logo Sign In

4K77 - Released — Page 6

Author
Time

Amano said:

timemeddler said:

I think my computer needs a better graphics card for it.

Yes, without official x265 hardware acceleration you are probably out of luck (unless you have a powerhouse workstation). I would rather go for buying a 4K UHD player and a 128GB USB 3.0 stick and playing that movie via your TV or preferably a projector. The Panasonic UHD players are very good at converting HDR to SDR and 4k to 1080p, so you can watch Star Wars 4K on any regular TV/projector and still have the benefit of better grain compression via the x265 codec and maybe even better colors.

Some UHD Players are getting cheaper already these days. The Panasonic UB-404 was under 200 Dollars the last time that I checked. Mine included 2 movies, “Passengers” and “Life”.

@deep blacks:

A projection cannot show really deep blacks. E.g. Christopher Nolan (of Interstellar fame) color-times all his movies with raised blacks for home-cinema to replicate the theatrical experience. For this reason he uses an IP for all his movies as the starting point. So colors and the grain are closer to theatrical prints then a scan from the OCN would have been.
Mike Verta on the other hand color-timed for rather deep blacks to hide the matte boxes in space. Because matte-boxes wouldn’t have been visible projected in cinema as well. So he was in a bit of conflict: Raised blacks as projected or visible matte boxes as not seen projected. I think that hiding the matte boxes was a wise choice. Because most people will watch Star Wars on the TV Screen and wouldn’t care that those black levels wouldn’t have been possible projected.

Just as an aside, the matte boxes absolutely are visible in the cinema on the 1977 prints of Star Wars, especially around the TIE fighters.

Yes, it is the eternal debate when making a 35mm release available on digital.
Do you make it look how the director would have liked it to look (no matte boxes, consistent black levels), how it did look, or something in-between.
Especially when most people are going to watch it on a screen that is only 32-80 inches in size, in a room with white walls and ceiling, with a screen set to who-knows-what as far as calibration goes.

You draw a line in the sand, and go with it. where that line is will be different for everyone who puts something out there.

Donations welcome: paypal.me/poit
bitcoin:13QDjXjt7w7BFiQc4Q7wpRGPtYKYchnm8x
Help get The Original Trilogy preserved!

Author
Time

Williarob said:

The DNR version is coming along quite nicely I think:

Wow, those are a marked improvement. Can anyone explain exactly how the DNR process is being handled? It definitely doesn’t have the “waxy” look one might associate with DNR.

Author
Time

Williarob said:

The DNR version is coming along quite nicely I think:

This looks amazing!! Just out of curiosity, will you be redoing the 2 trailers that you made for this restoration using the DNR version?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I’m working on a shot by shot correction for 4k77. Here are a number of in progress shots. These are regrades of the bluray, but the 4k77 version will be pretty much identical. Now that 4k77 is released, I will apply this color grading to the 4k77 shots. A separate thread will be created for discussing the ongoing work on this shot by shot regrade. In the mean time here are the color graded shots:

Author
Time

Octorox said:

Williarob said:

The DNR version is coming along quite nicely I think:

Wow, those are a marked improvement. Can anyone explain exactly how the DNR process is being handled? It definitely doesn’t have the “waxy” look one might associate with DNR.

The levels of grain and noise in Star Wars vary scene to scene and shot to shot. So I split the entire film into shots and I’m applying Neat Video’s Denoise filter to each shot, one at a time, and adjusting the settings. Often, for example when characters are talking, a scene is split into three camera angles - over Luke’s shoulder, over Ben’s shoulder, wide shot and the edit cycles back and forth between the angles. Unless there are SFX in some of these shots, the same settings can usually be used for all of the shots from the same angle, so the neatvideo settings can be resused without having to set everything up again, which makes it go faster. In this fashion I was able to denoise all of reel 1 on Sunday.

Besides Denoising, I am also sharpening the image a little - removing the sharp grain makes the image look softer.

Finally, I regrain with nice clean (real - not emulated) film grain.

