logo Sign In

The GOUT crawl — Page 2

Author
Time
 (Edited)

And here it is compared with the '06 and '04 DVD's.

[ Scanning stuff since 2015 ]

Author
Time

mverta said:

I hadn't given it much thought until recently, when I noticed an extreme amount of jitter in the title card, which I have from two absolutely confirm-able 1977 sources, which are identical to each other.  What's odd is that the GOUT title card element is much straighter and smoother in its motion.  Stabilizing my 1977 elements doesn't yield the GOUT result; they have internally different characteristics.  If I didn't know better, I'd say either 1) GOUT was indeed a recreation or 2) There was a second, more stable version of the title card created after the initial release in 1977, but before the 1981 re-release and re-do, which GOUT is based upon.

This is actually not that hard to believe, as they went trough the trouble of revising the end credits, there's a possibility they could also have used a more stable version of the crawl on later prints. Maybe a closer examination of all the '77 sources will tell us something.

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

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Going with the redo theory, would they have re-filmed the lettering or just recomp'd as maybe some new development was figured out in optics?

Looking at crawl production pics:

SW - (early crawl).................................... ESB

 

The light rigging box looks the same between movies.  The cameras don't look the same but since I can't name the parts, not sure how much is just redressing.

 

poking around, Sam Longoria says:

http://emusingmusic.blogspot.com/2011/05/typographic-rage.html

The artwork for a filmed title sequence, while hand-assembled from Letraset rub-on letters, as you assert, were not silk-screened onto a glass plate.

They would instead be shot on a stat camera, onto high-contrast Kodalith film. That's pretty standard, for movie title work.

The artwork that went before the ILM VistaVision Dykstraflex motion-control camera, performing its title crawl, (operated by Richard Edlund in your photo), was most probably a big black strip, assembled from sheets of Kodalith film (with white titles on a black field) and black paper, all held together by black photographic tape.

That would be taped onto the top surface of a fan-cooled Light Box, mounted atop the Dykstraflex's main rail, on the floor.

I've shot lots of titles on animation stands, and I was on hand at ILM in 1980, as they shot the "Episode IV: A New Hope" crawl, to replace the original "Star Wars" title.

What I saw that day looked to be Kodalith film artwork on the light box, as it shot that artwork onto VistaVision 35mm color negative.

White letters on a black field, to be composited in the optical printer over the starfield. Yellow title color would be achieved at that stage, as you mentioned.

http://samlongoria.blogspot.com

So let's get our thoughts together, and send over a question or two.  The blog is still active.

As Richard Edlund's in the first shot, he's got a website too: http://www.richardedlund.com/home

Author
Time
 (Edited)

none said:

Going with the redo theory, would they have re-filmed the lettering or just recomp'd as maybe some new development was figured out in optics?

Correct me if I'm wrong but I guess that the Kodalith would've needed to be re-filmed if a redo took place as just a recomp wouldn't solve the instability. I can actually not see any differences between the sources, but those that are available to us besides the GOUT are in not so good quality that a comparison is easy to make, the flyover special effect sequence seems to be identical to my eyes, but those elements were probably just the same anyway, they even were in the '81 redo despite the matte line clean up (I'm only talking about the two ships and their lasers and impact flashes). But when Verta pointed out this difference in stability and the fact that ILM did film many foreign variations of the crawl combined with the end credits find, it wouldn't actually surprise me if it was done.

none said:

So let's get our thoughts together, and send over a question or two. The blog is still active.

As Richard Edlund's in the first shot, he's got a website too: http://www.richardedlund.com/home

Could be worth a shot. The end credits redo intrigues me just as much. If the crawl actually was updated shortly after it premiered, I suspect it was done on the same batch of prints with the updated end credits.

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

Author
Time

 

here are some sample shots from our

english version that have not been

processed yet.. there's a of color

anomalies in them..


the fox logo, lucasfilm, alta, the star wars logo

WITHOUT episode 4, and parts of the crawl.


reel 1:

=====================


 




later

-1

 

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time

here are the color corrected versions of those

previous frames from the english '77 print:

================================

 


 

 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time

Looks like a light leak. Maybe the lab leaked in a little light during the copy process.

What’s the internal temperature of a TaunTaun? Luke warm.

Author
Time

timdiggerm said:

What's with the big blue ....thing?

don't know.. there's a lot of weird

color anomalies due to aging, turning red,

etc, etc.. not sure how it impacts the other

reels yet.. that's why we're not using these,

because it would take too long to fix... 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time

You guys have definitely darkened it TOO MUCH

Author
Time
 (Edited)

negative1 said:

timdiggerm said:

What's with the big blue ....thing?

don't know.. there's a lot of weird

color anomalies due to aging, turning red,

etc, etc.. not sure how it impacts the other

reels yet.. that's why we're not using these,

because it would take too long to fix... 

later

-1

I think its pretty salvageable without taking ages to fix. Just took about 10 minutes to do these in Sony Vegas;

nowhere near perfect (especially working from highly compressed images) but this just shows what can be done in a small amount of time. But, as pittrek said, you are darkening the image way too much

Now the bright spots/ colour anomalies down the centre of the image can easily be cleaned up by creating a mask in after effects and adjusting these spots to match the outer edges.

