logo Sign In

.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *) — Page 50

Author
Time
Post link
Well even the kind of 720x480 res capture that Laserman was speaking of would be great, since it would be at full DVD res. Which would then allow for a proper anamorphic transfer to DVD after any preservation/restoration work was done. I don't suppose it would be relatively inexpensive to obtain a 16mm film scanner with the capacity to handle these 1200ft. 16mm reels that Laserman is talking about?

The Star Wars trilogy. There can be only one.

Author
Time
Post link

One of these cameras look pretty good...

Maybe we could do a film of a guerilla film crew making it happen too.....
Author
Time
Post link
Arnie.d: I'd say I just got my ass handed to me.
Author
Time
Post link
I definitely see the distinct lines on the X0 capture. Note: there are two different wide shots - the first one is right after R2 comes out and the second is a few seconds later after the applause and the 3-shot of Han, Luke, and Leia. The first one, which most of your screens above are from, is a bit clearer and you can see the lines quite distinctly. The second shot, which your PAL GOUT and EditDroid screens are from, is not as clear and the lines are harder to make out. The X0 raw capture does look clearer than your GOUT shots. The final X0 will obviously look even better.

My Projects:
[Holiday Special Hybrid DVD v2]
[X0 Project]
[Backstroke of the West DVD]
[ROTS Theatrical DVD]

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Dunedain
Well even the kind of 720x480 res capture that Laserman was speaking of would be great, since it would be at full DVD res. Which would then allow for a proper anamorphic transfer to DVD after any preservation/restoration work was done. I don't suppose it would be relatively inexpensive to obtain a 16mm film scanner with the capacity to handle these 1200ft. 16mm reels that Laserman is talking about?


You can get a decent scanner with a 16mm gate for about 100K

The workprinter as Puggo said is not a film scanner and so the results you get are good, but nothing like you get from a dedicated scanner.

Anyway, this stuff should be discussed over in the tech forum.
Author
Time
Post link
100k? Ouch. Puggo's 400 foot capacity 16mm scanner is sounding pretty darn good. As you said, the reels would need to be cut to fit, but it would never have to be done again in the history of Star Wars fan preservation/restoration. Something to seriously consider if it's at all possible to get access to decent 16mm prints. *imagining 2k scans of 16mm Star Wars film... drool*

Zion: Those GOUT shots look pretty good, all things considered. And so it's really cool when one ponders the fact that the X0 project's final results will be quite a bit better. What do you think will be more easily discernible when watching the X0 versions, the improved clarity and detail, or the colors being more correct?

The Star Wars trilogy. There can be only one.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Zion
I definitely see the distinct lines on the X0 capture. Note: there are two different wide shots - the first one is right after R2 comes out and the second is a few seconds later after the applause and the 3-shot of Han, Luke, and Leia. The first one, which most of your screens above are from, is a bit clearer and you can see the lines quite distinctly. The second shot, which your PAL GOUT and EditDroid screens are from, is not as clear and the lines are harder to make out. The X0 raw capture does look clearer than your GOUT shots. The final X0 will obviously look even better.

That's good news. Makes me wonder what they did to the GOUT so it has less detail than the LaserDiscs.


Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
Post link
That GOUT shot is from the PAL DVD which allegedly is resized from the NTSC so perhaps the NTSC shot is clearer, anyone got a cap of this frame from the NTSC DVD?
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
That's good news. Makes me wonder what they did to the GOUT so it has less detail than the LaserDiscs. See:
http://www.originaltrilogy.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=9&threadid=6848A problem with horizontal field movement during the telecine process caused 'jaggies' in the Definitive Collection transfer. Instead of fixing this properly, i.e. making a sub-pixel horizontal adjustment between the fields, the DVD has been mastered with a vertical blur to mask the jaggie effect.

Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here

Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Moth3r
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
That's good news. Makes me wonder what they did to the GOUT so it has less detail than the LaserDiscs. See:
http://www.originaltrilogy.com/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=9&threadid=6848A problem with horizontal field movement during the telecine process caused 'jaggies' in the Definitive Collection transfer. Instead of fixing this properly, i.e. making a sub-pixel horizontal adjustment between the fields, the DVD has been mastered with a vertical blur to mask the jaggie effect.

Oh, I missed that thread. Vertical blur? Well, the jaggies are still very visible so it didn't even help + the picture is now more blurry...
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
Post link
Basically the PAL GOUT is worse because they started off with the NTSC GOUT and then upscaled it to PAL resolution and softened the result, instead of using the much higher resolution PAL laserdisc masters.

Seeing as they were so cheap as to only use on master, they probably should have used the PAL masters for the PAL GOUT and then downsclaed it for the NTSC GOUT rather than the other way around.
Add the DVNR into the mix and it aint great for the PAL territories.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Dunedain
100k? Ouch. Puggo's 400 foot capacity 16mm scanner is sounding pretty darn good. As you said, the reels would need to be cut to fit, but it would never have to be done again in the history of Star Wars fan preservation/restoration.


AAAAHHHHRRRRRGGGGHHHH!!!! I feel like I've been banging my head against the wall. For the fourth time, I do NOT have a 400 ft 16mm scanner. I have a 2000 ft 16mm WorkPrinter. If I were to do a 16mm film transfer, it would NOT be necessary to cut up the film. (not that I have time right at the moment... too many other film projects going on).