TheStarWarsTrilogy.com.
The007Dossier.com.
Donations always welcome: Paypal | Bitcoin: bc1qzr9ejyfpzm9ea2dglfegxzt59tys3uwmj26ytj

Author
Time

KranixZero said:

Williarob said:

The DNR version is coming along quite nicely I think:

This looks amazing!! Just out of curiosity, will you be redoing the 2 trailers that you made for this restoration using the DNR version?

I might - though I think I would prefer to recreate a different trailer or TV spot.

TheStarWarsTrilogy.com.
The007Dossier.com.
Donations always welcome: Paypal | Bitcoin: bc1qzr9ejyfpzm9ea2dglfegxzt59tys3uwmj26ytj

Author
Time

Downloaded this last night (1080p version) and had a quick scan through it this morning, it looks fantastic, will try and get a chance to watch it fully this evening, love the grain. I wasn’t too fussed about seeing the DNR’d version but looking at the sample screenshots in this thread it looks like it’s going to be great too. A technicolor version of this would be awesome too. How many versions of a film can you have 😃 To all those involved fantasic work!

Author
Time

Williarob said:

The DNR version is coming along quite nicely I think:

I think it is a bit too much.

Author
Time

Those of you who are experiencing jerky playback in the UHD version: Try remuxing the streams into a new MKV container - somebody on another forum did this when adding/subtracting some audio streams and the problem went away. It was originally muxed with the latest version MKVToolnix, but perhaps there is a glitch in the container. Try it and let us know if that fixes the problem for you too.

TheStarWarsTrilogy.com.
The007Dossier.com.
Donations always welcome: Paypal | Bitcoin: bc1qzr9ejyfpzm9ea2dglfegxzt59tys3uwmj26ytj

Author
Time

Williarob said:

Those of you who are experiencing jerky playback in the UHD version: Try remuxing the streams into a new MKV container - somebody on another forum did this when adding/subtracting some audio streams and the problem went away. It was originally muxed with the latest version MKVToolnix, but perhaps there is a glitch in the container. Try it and let us know if that fixes the problem for you too.

I tried that when I first noticed the problem. Though I probably also had the latest mkvtoolnix, I did mux it with only a single audio track. I also tried m2ts. Jerky playback with everything. As I’ve said once or thrice, MadVR in MPC solved the problem completely.

Author
Time

towne32 said:

Williarob said:

Those of you who are experiencing jerky playback in the UHD version: Try remuxing the streams into a new MKV container - somebody on another forum did this when adding/subtracting some audio streams and the problem went away. It was originally muxed with the latest version MKVToolnix, but perhaps there is a glitch in the container. Try it and let us know if that fixes the problem for you too.

I tried that when I first noticed the problem. Though I probably also had the latest mkvtoolnix, I did mux it with only a single audio track. I also tried m2ts. Jerky playback with everything. As I’ve said once or thrice, MadVR in MPC solved the problem completely.

Thanks, I’m kind of relieved that’s not the problem…

TheStarWarsTrilogy.com.
The007Dossier.com.
Donations always welcome: Paypal | Bitcoin: bc1qzr9ejyfpzm9ea2dglfegxzt59tys3uwmj26ytj

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Williarob said:

The DNR version is coming along quite nicely I think:

Imgur

Imgur

Ok so I get you are preserving the color of “the print” this is without the light shining through it…

So if this has a purpleish tone and the light from a projector has a yellowish tone would this not equate to the image looking more or less neutral basically what the home video releases tried to achieve?

I find it quite fascinating how when confronted with the problems the answers reveal themselves and you have to do the same sort of thing that has already been done but the full understanding becomes apparent?

But obviously not drastic yellow faces just it comes up neutral in most instances I would imagine.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Ronster said:

Williarob said:

The DNR version is coming along quite nicely I think:

Imgur

Imgur

Ok so I get you are preserving the color of “the print” this is without the light shining through it…

So if this has a purpleish tone and the light from a projector has a yellowish tone would this not equate to the image looking more or less neutral basically what the home video releases tried to achieve?