ANH:REVISITED
ESB:REVISITED

DONATIONS TOWARDS MATERIALS FOR THE REVISITED SAGA

Author
Time

thanks adywan, looks great..

 

however, that's just a sample of the frames, there's a ton

more with those problems... i'll put up a set later on.

 

we already have them in better format/transfer, so it would

be just adding more work on top of us just trying to get it

done at this point.. that's why it's a future problem.

 

also, yes the 'fixed' pictures were my quick attempt,

and were too dark.. also due to me working on several

different computers and monitors.

 

later

-1

 

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time

none wrote:  poking around, Sam Longoria says:

http://emusingmusic.blogspot.com/2011/05/typographic-rage.html

Mr. Longoria was nice enough to answer the questions sent over, they've been added to the above blog's comments section.

You are welcome, Christian, and I thank you for the opportunity to comment on your fine post, which I enjoyed very much.

I am grateful also to Peter Lopez, who wrote me recently, to ask more detailed questions about the title shoot.

Just to be clear, I did not work at ILM in 1980. I came there to visit in when my friend (and later boss) Richard Edlund ASC invited me. Later, I worked for Richard at his special effects company (Boss Film) in Los Angeles.

What I saw of the title shoot was quite wonderful. They ran the VistaVision camera over the high-contrast title artwork on a light box. I've shot lots of titles on animation stands, so it was familiar to me, but I'd never seen it done with a motion-control camera before.

I remember seeing the title "Episode IV - A New Hope," and wondering at it, but I don't recall much discussion.

If there are variations between title crawl versions, as Peter asserts in his email to me, that would be caused by some combination of executive order and camera operator choice, both in the original photography and in re-photography. (Optical printing, printing for foreign distribution, etc.)

There are sooo many parts to a movie, and there are so many variables.

I hope my response is helpful. Keep up the great work!

Sam Longoria
http://samlongoria.blogspot.com

So the next step is to send something over to Mr. Edlund.  He did do the work, wish we had a little more then speculation...

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Some general info on the crawl creation:

http://articles.latimes.com/1999/may/23/magazine/tm-39966

SO SOCAL: The Best...The Beautiful...And the Bizarre
: STAR WARS
May 23, 1999|Jason Dietrich

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away . . .

To be exact, it was 22 years ago. And the galaxy was a makeshift viewing room in Van Nuys, where graphic artist and title designer Dan Perri carefully analyzed the opening sequences in the 1939 film "Union Pacific," in which titles traveled down the tracks, and some 1930s serials. Next to him sat George Lucas, and together the men would conceive the stark, foreboding opener for the first "Star Wars" film.

After the film's screening for cast and crew, Perri, who had designed title sequences for "Taxi Driver" and "The Exorcist," knew the force was with him. "When the letters started rolling up from the bottom of the screen," he recalls, the audience "went berserk."

To create the effect, Perri made a negative photostat of Lucas' introduction and painstakingly rubber-cemented the white letters to a 4-by-12 piece of black poster board. ("I wonder where the thing is now," Perri laments.) He mounted the poster board at an angle and a camera slowly tracked over the type; the text looked as if it vanished into a star field.

Perri modified Lucas' original, vertical "Star Wars" logo into the distinctive broad-lettered block that we know today so that it would fit the wide-screen Panavision format.

In a Hollywood awash in computer graphics, Perri's handiwork, completed with grade-school art project supplies, seems long ago and far away after all. "It was really primitive," says Perri, who is still in the business but can't claim title credits for "The Phantom Menace," which opened this week. "Now you could do something like that in a day."

Sounds like maybe this was a previz version to test the scheme.

Author
Time

just to show you guys some of the weird

artifacts.

 

here's some unused tests from the english print

they are 1024x768 avi's without sound: (PLEASE DON'T

REPOST THESE, THANKS!)

===================================

fox intro

----------

http://www.sendspace.com/file/hxx7re

lucasfilm limited

---------------------

http://www.sendspace.com/file/emh05i

 

a long time ago

--------------------

http://www.sendspace.com/file/xneqoo

 

star wars logo

--------------------

http://www.sendspace.com/file/l2cgan

 

note the shimmering effect that comes and

goes with each one..

 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time

Maybe Adywan should do your color correction, Negative1.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The Crawl in 2006 GOUT DVD is different from the crawl in PUGGO GRANDE 16mm.

Look at at the speed of the crawling itself. In PUGGO GRANDE the title STAR WARS is completely gone when the first line of the crawl appears. In 2006 GOUT DVD and in all the others known sources, the title STAR WARS is still present when the first lines of the text start to crawl