ZigZig

ChainsawAsh said:

That’s not true. If it was, the Cinema DTS track of TPM wouldn’t sync with the VHS and laserdisc. But it does.

Furthermore, at least two bootlegs (direct cams from a theater) are available: the VCD “Z bootleg” and the VHS taken from a NYC theater. They perfectly match the official VHS, VCD and laserdisc releases.

If you have Photoshop 2020 you can try this trick:

• open your movie and convert it into a smart object
• apply a field blur of 1 px (= no blur) from the blur gallery
• then you can add a very realistic simulated grain and change a lot of parameters (amount, size, roughness, color, highlights)

By comparing with a real 35mm scan (which I’ll provide to you), you will be able to change the parameters and get a very natural grain, quite similar to the original one.

Dek Rollins said:

ChainsawAsh said:

My biggest “compromised purism” in Star Wars is wanting to conform the BR cut of TPM to the theatrical cut - that is, keep the editing of the theatrical cut exactly, but with all the visual updates of the BR (CGI Yoda, mainly).

It’s the only one where something like that would outright replace any official version forever for me.

But Creepy Puppet Yoda™ looks infinitely better than CGI Yoda. CG Yoda constantly has his head at a downward angle and looks up at the people he’s talking to only with his eyes, and he lacks the little bit of expression that CPY had left. Screw consistency, I prefer a decent but weird puppet that looks nothing like the character over awkward CGI that still looks nothing like the character. 😛

This!

In addition, Yoda was animated by a puppeteer (Frank Oz, probably the best), with a real acting.
It is not only a doll that could have been replaced by a CGI: there are real intentions of an actor in his movements and his facial expressions.

Replacing it with a CGI is as unacceptable as, for example, replacing the face of Alden Ehrenreich with Harrison Ford, because it would look more like the original character.

Maaga said:

If all be honest I was hoping for some rich deep blues on those guards

As deep as the blue background, whose color has to be replaced by CGI…

ChainsawAsh said:

A 35mm scan is in the works at the moment. I believe ZigZig would be the person to get in touch with about that.

The scanning process is currently locked down in a Parisian lab due to Covid-19…
But I’d be happy to share with emanswfan the rough scan of reel #4 (which was done 2 times with 2 different lenses).

Emanswfan, if you’re interested, please feel free to PM me.

https://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Star-Wars-SDTV-and-HDTV-digital-broadcast-database/id/17744

FTFY

MASTER260 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Whether it’s the same from a legal standpoint or not, it’s not the same ethically at all.

Plus there’s the fact that it’s explicitly against the rules of this website, so I’m not sure what argument you think you’re trying to make here.

How is it not the same ethically? We’re stealing from Lucasfilm either way.

Chewielewis said:

RashadShehadeh said:

I’m aware that the negative for TPM is essentially a print of the 2K DI. But of all companies, can’t Disney have access to the original camera negatives. I don’t buy the fact that Lucasfilm hasn’t stored them, somewhere.

Its been said several times that the 2K filmouts ARE the original camera negatives. Yeah the can rescan the negatives but they cant re render the CGI which is 99% of the movie.

Furthermore, there was NO DI for TPM. The first movie processed through a Digital Intermediate was “O’ Brother where art you”, one year after TPM.

Twingo said:

emanswfan said:

I’m rendering out another preview tonight. I’ve since redid the whole grade, which is a lot more complex now, although I’m not quite sure I’m happy with it still, or am thinking it’s so much better.

Trying to bring up more shadow detail wasn’t as simple as a small adjustment to the previous grade. Personally those black levels look closer to something you might see with some theatre prints which have a dark filmic punch to them. But I’ve since tried to squeeze a lot more shadow detail in, although it doesn’t necessarily have the results I’m looking for.

Still, I want to see what you guys think about it before I go about working more.

A lot of my knowledge from working with the blu-ray applies here, but I’m new to working with 10 bit HDR-sourced footage, but I’ll say it gives a lot more freedom for color work over 8 bit SDR sourced material.

To clarify again, there are going to be multiple releases for each film, with different intentions. There’s a diverse set of options out there, so I’m trying to make different editions for different tastes, as well as for the fact that some versions will take longer or have more creative license.

This first edition of The Phantom Menace is a film-wide color grade straight from the disc, intended to recreate the look of your average theatre release print. I will release it in 10 bit SDR 4k, as well as 8 bit SDR 1080p. The 4K version will be rendered at a quality similar to a 4K Blu-ray disc, and the 1080p version will be rendered at a quality similar to a 1080p Blu-ray disc.

Later editions will go into shot by shot grading, and detail reconstruction via AI. But those will take a while.

I plan on releasing film-wide color grades of AOTC and ROTS as well after TPM, all before I move on to shot by shot graded and AI-enhanced editions of any of the films.

Here’s a screencap from the render:

To note the grain looks heavier in uncompressed still images, when compressed into video the grain gets smooshed into the image more.

Als a release as how it was in the cinema ???

Hi emanswfan, it looks great.
Just a question: is it a real 35mm grain you added, or is it a digital noise? It seems just a little bit heavy and artificial to me…

Here are a some rough scans of the 35mm in 4K (without NR or color regrade): I feel that the grain looks more natural and softer.