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Puggo - Jar Jar's "Yoda"

AAAAHHHHRRRRRGGGGHHHH!!!! I feel like I've been banging my head against the wall. For the fourth time, I do NOT have a 400 ft 16mm scanner. I have a 2000 ft 16mm WorkPrinter. If I were to do a 16mm film transfer, it would NOT be necessary to cut up the film. (not that I have time right at the moment... too many other film projects going on).

But once you've got some free time, I imagine that 400 ft. 16mm scanner of yours will come in real handy!

*BANG!*thud*

Ron Moses

Avoid infestation. Rotate.

Author
Time
Post link
Puggo: Sorry for any confusion. When you posted the stuff quoted below from a couple pages back, I thought you were initially referring to the capacity of a 16mm scanner you had (the WorkPrinter I thought was a completely separate piece of hardware you also had). I now see you were talking about how long 16mm *reels* themselves normally are. Oops. But apparently the Star Wars 16mm reels that Laserman has seen are often 1200-1600ft. long each.

---------------------------------
" Originally posted by: Laserman I think he can only take 400ft reels and not many people would be happy having their 1200ft or larger reels cut up.


The 400ft limitation was for super-8. I'll have to check on the limit for 16mm, but it's gotta be more than that..."

"16mm reels are only 400 feet, translating to roughly 10 minutes of footage."
---------------------------------

In any case, it would seem no one here has or has access to a 16mm film scanner they could use. So it's the WorkPrinter method or nothing, I guess. It might not be as fancy as a film scanner, but according to that web site that you posted that describes what the WorkPrinter can do, it provides quite good transfers.

The Star Wars trilogy. There can be only one.

Author
Time
Post link
Any scanner/workprinter talk/confusion really should be taken over to the technical threads.
Author
Time
Post link
I agree, I wouldn't have even mentioned it in the first place except it would provide the ultimate source for a team like you guys to work with.

The Star Wars trilogy. There can be only one.

Author
Time
Post link
So wait, was this vertical blur on the laserdiscs or just the new dvds? Which X0 laserdisc cap shows more detail, the definitive or special collection. Getting more detail with the SC seems very likely but I can't understand how the '93 laserdisc could have more detail than the "Gout" without some tweaking.
Edit: FYI, that last shot, the 2004 SE transfer of shot # 36 can also be seen in non-animorphic widescreen with the full screen dvd.

Take back the trilogy. Execute Order '77

http://www.youtube.com/user/Knightmessenger

Author
Time
Post link
I think all the laserdisc transfers (SC, DC & PAL) have more vertical detail than the GOUT DVD (because of that vertical blur effect on the picture). However, the DVD wins out when you look at the horizontal detail.

I imagine that the X0 capture has better vertical detail too, and if the horizontal detail is similar to the DVD, then you're doing well.

Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here

Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Dunedain
Puggo: Sorry for any confusion. When you posted the stuff quoted below from a couple pages back, I thought you were initially referring to the capacity of a 16mm scanner you had (the WorkPrinter I thought was a completely separate piece of hardware you also had). I now see you were talking about how long 16mm *reels* themselves normally are. Oops. But apparently the Star Wars 16mm reels that Laserman has seen are often 1200-1600ft. long each. Two of those quotes were not even from me. To wit:


I think he can only take 400ft reels and not many people would be happy having their 1200ft or larger reels cut up. That one was by Laserman.

The 400ft limitation was for super-8. I'll have to check on the limit for 16mm, but it's gotta be more than that..."
That was by me.

"16mm reels are only 400 feet, translating to roughly 10 minutes of footage."
I think that was Laserman too.

I do have two pieces of equipment, but neither of them is a scanner. Both are Workprinters, one for 16mm and one for 8mm. The 8mm has a 400 ft limitation, the 16mm has a 2000 ft limitation.

The 400 foot confusion must have come from a separate thread, where someone said it was possible to buy 1200ft super-8 reels in widescreen of ANH. I was asked if my 8mm WorkPrinter could handle them, and I said they'd need to be cut into 400 ft reels. But there is no such limitation on the 16mm WorkPrinter. Man, we're WAY off topic...!

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
Post link
Oops, the quote "16mm reels are only 400 feet, translating to roughly 10 minutes of footage." was actually made by zombie84, when he posted it right after your previous post 2 pages back. The avatars you guys use are very similar if you just glance at them for an instant, and I assumed the post was from you. Anyhow, that quote is where the confusion stemmed from. Thanks for explaining it. Now the only problem is where to get 16mm prints good enough to transfer.

It's interesting to see the comments that the GOUT may have more horizontal resolution that the DC laserdisk set. If the DC laserdisk master had this level of horizontal resolution all the time, but laserdisks didn't support that much horizontal res, so we've never seen it before, this may be the one area where the GOUT DVD set is actually better than the DC. Will that extra horizontal res from the GOUT be noticeable if one viewed the GOUT set and X0 set side-by-side? If I recall correctly, back when the GOUT set was announced it was noted that the DC laserdisk masters had a full 480 lines of vertical res, more than laserdisk could support. And so for the first time we would get to see the full 480 vertical res of the DC masters on the GOUT DVD set. Did that actually happen? I suppose that was made impossible when they didn't do an anamorphic transfer (needed to see the full 480 lines of res on your t.v.). But certainly the X0 set would have the edge in every other area of image quality.

The Star Wars trilogy. There can be only one.