Treadwell

;)

While 2004 Jabba might be a more detailed model, the '87 one actually looks more like the puppet.

Thanks for the research adywan. I thought it went beyond GOUT but obviously not.

It was strange that the scratch didn't overlap the edit points of the shot, so I'll forever wonder why. Anyway, if cleanup counts, then it might be considered for a 97 SE change entry. Or maybe not, since a lot of dirt and damage was repaired throughout.

I'm afraid I can't make a screengrab right now, but I've never seen this mentioned:

In ESB when the probe droid blows up, there's a quick shot, perhaps 4 frames, just before the explosion, that has a vertical scratch through the frame. It starts and stops with the edits on either side of the shot. Why a dupe of a scratched positive ended up in this, I have no idea, as ASAIK there aren't even any opticals in the shot.

Anyway, for Blu-Ray the scratch was finally fixed. IIRC it was still there in 2004.

I read somewhere Muren saying that the lasers and lightsabers (some? all?) were subcontracted and they did not get isolated elements back.

As for the two strips of film thing, not necessarily. One exposure with it overexposed so you get the white core, then another exposure on the same frame with the red line lit normally but the camera out of focus.

(ulp)  I was going by memory. Stop that, Tread.

I'll look again...

Coupla thoughts (apologies if I missed these being mentioned already):

The shot is an optical. The "camera shake" is fake. It is possible the orange errors were introduced when creating the shake, and, perhaps, the shake was redone at a later date...perhaps after discovering an IP/N they were using was sans optical. (?)  This kind of effect would likely be done at the same time as wipes and fades--by chance have we ever come across any redone wipes or fades prior to the SE that might suggest a time that the shake could've been redone as well? In any event, this would've been redone along with all the wipes and fades for the SE, which explains framing inconsistencies.

The errors are not a negative tear...or at least, not a single one. A single tear would be at the bottom of one frame and at the top of the next. These errors are inconsistent with that. They are two separate errors on subsequent frames.

Too bad the infirmary scene wasn't allowed to play longer. There were more changes as the scene progressed: Leia originally blamed Han being grounded on the discovery of the probe droid (which came before this scene originally). In the final version, Leia's voice going to ADR, and a cutaway to Chewie are the giveaways.

Food for thought: reels can be mixed up over the years. Are we sure the final reels of these pre-81 prints are actually from pre-81 prints? The crawl helps us date R1, but what about the rest?
I don't know if there would be edge numbers or something that could help.

doubleofive said:

ESB:

1. The probes launching is a recomp. The pods are slightly rearranged/timed.

Just double-checked, splitscreen shows them frame-by-frame to be in exactly the same positions

 

Whups. Was going by memory of 13-year-old comparisons. Usually my memory is perfect, as I DEFINITELY remember seeing the Anchorhead footage in the theater!  ;)

doubleofive said:

I already have them as what is currently 266-268.

I am also flawlessly observant. ;)

doubleofive said:

Which shots of Vader looking out the window, there are a few.

I'd have to look again...

doubleofive said:

ROTJ
1. The Treadwell site says:

For some reason, this shot of Artoo turning his head to look at us (the shot is a POV of the camera-arm-thing that pops out of the door to Jabba's Palace) is shorter in the SE. The two versions go immediately out of synch with that shot. Weird.

I haven't checked the 2004. This is not a reel change point, as that just happened between the matte painting shot of the droids and the studio shot of them approaching the doors. I think the SE did something (or RE-did something) to Artoo's eye to hide light shining through it, and I guess their source element turned out to be shorter.

2004 timing is identical to the GOUT at this point. I can't tell with the 97SE, but they look the same to me.

I caught this using either the Japanese SE laserdisc or the widescreen '97 SE VHS tape (I forget), and the Definitive LD. Maybe the timing was put back for 2004, or maybe the reel change really was at that point (I haven't cross-referenced the data on the reel change thread) and it thus varies, or maybe just a glitch in the home video production realm. Perhaps an oddity not worth documenting.

Darth Mallwalker said:

 

However, I'll join with msycamore in questioning your assertion that 60 is a changeover point. It doesn't match my findings.

 

I'll defer to you guys on that one. Maybe there was a splice at that point in a print I saw repeatedly that stuck in my head.

Hi, folks! Yup, it's Treadwell, creator of that 14-year-old (yikes!) SE changes site. Although I never put it back up after dumping my ISP a few years ago, it's good to know it's still of some use, even in archive.org form.

