Do you think the special editions will get the same remastering as the 50th anniversary? — Page 2

SpacemanDoug said:

SonnyGFunk said:

SpacemanDoug said:

-First point: The original negative was never reconformed despite rumors saying otherwise, the original negative itself has always been conformed to the 1977 cut and always will be. The special editions from 1997 were finished likely on interpositives, since they had to create at least some type of film element for 35mm printing at the time. But thankfully, the original negative itself wasn’t reconformed (and even if it was, Lucasfilm would’ve saved everything anyway).

We know for a fact the negative for SW was reconformed to the 1997 cut, there are countless sources that state this. The production documents for the new restoration also confirm that the 97 inserts had to be removed from the negative to bring it back to it’s pre 1997 state. Where are you getting your information from that the SW negative was never reconformed to the 1997 edit?

It was discussed on blu-ray forums some time ago in the ANH 4K thread, unfortunately the posts are long buried now but someone kept insisting that the negative wasn’t reconformed and posted “evidence” about it. If you wanna try and search that cesspool of a thread by all means, but it’s what I remember being discussed there.

But where are these restoration notes at that you say you saw?

The notes were posted around the time of the leaks and were shared on here previously. The OCN was described as being “Reconfirmed in ‘97 for legacy output, selectively damaged.”

Another document further supported this, noting that during the new restoration the 1997 inserts were “not reintroduced into the OCN assembly”

The negative being reconformed to the originals is a pretty big fuck you to Lucas and the special editions, no?

I’m interested to know who’s in charge of all this. Doesn’t seem like something Kennedy would have done.

If Lucas was so worried about film preservation, I don’t think he would have cut those sections out in the first place.

Lucas was still talking about how the SEs are the real movies as late as 2024, and that the theatrical cuts are inherently “terrible” looking.

I seriously doubt this restoration won’t rankle him.

SpacemanDoug said:

SonnyGFunk said:

SpacemanDoug said:

SonnyGFunk said:

SpacemanDoug said:

-First point: The original negative was never reconformed despite rumors saying otherwise, the original negative itself has always been conformed to the 1977 cut and always will be. The special editions from 1997 were finished likely on interpositives, since they had to create at least some type of film element for 35mm printing at the time. But thankfully, the original negative itself wasn’t reconformed (and even if it was, Lucasfilm would’ve saved everything anyway).

We know for a fact the negative for SW was reconformed to the 1997 cut, there are countless sources that state this. The production documents for the new restoration also confirm that the 97 inserts had to be removed from the negative to bring it back to it’s pre 1997 state. Where are you getting your information from that the SW negative was never reconformed to the 1997 edit?

It was discussed on blu-ray forums some time ago in the ANH 4K thread, unfortunately the posts are long buried now but someone kept insisting that the negative wasn’t reconformed and posted “evidence” about it. If you wanna try and search that cesspool of a thread by all means, but it’s what I remember being discussed there.

But where are these restoration notes at that you say you saw?

The notes were posted around the time of the leaks and were shared on here previously. The OCN was described as being “Reconfirmed in ‘97 for legacy output, selectively damaged.”

Another document further supported this, noting that during the new restoration the 1997 inserts were “not reintroduced into the OCN assembly”

So are they actually physically reconforming the negative for a third time to once again resemble the 1977 cut?

Yes, the negative has been re-re-conformed to the 1977 cut. A recent Facebook post showed the films had been put into new film cans and the SW negative was labelled as theatrical, further supporting content from the documents.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/18c49X5zqc/?mibextid=wwXIfr

When the restoration documentary is released, hopefully we should all have a clearer picture on the restoration process, despite us already knowing a fair bit.

Broom Kid said:

It won’t

It will

Let’s not forget he misremembered by saying the originals were released to Laserdisc and people said they looked terrible. No it was the 2006 DVDs that people thought looked terrible and it wasn’t because the films themselves were terrible, the transfers were. They were outdated Laserdisc masters that weren’t upscaled for modern viewing. Acceptable by ‘90s standards, by mid-00s onward not so much.

I too feel he doesn’t care anymore. He authorized a screening of the original film a few years back and it was shown again in the UK last year with KK in attendance. He’s not boycotting this. He’s focussed on his museum and other things and has basically moved on from Star Wars. I have no doubt the ‘12/‘19 versions will remain in circulation in some form even after the new restorations come out so he can have his cake and eat it too.

Verboten said:

Lucas was still talking about how the SEs are the real movies as late as 2024, and that the theatrical cuts are inherently “terrible” looking.

Lol, hilarious for him to mischaracterize people’s argument there.

