"Anyway - I took your advice! I have a 'User' setting on my TV. I turned on the 'warm hue' setting, halved the saturation and mucked about with the contrast and brightness a bit and lo and behold you are right! The corridor in the Tantive IV is white again!!!! Yay! And yes, even the green lightsaber is less offensive now - so thank you. Still doesnt stop Hoth being blue sometimes though - they must have REALLY overdone it on that ."
-------------------------------------
I'm glad I helped you enjoy your 2004 dvd's more. And thank you for the "warm hue"-tip. I've changed the hue setting on my tv-set from "normal" to "warm" and it's a huge improvement watching these dvd's.
Before the settings on my tv were set according to the THX-optimizer found on my Ep I-dvd. All my dvd's (+- 200 titles) played just fine with these settings. (except the 2004 original trilogy dvd's - too dark - way too bright colors, etc...)
The THX-settings on my set (Philips 32" - pixel plus 2) are :
contrast: 44/100
brightness : 44/100
color : 44/100
hue : normal
The settings with which I find the 2004 dvd's to look their best are:
contrast : 59/100
brightness : 46/100
color : 20/100
hue : warm
Now I can truly claim these dvd's have never looked better (So good in fact that if Lucas would re-release the 2004 dvd's with the color-brightness issues solved I would not easily be tempted to pick them up.)
Darth Evil wrote :
"And to the OP, that's cool that you're able to enjoy them and found the right brightness setting, but i'll have to say I just wouldn't want to go through all that hassle to get the DVD's looking right."
------------------------------------------
I agree that the dvd's ought to have looked right straight out of the box. However by twiddling a bit with the settings of my tv I saved myself 50 euro. ( by not getting Lucas sept. 12 release and probably even more come 2007.)
THX wrote :
"Andrew-Kenneth - it's great (for you) that you have found a way to enjoy the '04 discs. As you can see, most people here can't overlook the destructive effect of the SE changes. For me personally, even if they were the OUT, I couldn't overlook the color/contrast issues. It is not simply a case of more blue, more color - the palette has been changed considerably. And no amount of brightness can restore detail lost in shadow areas. However, if you're happy, I'm happy for you. "
-----------------------------------------
Last friday I advised to raise the brightness a tad, and to decrease the color dramatically.
Over the weekend I learned that using the "warm hue" setting (thanks Fuser) also improves the picture as does a considerable increase of contrast. (These two changes are also significant.)
.
I've said earlier that the SW 2004 dvd's now look (almost) exactly LIKE I REMEMBER SW to look in the theatre (color-wise that is.). ( I did not claim this IS SW EXACTLY as it looked in the theater.) But now - at least it looks close enough for me to enjoy the discs without frustration about their color/brightness.
.
I have, like you, also noticed that a lot of SW fans are really opposed to SE-changes. As we have recently learned from the Lucas-website about 100 changes were made in each film. Yet only about six or seven objectionable changes were mentioned in this thread.
.
So we must conclude there are changes people like (or don't even notice), changes people kinda like (or are indifferent about) and changes people really dislike (or even hate).
.
I mentioned a change I didn't like in my original post and if hard pressed I'll admit that in an ideal galaxy Greedo would not have shot at all and the Sarlacc would not have had a beak. (There are some more changes that could be improved upon- better done hologram scene in ESB, etc...) But I don't hate these changes enough to start hating the 2004- versions.
.
Also, don't forget that the original trilogy also had it's share of cringeworthy moments. (Chewbacca's Tarzan yell in Ep. VI for instance...)
.
Right now, because of all the changes, I think there are as many "ideal"-versions as there are fans.
.
In film history - Lucas must be one of the few directors that keep changing their movies.
I know of the SE's of Ridley Scott (Bladerunner), Spielberg (Close encounters, E.T.), Coppola (Apocalyse Now), (amongst others) but the changes they made were never so bitterly opposed as Lucas's.
.
The only other artwork, I know of, that has a "Special Edition-history" comparable to SW is Wagner's opera "Tannhäuser". This opera was premiered in Dresden in 1845. (making it middle-period Wagner). It's a pretty straightforward opera and did relatively well. In 1861 Wagner had the chance to get this opera staged in Paris. In those days all operas performed at the Paris opera had to have a ballet somewhere in the second act. So Wagner was kindly asked to recompose part of his opera - include a ballet etc. Eventually the ballet was added in the first act and some scenes were reworked. Because the new scenes were composed in Wagner's mature style they are musically far more evolved than the surrounding (older) material. Because of this the "Paris-version" of Tannhäuser is the version that is performed and recorded mostly. Only in very recent times the original version is starting to get it's due. Classical audiences are starting to see past the opulent ear-candy of the "Paris-version" and getting interested in the original. (better paced drama - no jarring between middle-period and mature styles.)