Originally posted by: boris

Originally posted by: zombie84
This still doesn't answer the question though: why is it different than the EOD crawl? Clearly the EOD crawl is newly struck from a film source, however the OOT crawl is very different, in terms of image quality, image characteristics and colouring.

The EOD crawl was coloured to match the 2004-crawl colouring. The EOD suffers more compression then the OUT, and the EOD crawl seems to be cropped differently (however, this could be because it's the "whole frame", and the OUT disc is cropped to the anamorphic ratio).

But the two are from completely different raw sources. The EOD one is even differently exposed, with fainter stars (is this why the star wars logo appears to receed quicker?). The OOT however uses what appears to be the very same backdrop from the 2004 DVD crawl (incidentally being the original one) which also leads me to believe that perhaps this is a re-creation--with the raw backdrop on file, the crawl could simply be digitally done, without the need for a dissolve to match the footage, as would have been required if they used the EOD file. What is the starfield like for the stardestroyer fly-by then? Is it also the same as the 2004 disk? If so, it may mean that they re-created the 1977 crawl using the same elements and technology that they used to re-create the 1981 crawl for the 2004 disk, and made a new composite using the 2004 fly-by.