People said they looked terrible not due to the 1970s practical effects, but because of the ancient 1993 LaserDisc master they used for the 2006 DVDs… they were complaining about the lack of any re-mastering they did, but somehow he interprets that as people complaining about the original VFX… odd.

SonnyGFunk said:

Yes, the negative has been re-re-conformed to the 1977 cut.

I don’t understand why they’d do that. Handling the negative more than they need to greatly increases the risk of damaging it. They’d want to handle it as little as possible.

In 2026, there’s zero reason for them to need to physically re-conform the negative. All of that can easily be done digitally, they’d just piece it back together digitally.

I understand why they did it in 1997, the workflow back then was still pretty analog with digital intermediates not very common yet and in low resolution.

But I’d be surprised if they actually did that again. Really no reason or need to.

gsm-man said:

SonnyGFunk said:

Yes, the negative has been re-re-conformed to the 1977 cut.

I don’t understand why they’d do that. Handling the negative more than they need to greatly increases the risk of damaging it. They’d want to handle it as little as possible.

In 2026, there’s zero reason for them to need to physically re-conform the negative. All of that can easily be done digitally, they’d just piece it back together digitally.

I understand why they did it in 1997, the workflow back then was still pretty analog with digital intermediates not very common yet and in low resolution.

But I’d be surprised if they actually did that again. Really no reason or need to.

I’m sure we’ll get all the answers we want when the restoration documentary comes out. I’m hoping for at least a 1 hour video that goes over all the intricacies of this stuff.

That guy with no name said:

Well, they HAVE done it. The rumors spread by the leaks were all but confirmed by photographic evidence taken by someone who toured the Disney film archive a few months back. The negative for Star Wars was re-conformed to the theatrical cut.

Where do those images say the negatives were re-conformed?

I see several issues in that photo posted to Facebook:

1. The labels on the film cans list the title as “A New Hope”, which wouldn’t be the original theatrical cut.

2. The aspect ratio is listed as “1.33”, which would be incorrect. Star Wars was shot in 2.35 anamorphic widescreen.

3. The label for The Nightmare Before Christmas also says it’s the “theatrical cut” and “original cut negative”, so those labels aren’t unique to Star Wars.

Given that some of the information on that label is incorrect, I wouldn’t read too much into it, and I see nowhere in those photos confirming that the negative was re-conformed to the 1977 cut.

Again, it would make no sense to do that when it could be easily scanned and re-cut digitally without risking damage to the negatives.

That guy with no name said:

The re-conform was done incidentally during a new photochemical restoration.

What is a “photochemical restoration”? lol

The negatives have already been developed, 50 years ago. Nothing more can be done to film “photochemically” after it’s been developed and fixed. It no longer reacts to chemicals at that point, and the image is fixed.

All restoration work is done digitally.

They might do a wet gate film scan, but that’s just to reduce the visibility of dust and scratches when scanning it.

The remainder of the color correction and dust/scratch cleanup is all 100% done digitally.

We can see the raw, uncorrected scans of the negative in some of the leaked clips. Nothing was done to them photochemically.

Broom Kid said:

The initiative to start doing this was likely 2020/2021, and work actually started in 2022.

The earliest copyright date I saw on any of the leaked clips was 2025.

Why would this restoration take 5+ years, with Disney’s resources?

The X-Files remaster only took less than 2 years, and that was far more film they had to scan and color correct (over 150 hours of footage vs. 6 hours for the 3 Star Wars films).

gsm-man said:

Broom Kid said:

The initiative to start doing this was likely 2020/2021, and work actually started in 2022.

The earliest copyright date I saw on any of the leaked clips was 2025.

Why would this restoration take 5+ years, with Disney’s resources?

The X-Files remaster only took less than 2 years, and that was far more film they had to scan and color correct (over 150 hours of footage vs. 6 hours for the 3 Star Wars films).

Production documents suggested that the films were rescanned from 2022-2023

That guy with no name said:

2.35 is the final stretched aspect ratio, not the one the film was “shot in”; which is the whole point of anamorphic film.

Then why do the cans for ESB correctly say 2.35 on them? lol

Clearly, it was an error. You’d never list the un-stretched ratio, that makes literally zero sense. No one does that. It would be listed as anamorphic.

If you don’t know what that means, then frankly you’ve got no horse in this race.

It’s a nonsensical statement. The restoration is purely digital. There are no “chemicals” involved, and it’s not an analog process at all.

SonnyGFunk said:

Production documents suggested that the films were rescanned from 2022-2023

The work doesn’t take 5 years, is my point. Unless they just wanted to give themselves a lot of extra time in case something went wrong, and they want to arbitrarily wait until the 50th anniversary to release them.

If the work started years ago, they could’ve released them already. Otherwise, they’re working awfully slowly.