technology to do this digitally didn’t exist yet, as it would by 2004, so they were still doing this photochemically. Because the o-neg was made up of four different kinds of film stocks (one for the shots that would’ve come straight from the camera, another for the vfx shots, etc), it had to be disassembled in order to clean and chemically treat each shot with the tender love and care it needed. I’m not sure if this necessitated separating each and every shot (for example, the scene where Luke has dinner with Owen and Beru was presumably all shot on the same film stock, so maybe they were able to clean/bath that scene without disassembling it).
While they were doing this, they also redid the optical wipes. This would have involved separating the end of each scene from the beginning of the next.
The negative has been conformed to the SE since 1997. George decided to cut the changes directly into the negative because, as far as he was concerned, the SE was the official version of the movie now.
We recently got confirmation from the relevant person at Fox that the pieces of the negative replaced for the SE were indeed put into storage and not discarded. It’s worth noting, though, that many of the vfx shots had deteriorated by '97 because of the chemical properties of the specific film stock they were finished on. As a result, even the shots that weren’t completely redone with cgi still had to be replaced. Because the only alternative was going to a grainier second-generation source like an IP or sep, George instead had ILM go back to what I presume were the VistaVision originals (which I guess hadn’t faded as badly?) and recomposite those shots digitally.
I think I remember reading on zombie’s website that the negative need not be disassembled to reconstruct the unaltered version. Because a modern restoration would be done digitally anyway, they would simply need to take a scan of the o-neg as it is now, scan in the pieces that got replaced, and rebuild everything in the digital realm.
What exactly does it mean for the negative to be disassembled?
The negative has been conformed to the SE since 1997. George decided to cut the changes directly into the negative because, as far as he was concerned, the SE was the official version of the movie now.
We recently got confirmation from the relevant person at Fox that the pieces of the negative replaced for the SE were indeed put into storage and not discarded.
I think I remember reading on zombie’s website that the negative need not be disassembled to reconstruct the unaltered version. Because a modern restoration would be done digitally anyway, they would simply need to take a scan of the o-neg as it is now, scan in the pieces that got replaced, and rebuild everything in the digital realm.
For further context, the negative is the first-generation source for the footage used in the final cut. They are also without any color timing as that comes later in the process, and unlike a 35mm print, which is a few generations down from the negative, there is only one layer of grain to deal with (this is not the case with SW as there is optical compositing).*
*if I’ve made any mistakes, please correct me.
“That said, there is nothing wrong with mocking prequel lovers and belittling their bad taste.” - Alderaan, 2017
MGGA (Make GOUT Great Again):
http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Return-of-the-GOUT-Preservation-and-Restoration/id/55707
What exactly does it mean for the negative to be disassembled?
Sorry, I wrote and posted my response without fully understanding the context of your question. I’ve edited my post above accordingly with additional information.
Wasnt there a confirmation or a rumor of some sort that Empire of Dreams was remastered in HD?? Assuming thats true thats gotta fit in here somewhere.
Not that it has been completed, just that somebody says they worked on it.
The Person in Question
Not that it has been completed, just that somebody says they worked on it.
I love that documentary, hope it’s true.
That a documentary made in 2004 wasn’t shot in HD, (if only to future proof it) is weird.
Where were you in '77?
That a documentary made in 2004 wasn’t shot in HD, (if only to future proof it) is weird.
So if anything, we’ll get an upscaled version of it
That a documentary made in 2004 wasn’t shot in HD, (if only to future proof it) is weird.
So if anything, we’ll get an upscaled version of it
I feel like we don’t really know.
Did the guy who blabbed about it provide any kind of details?
It’s also possible it was shot in HD, but the film clips were SD. Or the whole thing was edited in SD. Who really knows when George and Lucasfilm were involved?
Where were you in '77?
That a documentary made in 2004 wasn’t shot in HD, (if only to future proof it) is weird.
So if anything, we’ll get an upscaled version of it
I feel like we don’t really know.
Did the guy who blabbed about it provide any kind of details?
Just that there were delays with Lucasfilm giving him the prints of the unaltered footage and that he was worried that if they wanted it soon they’d have to upscale things. This was about two years ago though.
The Person in Question
That a documentary made in 2004 wasn’t shot in HD, (if only to future proof it) is weird.
So if anything, we’ll get an upscaled version of it
I feel like we don’t really know.
Did the guy who blabbed about it provide any kind of details?
Just that there were delays with Lucasfilm giving him the prints of the unaltered footage and that he was worried that if they wanted it soon they’d have to upscale things. This was about two years ago though.
Implying that they were actually doing a fresh scan of the unaltered material for the first time in decades? Interesting…
That a documentary made in 2004 wasn’t shot in HD, (if only to future proof it) is weird.
So if anything, we’ll get an upscaled version of it
I feel like we don’t really know.
Did the guy who blabbed about it provide any kind of details?
Just that there were delays with Lucasfilm giving him the prints of the unaltered footage and that he was worried that if they wanted it soon they’d have to upscale things. This was about two years ago though.
Implying that they were actually doing a fresh scan of the unaltered material for the first time in decades? Interesting…
It was not clear what the delays were. He admitted to not knowing so it could have been anything from the scans being a work in progress to them not even doing scans. If the blu-ray forum man is right, then Disney/Lucasfilm has scanned, or is scanning, all of its Star Wars material in 4K.
The Person in Question
That a documentary made in 2004 wasn’t shot in HD, (if only to future proof it) is weird.
So if anything, we’ll get an upscaled version of it
I feel like we don’t really know.
Did the guy who blabbed about it provide any kind of details?
Just that there were delays with Lucasfilm giving him the prints of the unaltered footage and that he was worried that if they wanted it soon they’d have to upscale things. This was about two years ago though.
Implying that they were actually doing a fresh scan of the unaltered material for the first time in decades? Interesting…
It was not clear what the delays were. He admitted to not knowing so it could have been anything from the scans being a work in progress to them not even doing scans. If the blu-ray forum man is right, then Disney/Lucasfilm has scanned, or is scanning, all of its Star Wars material in 4K.
We can only hope he is right.
Meanwhile, Disney has actually restored Song of the South.
Anything is possible.
That a documentary made in 2004 wasn’t shot in HD, (if only to future proof it) is weird.
Are you kidding? There were tv shows back then not filmed in HD, nevermind a silly documentary.
The extensive LotR appendices, completed in 2004 with the Extended Edition of Return of the King, were also done in SD. At least they and EoD were 16:9. The Alien Quadrilogy making-ofs from right around that same time (2003/2004) were 4:3 and had to be both cropped and upscaled when they were carried over to the blu-ray in 2010.
Dangerous Days was made in 2007 but only released on a regular dvd across all of the various SKUs of Blade Runner released that year (even for the bd and hddvd). It’s 16:9 and looks like it could have been done at a higher resolution and then downscaled. I’m not sure if this was ever definitively answered, but it’s been ten years and the documentary was never released in hd.
That a documentary made in 2004 wasn’t shot in HD, (if only to future proof it) is weird.
Are you kidding? There were tv shows back then not filmed in HD, nevermind a silly documentary.
Which ones? Star Trek Enterprise was in HD, and it went off the air by 2005. Spielberg was talking about HD content in the 1990s, so it’s not like it would be crazy to shoot HD in 2004.
JEDIT: Above post reminded me there’s a big difference between TV shows and home video bonus content.
.
Han: Hey Lando! You kept your promise, right? Not a scratch?
Lando: Well, what’s left of her isn’t scratched. All the scratched parts got knocked off along the way.
Han (exasperated): Knocked off?!