⭐ Star Wars' 50th anniversary in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations (if any)... — Page 30

Reminder that none of these leaks have been “finals” of anything, they’re all WIP and are being approved for further work based on what’s being shared. It’s possible that what’s happening now is we’re seeing different versions/attempts at something on the road to a shot getting “finaled” so variations on things we’ve already seen before shouldn’t necessarily prompt any sort of anxiety or worry that something’s getting screwed up

The value of these leaks is mostly in getting to look behind the curtain at the quality of what they’ve got, what they’re doing to it, and being able to compare that - even IN it’s WIP status - to previous finals and fan preservations.

RM4747 said:

That guy with no name said:
they also probably put that hair in after the fact. When you line it up precisely in an editor, it is, in fact, slightly off.

Lol, no. That’s completely ridiculous and nonsense.

It’s not. Stay ignorant & stubborn.

Yeah, guys, definitely just nonsense:

RM4747 is so clever! I wish I were more like him!

DarthSmaul said:

I’ve always found it quite interesting how when the Fox logos were changed for the 97SE they kept their original themes, even on the soundtrack. ANH has always been the most obvious.

I know John Williams himself composed theme for all the films.

What? What themes?

DarthSmaul said:

That guy with no name said:

DarthSmaul said:

I’ve always found it quite interesting how when the Fox logos were changed for the 97SE they kept their original themes, even on the soundtrack. ANH has always been the most obvious.

I know John Williams himself composed theme for all the films.

What? What themes?

The Fox logo theme music itself.

John Williams did not compose the music. That was composed by Alfred Newman. He did record a version but it wasn’t used in any of the Star Wars films. Instead they just used the original recording…

That guy with no name said:

DarthSmaul said:

That guy with no name said:

DarthSmaul said:

I’ve always found it quite interesting how when the Fox logos were changed for the 97SE they kept their original themes, even on the soundtrack. ANH has always been the most obvious.

I know John Williams himself composed theme for all the films.

What? What themes?

The Fox logo theme music itself.

John Williams did not compose the music. That was composed by Alfred Newman. He did record a version but it wasn’t used in any of the Star Wars films. Instead they just used the original recording…

I thought they only used the original recording on SW77, but Williams’ recordings on ESB & ROTJ?

timdiggerm said:

That guy with no name said:

DarthSmaul said:

That guy with no name said:

DarthSmaul said:

I’ve always found it quite interesting how when the Fox logos were changed for the 97SE they kept their original themes, even on the soundtrack. ANH has always been the most obvious.

I know John Williams himself composed theme for all the films.

What? What themes?

The Fox logo theme music itself.

John Williams did not compose the music. That was composed by Alfred Newman. He did record a version but it wasn’t used in any of the Star Wars films. Instead they just used the original recording…

I thought they only used the original recording on SW77, but Williams’ recordings on ESB & ROTJ?

That might be the case.

Star Wars: recording taken from 1954’s “River of No Return”
Empire & Jedi: re-recording by John Williams & London Symphony Orchestra

RM4747 said:

That guy with no name said:

That might be the case.

Honestly, you come across as a teenager in these comments.

“NO! YOU’RE WRONG!”

“Actually, I think this is true…”

“Oh… well, that might be the case…”

LMAO

Everyone here should just ignore you, child. Don’t you have homework to do?

I never said those words at all. He was wrong. John Williams didn’t compose the 20th Century Fox logo. I wasn’t sure about its usage, and I made that very clear. Keep bullshiting… You’ve been repeatedly proven a fool, yet you can’t seem to accept it.

RM4747 said:

That guy with no name said:

Yeah, guys, definitely just nonsense:

RM4747 is so clever! I wish I were more like him!

Looks just like a difference in sharpness/DNR with the color gradient there.

It’s also more cropped in, like I mentioned.

Almost like one of the images was anamorphic and one was flat, so the anamorphic is slightly distorted.

Editing in a hair (only to remove it) would make literally no sense at all.

Why would they do that?

It’s not. The hair is very clearly in a different position and is a different thickness. The rest of the image is exactly the same proportion-wise.