Peter Lopez recommended originaltrilogy to me recently, but I did already know about it, and used to read it regularly. Somehow I lost the habit.

Anyway, I've just spent hours reading this thread (slow work day) and see y'all have far surpassed my seminal efforts. Great stuff. As such, I only have a few things to offer.

I made some quick notes as I went, so here they are. Some points might be redundant to other posts:

ANH:

1. There was some discussion of missing or extra frames here and there, namely fading out/in to Threepio in the oilbath, or the TIEs approaching the Death Star in comp 60. These are reel change points--as such, it is common for one transfer to have a few frames more or less than another, as they have to be either put together later in the video realm, or the reels edited together in real time during the telecine. While these would count as differences, they are the kind of thing that will be found between every transfer ever made (not just original/SE), and thus do not fall within doubleofive's listing criteria.

2. Someone pointed out color inconsistencies inside the Sandcrawler. There might very well be, but using the lights on Artoo as reference is problematic, as they were fiber optics that led to a color wheel--so the colors would change as the wheel turned.

3.

I find this interesting, for if this is a recomp, they seem to have used the original clash animation mattes--or very carefully matched them (which they didn't do for the ESB cave recomp). However, look at how the light shining on the ceiling strut (which is present in frames without the flash) was mistaken for "flash" and filled in with the effect for the second pic. That shows that the clashes were, at least, altered by hand.

4. The Treadwell site said:

Right after Gold Leader says "Red Leader this is Gold Leader", the Y-Wings outside his window still disappear for a single frame at the end of the shot.

This was still the case in '97 but not 2004. I've never checked to see if they just removed the last frame of the shot or restored the Y's.

5. Comp 260: John D. is name of the pilot of Red 4 (or Blue 4) in the script (and the credits). It has nothing to do with John Dykstra. John D. was played by Jack Klaff.

6. The Treadwell site said:

the first two frames of the shot where Vader opens fire on Luke are missing the TIE on the left-hand side!

This was still the case in '97 but not 2004. I think this shot is a recomp, as are a few more not listed, such as the torpedoes entering the shaft.

7. On DVNR and hologram scan lines: it's been pointed out, but I must support the notion that the GOUT/'93 laserdisc sources cannot be trusted when evaluating such fine detail. The DVNR was applied during telecine, so the GOUT isn't going to be any better than other '93 fan copies in that regard. There was some mention of GOUT actually being softer...would comparisons to fanmade '93 LD transfers help in this case? Is the EditDroid version still about the best, or have better ones come along?

ESB:

1. The probes launching is a recomp. The pods are slightly rearranged/timed.

2. Comp 45: replacement bg? You mean the one behind Piett? Or do you mean the framework around the monitor? In either case, I'm not so sure. Yes, we can see more of the wall behind Piett, but I don't think that's a CG extension, just a slight realignment of the element.

3. The slomo cave scene would definitely be recomped, as it was not shot in slow motion, but was slowed down in post via "stretch printing", which repeats frames. That's why the original version has so much printed-in dirt. Since they were redoing opticals, it would make sense to throw this in as well, thus necessitating recomping the sabers and the clashes. Now, why the original saber and clash overlay elements weren't used, who knows.

4. Speaking of redone opticals, what about the quick fades between Luke and Vader just before the escape to hyperspace? They're only like 4 frames, so it would be hard us to compare, but these were probably redone along with all the others.

5. The Treadwell site says:

I have NO confirmation, but I've always believed one or two shots of Vader looking out the window have BLACK AND WHITE elements; notice how monochromatic he is, even the reflections on his helmet. My SUSPICION has been that his helmet suffered from "blue spill" and thus couldn't be chroma-keyed with a color Vader element. Still looks this way to me in the SE video, but it could all be in my head.

Back in the day, someone emailed me to say they studied it in photoshop or something, and, aside from video noise, they could find no chroma information on Vader. I think it might have been fixed for 2004.

ROTJ
1. The Treadwell site says:

For some reason, this shot of Artoo turning his head to look at us (the shot is a POV of the camera-arm-thing that pops out of the door to Jabba's Palace) is shorter in the SE. The two versions go immediately out of synch with that shot. Weird.

I haven't checked the 2004. This is not a reel change point, as that just happened between the matte painting shot of the droids and the studio shot of them approaching the doors. I think the SE did something (or RE-did something) to Artoo's eye to hide light shining through it, and I guess their source element turned out to be shorter.

All I got for now. Keep up the good work!

-Jay