skyjedi2005 said:
Sorry man. I thought i remembered your comments in the clone wars tv thread to that effect.

If i remembered wrongly i apologise.

As for Episode 1 and how the film was shot etc. I think it was documented somewhat by American Cinematographer and Cinefex magazines.

But David Tatterstall Cinematography really does not do the same as Gil Taylor. I realise he researched the look of the original tatooine photography and stuff. Not just Gil Taylor, the cinematographers on the original trilogy were just better imho. The same with the original indiana jones trilogy.

Lucas and Spielberg got these replacement Cinematographers who were not as good, again imho.

Of course Ben Burrt is no Marcia Lucas when it comes to film editing either.

But then again george uses the avid system as far as i know and does not edit the same anymore himself. He does not cut film as he no longer even uses film.

You know that cutting a film used to refer to piecing together the celluloid with editors glue or cement, on a moviela or an upright KEM editing station. I know almost all of the phantom menace was shot on 35mm motion picture film but was not physically edited. It was digitized then edit in computers and printed back out onto film. Thereby losing quality in the image. Lucas could now go back to the camera oneg and get a 4k scan but i don't think he would want to spend the money on it. Besides the edits that were done on computers would have to redone and reassemble the movie from that point.

Computers are just a tool. Digital Video is too. It's what you do with them. Plenty of good looking movies have come out on digital by now, the format has matured, AOTC was an early adopter which Is why it looked bad and both digital prequels just completely ignored the look of the originals and went for it's own look. ROTS didn't look bad, it just looked very CG and not like the originals.

I still believe they should have went with 80's stock and more practical effects though, for continuity's sake.