DNR and Sharpening can’t and doesn’t shift specific pixels or characters around…

SparkySywer said:

That guy with no name said:

RM4747 said:

That guy with no name said:

Yeah, guys, definitely just nonsense:

RM4747 is so clever! I wish I were more like him!

Looks just like a difference in sharpness/DNR with the color gradient there.

It’s also more cropped in, like I mentioned.

Almost like one of the images was anamorphic and one was flat, so the anamorphic is slightly distorted.

Editing in a hair (only to remove it) would make literally no sense at all.

Why would they do that?

The rest of the image is exactly the same proportion-wise.

It’s not though? The light cone clearly moves in the gif you posted lmfao

Did I not say previously that the light beams were different??

EDIT: Just checked again, that beam is in the same position in that frame… it’s just thinner and less transparent in the original. Again, these have to be different versions…

SparkySywer said:

I’m not sure what you mean saying that the light beams move at different speeds. They don’t seem to to me! The light beam that is in a different position in the gif you posted is NOT moving in either clip. Yet it moves more in your gif than the hair does. We should get to the bottom of this.

They are different thicknesses and transparencies… I wonder if differences in the fidelity of the films and scans, the cropping, or post-processing effects like sharpening/DNR might have something to do with it? Maybe that could also explain why the hair seems to move a little! After all, the specific way it moves really reminds me of comparing the same frame from, say, Harmy’s Despecialized and 4k83. Seems less fucking insane than Lucasfilm editing in a pubic hair for no reason.

Oh my god…

Those are two completely misaligned clips you’re showing… of course, they’re gonna look different! I aligned the shot exactly before comparing. Oh well, It was just my theory, If you don’t want to belive me then that’s your pergotoive. What I do know is that the hair is, in fact, manipulated in the first shot, and no, DNR and Sharpening have nothing to do with it. Look at the top of the 0, it’s perfectly aligned and doesn’t move. So why does the hair?

SparkySywer said:

That guy with no name said:

SparkySywer said:

I’m not sure what you mean saying that the light beams move at different speeds. They don’t seem to to me! The light beam that is in a different position in the gif you posted is NOT moving in either clip. Yet it moves more in your gif than the hair does. We should get to the bottom of this.

They are different thicknesses and transparencies… I wonder if differences in the fidelity of the films and scans, the cropping, or post-processing effects like sharpening/DNR might have something to do with it? Maybe that could also explain why the hair seems to move a little! After all, the specific way it moves really reminds me of comparing the same frame from, say, Harmy’s Despecialized and 4k83. Seems less fucking insane than Lucasfilm editing in a pubic hair for no reason.

Oh my god…

I aligned the shot exactly before comparing. Oh well, It was just my theory, If you don’t want to belive me then that’s your pergotoive. What I do know is that the hair is, in fact, manipulated in the first shot, and no, DNR and Sharpening have nothing to do with it. Look at the top of the 0, it’s perfectly aligned and doesn’t move. So why does the hair?

Maybe it’s because you didn’t actually align the shot as well as you thought you did?

The original image was stretched and you did not account for the stretching exactly right. It’s most apparent in the clouds by the left edge of the frame, since the movement is more pronounced the further you get away from whatever you used as references when aligning the frames. But it’s also visible in how the 2 wobbles. The hair moves along with this stretching exactly. Compare it to the clouds nearby it on the right side of the frame.

It looks like it moves relative to the light cone, but looking at the whole frame it looks like the light cone just has a little difference in how the light cone’s glow drops off, changing where the “edge” appears. This is easily explained by differences in fidelity and post-processing. Much more easily than them editing in the hair. This is why I included that comparison from Return of the Jedi. The drop off in the glow of the lightsabers is significantly different, for similar reasons.

Yeah, I fixed that when I went back and did the GIF. Still doesn’t change my point…

What does differences in fidelity even mean? Film degradation isn’t gonna change the transparency of the in-frame element… no other version of this logo with the hair has this problem? There is clearly a unique shift to just the hair and nothing else…

I do have to admit that I’ve presented this rather soppily, and I should not have cropped the image GIF, as this clearly confused you. Sorry about that lol Hopefully you can see that the hair is in fact moving on its own…