Here are some comparisons between the 2011 Blu-Ray and the new Disney’s Blu-Ray (1080p, not the 4K HDR one, based on screenshots made by blu-ray.com) :

http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/7DLDGNNX
http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/9JBJMNNU
http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/7DLDPNNX
http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/9JBJCNNU

It really shows how bad the colors of 2011 are…

pat man said:

ZigZig said:

Thanks!
According to page title, it seems to be screenshots from the “4K Blu Ray”, not from the 1080p Blu Ray.

Edit: “Broom Kid” beat me to it.

Yes you’re right, I didn’t read the description. Sorry!

Thanks!
According to page title, it seems to be screenshots from the “4K Blu Ray”, not from the 1080p Blu Ray.

Indeed, Tantive3+1’s proposal looks very nice, but is moving away from the theatrical version.

Chewielewis said:

(…)Basically TMP had no “Digital Intermediate” as we know it. Shots were digitized as needed, altered and then printed back to film. So the “master negative” of phantom is a cut negative comprising entirely of digital filmouts (with one exception). The resolution of these scans is most definitely 2K and the visual effects rendered at 2K or possibly less depending on the complexity of the scene.

Indeed, the first movie with a full “Digital Intermediate” during its creation process was “O brother where art you” (2000), so one year after TPM.

it is comparing the newest release with the '11 BR. Isn’it what you are searching for?

Broom Kid said:

Are there any comparisons out there (been looking, can’t find any) that side-by-side these '19 blu-ray tranfers with the '11 transfers. I know most people are primarily interested in dissecting the 4K presentation, but these sets do appear to be the only way to get the new transfers on blu, and I’m very curious to see how these new transfers look on that format, especially compared to 2011’s entry.

See my message from Yesterday on this same topic…

Broom Kid said:

That still looks pretty sunburnt to me.

You’re right, but it depends how the conversion to SDR was made by JawTDS.
With madVR, I get more natural colors:

… but the same awful halo…

Here is a comparison of the different editions of The Phantom Menace (Laserdisc, HDTV, 2011 Blu-Ray, 2020 4K Blu-Ray):

1. 4K vs. 2011 Blu-Ray vs. HDTV vs. Laserdic:
   http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/7LZ77NNX
2. same comparison magnified x8:
   http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/9BC9FNNU

We can clearly see that:

• there are indeed only two masters: the first one was used for VHS, Laserdisc, DVD and HDTV; the second one was used for the Blu-Ray of 2011 and now for the 4K version of 2020;
• it seems that the colors are regraded again in the new 4K version, and the image is a little more cropped in 2020 than in 2011;
• there is more sharpness in the 4K version than in the Blu-Ray of 2011, but there is also less grain and, apparently, a slight edge enhancement. This makes me believe that it is indeed a simple upscale of a 2K master. What do you think ?

Hi Chewielewis,

Very interesting sources, as always, thank you!

Chewielewis said:

Im not 100% convinced that anything was “re-rendered” a lot of these changed shots could be simple alterations of the original source (Fode and Beed was definitely patched with after effects or similar, not a re-render).

Some scenes were obviously re-rendered: http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/1B01NNNU
(and the beginning crawl was also re-rendered).

DuracellEnergizer said:

Chewielewis said:

Then a bunch of shit was done to make them more 3D friendly, nose reduction ect.

Watto exempted, of course.

Watto was perfect from Day one.

You’re right, if we are talking about the differences between the theatrical version and the DVD, there are mainly 4 changes (+ new audio mix and bad color regrade).

ZigZig said:

Fang Zei said:

ZigZig said:

There is more changes thant those 4 known changes (ex: the invasion of Naboo was rerendered with different ships, the external view of Palpatine’s office was deleted, the sound was totally remixed) , but it is probably not the point of this discussion.

Ah, forgot about the Naboo invasion. After all these years my memory is a little blurry, but I want to say the view from the window of Theed Palace was re-done? Or are there other shots I’m forgetting about?

Yes, there are other shots. Ex: http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/1B01NNNU

Fang Zei said:

ZigZig said:

There is more changes thant those 4 known changes (ex: the invasion of Naboo was rerendered with different ships, the external view of Palpatine’s office was deleted, the sound was totally remixed) , but it is probably not the point of this discussion.

Ah, forgot about the Naboo invasion. After all these years my memory is a little blurry, but I want to say the view from the window of Theed Palace was re-done? Or are there other shots I’m forgetting about?

Yes, there are other shots. Ex: http://www.framecompare.com/image-compare/screenshotcomparison/1B01NNNU

There is more changes thant those 4 known changes (ex: the invasion of Naboo was rerendered with different ships, the external view of Palpatine’s office was deleted, the sound was totally remixed) , but it is probably not the point of this discussion.

Darth Robin said:

Now I’m confused. The digital bits article claimes both that it was scanned at 4K and that the film has a new color grade. And the say they’re getting their infromation from disney insiders.

Are they just lying?

Does anyone have an image gallery or video that more accurately dislpays the color? We’re not getting the 4K discs here in Finland untill May the 4th so I haven’t seen them yet.

I don’t know if it was scanned at 4K, I’m just saying that this is the same scan as in the BR from 2011, which was NOT the scan used previously in the DVD, the LD and the VHS.

About color grade, the new 2020 BR shows obviously a new color grade made on the old BR master. So the only question is: was the 2011 BR master scanned in 4K?