I find it quite fascinating how when confronted with the problems the answers reveal themselves and you have to do the same sort of thing that has already been done but the full understanding becomes apparent?

But obviously not drastic yellow faces just it comes up neutral in most instances I would imagine.

Possibly, but surely it’s better if I give you the actual colors that are on the print than to pretend I understand the physics involved in shining a light bulb of a certain color temperature through the film with this color and reflecting it off of a white screen?

As Poita said:

poita said:

When it comes to colour, unless you are sitting in a cinema with the print, and doing your colour adjustments based on that, and revisiting them again by watching the print etc. then the grade is going to be revisionist, from a certain point of view.

However if you take a straight scan, and do a ‘one light’ correction to each reel, then the scenes will keep their colour relative to each other. i.e. you can see that the background space colour is lighter in scene 3 than in scene 2, but darker than scene 4. You can see that the Falcon walls are more towards yellow in shot 27 than in shot 14. The presentation will reatin the relative colour and shade values that the original had, so you are closer to seeing how the print looked originally.
Your base might be off, but each scene maintains its relative relationship to each other scene.

Trying to get to the original theatrical presentation colours is a very tricky exercise.

Besides, not all of the Home Video releases are neutral. This early 1982 laserdisc still has green in the wall panels, not the grey of later releases:

imgur

TheStarWarsTrilogy.com.
The007Dossier.com.
Donations always welcome: Paypal | Bitcoin: bc1qzr9ejyfpzm9ea2dglfegxzt59tys3uwmj26ytj

Author
Time

Williarob said:

Ronster said:

Williarob said:

The DNR version is coming along quite nicely I think:

Imgur

Imgur

Ok so I get you are preserving the color of “the print” this is without the light shining through it…

So if this has a purpleish tone and the light from a projector has a yellowish tone would this not equate to the image looking more or less neutral basically what the home video releases tried to achieve?

I find it quite fascinating how when confronted with the problems the answers reveal themselves and you have to do the same sort of thing that has already been done but the full understanding becomes apparent?

But obviously not drastic yellow faces just it comes up neutral in most instances I would imagine.

Possibly, but surely it’s better if I give you the actual colors that are on the print than to pretend I understand the physics involved in shining a light bulb of a certain color temperature through the film with this color and reflecting it off of a white screen?

As Poita said:

poita said:

When it comes to colour, unless you are sitting in a cinema with the print, and doing your colour adjustments based on that, and revisiting them again by watching the print etc. then the grade is going to be revisionist, from a certain point of view.

However if you take a straight scan, and do a ‘one light’ correction to each reel, then the scenes will keep their colour relative to each other. i.e. you can see that the background space colour is lighter in scene 3 than in scene 2, but darker than scene 4. You can see that the Falcon walls are more towards yellow in shot 27 than in shot 14. The presentation will reatin the relative colour and shade values that the original had, so you are closer to seeing how the print looked originally.
Your base might be off, but each scene maintains its relative relationship to each other scene.

Trying to get to the original theatrical presentation colours is a very tricky exercise.

Besides, not all of the Home Video releases are neutral. This early 1982 laserdisc still has green in the wall panels, not the grey of later releases:

imgur

No complaints with your process at all, I just perhaps think that it probably overall comes in quite neutral with a light through it.

As far as projection goes there is no 100% value that could be ascertained.

You have various makes and models of projectors and their bulb counterparts which might vary in the light and temperature they put out. You also have to factor in distance drop off from the screen and also what the screen material was as some are more reflective than others. All in all there would be no particular average. All I am saying is if the bulb it slightly tinted yellow which they were… And the print is sort of purple then that would make sense as when combined they cancel out being a variant of neural with a bit of warmth.

That is all really, what I am saying is it’s nothing very drastic from what you have with a light through it. It won’t be radically different from what you have now just that it probably lands on neutral-ish color.

Author
Time

Ronster said:

Williarob said:

Ronster said:

Williarob said:

The DNR version is coming along quite nicely I think:

Imgur

Imgur

Ok so I get you are preserving the color of “the print” this is without the light shining through it…

So if this has a purpleish tone and the light from a projector has a yellowish tone would this not equate to the image looking more or less neutral basically what the home video releases tried to achieve?

I find it quite fascinating how when confronted with the problems the answers reveal themselves and you have to do the same sort of thing that has already been done but the full understanding becomes apparent?

But obviously not drastic yellow faces just it comes up neutral in most instances I would imagine.

Possibly, but surely it’s better if I give you the actual colors that are on the print than to pretend I understand the physics involved in shining a light bulb of a certain color temperature through the film with this color and reflecting it off of a white screen?

As Poita said:

poita said:

When it comes to colour, unless you are sitting in a cinema with the print, and doing your colour adjustments based on that, and revisiting them again by watching the print etc. then the grade is going to be revisionist, from a certain point of view.

However if you take a straight scan, and do a ‘one light’ correction to each reel, then the scenes will keep their colour relative to each other. i.e. you can see that the background space colour is lighter in scene 3 than in scene 2, but darker than scene 4. You can see that the Falcon walls are more towards yellow in shot 27 than in shot 14. The presentation will reatin the relative colour and shade values that the original had, so you are closer to seeing how the print looked originally.
Your base might be off, but each scene maintains its relative relationship to each other scene.

Trying to get to the original theatrical presentation colours is a very tricky exercise.

Besides, not all of the Home Video releases are neutral. This early 1982 laserdisc still has green in the wall panels, not the grey of later releases:

imgur

No complaints with your process at all, I just perhaps think that it probably overall comes in quite neutral with a light through it.

As far as projection goes there is no 100% value that could be ascertained.

You have various makes and models of projectors and their bulb counterparts which might vary in the light and temperature they put out. You also have to factor in distance drop off from the screen and also what the screen material was as some are more reflective than others. All in all there would be no particular average. All I am saying is if the bulb it slightly tinted yellow which they were… And the print is sort of purple then that would make sense as when combined they cancel out being a variant of neural with a bit of warmth.

That is all really, what I am saying is it’s nothing very drastic from what you have with a light through it. It won’t be radically different from what you have now just that it probably lands on neutral-ish color.

Sometimes though, you have to stop and say, this is good enough.

Sure we can talk bulb temperatures and film hues and lab presets etc etc. In a few pages, we’ll end up talking photons and building a mini Hadron Collider in order to recreate the optimum light photon that a vintage 70s bulb would have emitted.

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

Author
Time
 (Edited)

If you paid attention to what I wrote that was exactly the sort of thing that needs to be avoided…

From my understanding when the prints are scanned they are scanned with light already protruding through the image anyway so that actually means that the light factor is out of the way in a sense.

I would discard specs for bulb brightness and so on because this would be for the throw distance accounting for the loss in drop off from distance to screen so the bulb brightness is simply large cinema Bright bulb small cinema normal bulb. Brighter bulb higher temperature to be expected really.

Screen material is simply trying to improve the surface reflection and better screen material would perhaps be used in the bigger cinemas but in smaller cinemas it would be a shorter throw so you don’t really get much from this one.

Color of bulb is all that it really rests on so you already shined a light when scanning but if it was not the same as a projector bulb which used to be yellowish. So in as much as in an un-technical way of saying it the cancellation occurs between the print and the bulb color only. Anything outside of this is sort of not worth considering.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Yes, the colour temperature of the bulb/carbon arc rods, and the screen colour are taken into account when doing a preservation that will be purely digital. These were actually pretty heavily regulated and the values are well known.
It doesn’t have to get to building a collider level of pedantry, but understanding colour science, and the original projection standards vs the colour systems of current digital devices is absolutely essential if you want to approximate the colour of the experience of seeing the print projected.

Brightness, that is an issue, but there were standards for the amount of foot/lamberts that a cinema was meant to have, and good cinemas did adhere to. So in your own home, you can calibrate your system to give a close approximation of the brightness levels that a good cinema would have exhibited.

It is best watched on a projector if you are leaving grain levels as the are on the scan, if you are watching on a television, then the grain will look far, far more pronounced than a projected print would look.
This stuff probably should have its own thread in the technical section, and get discussed there.
Otherwise it can look like people are dissing the efforts of everyone on this project, but it is a valuable discussion to have, and it is all something very much taken into account when companies that care enter into a restoration of their film properties. The film Suspiria that we worked on recently spent weeks discussing colour, grain and dynamic range settings to get the home experience to as closely match the cinematic experience as possible, and a lot of work and research went into it, so it is important, but maybe lets take it out into the other room if we are going to get into the nitty gritty?

Donations welcome: paypal.me/poit
bitcoin:13QDjXjt7w7BFiQc4Q7wpRGPtYKYchnm8x
Help get The Original Trilogy preserved!

Author
Time

I think it would be a valuable discussion and as you have said, it’s not a case of calling out on any detriment on this or any other project but it seems you seem to have very valuable experience in this area. I would say yes please! It would be interesting for you to bring your own experience to the table and explain what is expected when an owner of a film asks you to restore their film and what they want and what they require and within their budget…

So these things are considered… At least I am on a simple level of understanding then.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Ronster said:

Williarob said:

The DNR version is coming along quite nicely I think:

Imgur

Imgur

Ok so I get you are preserving the color of “the print” this is without the light shining through it…

So if this has a purpleish tone and the light from a projector has a yellowish tone would this not equate to the image looking more or less neutral basically what the home video releases tried to achieve?

I find it quite fascinating how when confronted with the problems the answers reveal themselves and you have to do the same sort of thing that has already been done but the full understanding becomes apparent?

But obviously not drastic yellow faces just it comes up neutral in most instances I would imagine.

I’m not exactly sure what happened (some color conversion issue?), but upon closer inspection these look a lot more pink than I intended. The clouds in the Sandcrawler shot are supposed to be white. This is what these two shots are supposed to look like after applying the LUT:

Author
Time

Damn! Even my Zappiti One 4K HDR player plays the UHD 2160p 4K77 in a jerky way. I’d never have thought that could happen since it allows very high bitrate. The audio plays smoothly, but the video, damn! I’ll have to stick to the 1080p for now. My TV is 1080p for now anyway. I also noticed that the blacks were not as black on the 2160p, but it’s probably the 10-bit stuff on my full HD TV only that causes that. The 1080p looks quite terrific. Thanks guys!

Author
Time

The 1080p No-DNR version of 4k77 is also now up on Mega. PM me if you want it.

Author
Time

sigh I wish I had a computer so I could download and enjoy this gem, but that won’t happen for quite a while. Hopefully by the time my new PC arrives 4K80 and 4K83 are already available so I can add the original unaltered trilogy to my collection in one sitting.

Author
Time

I’m scrubbing through the 1080p version very slowly to take it all in. I don’t have a good pro reference monitor or anything but I do have my trusty OT.com credentials. Hopefully I can get a BD burner soon so I can do some deep analysis of HH’s brand new 70mm creation since I’m such a huge fan of matrixing formats.

But so far…wow…wowie…wow…wow…this makes the Tech samples I’ve seen and anything else look puny in comparison. There’s elements of the various video transfers we all have come to know and love and then there’s elements that seem completely different. One moment I 'm reminded of the JSC, one the 97 SE, the next the GOUT/Definitive, the next the SSE and/or non-Tech prints and the next the Technidisc and so on and so on…

And as for grain in spite of the time consuming and nice looking method being used for the DNR version (and DNR in itself is not a bad thing-it is used on a daily basis) put me down in the camp of it being unnecessary for this. I’m a tried and true 100% grain fan; I can’t get enough and what is on here naturally looks beautiful to my eyes even with this being in its raw form.

And that it’s already GOUT ready with lossless 77 stereo and mono…oh geez with the mono as loud as it will go…I’m already too darn emotional.

Okay Hands up, who here got teary eyed seeing the original LFL logo look this amazing? (Ironically I’m somebody who first experienced SW with the 97SE.)

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

My personal favourite of all English mixes is the 1978 mono mix.