Complete Comparison of Special Edition Visual Changes — Page 9

doubleofive said:

The crawls on the Comp are already by appearance, not by frames. Sorry, I didn't mark them.

Ah, that explains it, I was thinking the difference in the timing was a little too much. ;)

rockin said:

Interesting.

Seems like they decided to alter them further in the last one, which I am assuming is the 2004 one - I guess simply because they could?

Just to be sure, which one is which? the last one definitely looks 2004 SE but not sure what the top 2 are.

Here you go, unfortunately the quality isn't that good,

the logo is the only one of them that is matched up in frame count with your GOUT picture.

The Stardestroyer and/or mattepainting is also slightly repositioned in this '81 recomposite, notice how the ship is closer to the planet when compared to your other pics. I noticed the JSC laserdisc is missing the last frame of this opening shot when I compared it with the '93 laserdisc footage. (this is the last frame of the JSC)

Playing around with the images, I found that the aspect ratio in those images is much taller than the other two, and it looks like the crawl is positioned different.



Not sure what to make of it. The Tattooine matte seems to go farther to the right of frame of either version. The Star Wars logo is MUCH bigger than the other comparisons. Go ahead and play with them, see what you guys can figure out.

doubleofive said:

Playing around with the images, I found that the aspect ratio in those images is much taller than the other two...

Yes, I've noticed the aspect ratio on this transfer is a little bit streched by a few pixels, if that is an issue with the laserdisc itself I don't know. (the screen-caps are taken from arnie.d's superb preservation "V8")

It has nothing to do with an alteration done to the '81-version of some sort though ;) just modify them a little.

If I shrink the aspect ratio of the main logo down to the standard of the other two, it is definitely squished. I'll have to play with it more later.

I'm pretty sure the GOUT is the ONLY home video source of the 1977 crawl. And what do you mean by "correct"?

EDIT: I just realized that with the GOUT having the original crawl, that makes it its own version unto itself, as opposed to ESB and RotJ being the 1993 versions, whatever those versions may be completion-wise.

doubleofive said:

 

Sluggo said:

I'm loving the teamwork going on here!

It takes a team to wrap our minds around all of the different versions. I just can't believe we're the first to notice the "there one version, gone the next" scanlines. Not having scan lines in one version I can kind of understand.



This I don't. The scanlines are going in the complete opposite direction!

 

Also the 2004 shot seems to be zoomed out, didn't find that on your descriptions. Weird.

LexX said:

Also the 2004 shot seems to be zoomed out, didn't find that on your descriptions. Weird.

I'll tell you what, I'm not sure about the GOUT being cropped, but the 97SE of Jedi sure is:



The whole image is zoomed in on both comparisons I've done so far.

I'd also like to confirm that it looks like the 1997 SE ending is identical to the 2004 version, save for the head replacement. I assumed after viewing the splitscreen that they were 2004 changes to show off all the Hayden they could. But no, the Special Editions have focused on the ghosts more in the last few shots than the originals did. I wonder why...

doubleofive said:

...and it looks like the crawl is positioned different. Not sure what to make of it. The Tattooine matte seems to go farther to the right of frame of either version. The Star Wars logo is MUCH bigger than the other comparisons. Go ahead and play with them, see what you guys can figure out.

If I shrink the aspect ratio of the main logo down to the standard of the other two, it is definitely squished. I'll have to play with it more later.

Well, the whole opening shot was remade so it isn't that strange that it doesn't match and no transfer is framed/cropped the same. Maybe these will help http://aptirrelevance.com/otscreenshots/screenshots.php?shot=1 if you're going to adjust the slightly streched images.

Ok, the ESB-scanline-madness continues...

I just went through the standard-play Laserdisc of Empire which, Darth Mallwalker was kind to upload. This pan & scan US LD transfer from 1985 have another odd mix of scanlines in it. :) It have the same dot-pattern on Vader's viewscreen and vertical scanlines on the Executor - holograms like the GOUT & SE but it also have the horizontal scanlines on the Emperor which the GOUT doesn't have... how many video masters were made for Empire!? Oh, I almost forgot, the Hoth shield generator shot is like the other transfers, scanlines & green displays, which makes that glitch/or early version of the shot unique to the GOUT transfer. I can post pictures of them later if you want me to.

Don't know if anyone noticed, but I modified the beginning of Star Wars and the ending of Jedi on the Comps. Added the shots from 81 to Star Wars, and some shots from 97 to Jedi, including the "building wipe" replacement:



and a new wipe created for the 04 version:



Plus, what I've been waiting for, the prequel-less Coruscant skyline:

zombie84 said:

So, trying to keep up here but it seems like in order of completeness it goes like this:

-70mm via 8mm commercial

-1993 GOUT (/1995 US LD/ 2006 DVD) -->Edited according to 35mm version with fading-in Emperor

-1985 US LD -->adds Emperor scanlines

-1986 JSC(/1992 US LD) -->adds (and in some cases replaces) horizontal scanlines to all screens and holograms

-1997 SE (/2004 DVD) --> adds further elements plus the original pre-1986 dot screen 

That's a good breakdown of all releases. :) 

It seems the '93-master also introduces the scanlines to the Vader hologram in the AT-AT

The '85 LD is the first release with a "finished" shield generator shot

I really have to double check the '86/'92 releases again, the dot pattern on the '85 LD was hard to notice due to the low quality

The '97 SE is actually identical to the '85 LD in content minus the scanlines on Vader's hologram in the AT-AT and of course all the other SE alterations. ;)

zombie84 said:

So, it looks like "chronologically", the GOUT is just a bit less completed than the 1985 LD. Now I am really curious about how "early" it is, and whether there is a transfer from 1984 that is more complete than the GOUT. Because it seems to be the "earliest" or least completed version available on home video. What is interesting is that until the GOUT comes along it also seems like the transfers are progressively being "completed" on home video in 1985 and then 1986. It could just be coincidence, of course, and if it is it makes it all the more bewildering how many different 35mm print masters with varying levels of work seem to exist for the film.

The first Laserdisc release of Empire was in 1984 according to the Laserdisc Database, don't know if it has been preserved by someone here?

Great work on the comparisons, doubleofive! a few minor corrections and suggestions for you...

SW comparison 3: "The preface was rendered in a different font with wider spacing in 1997 (middle) and yet again in 2004 (bottom)." the '97 preface uses the same font as the original, it's just a little thinner with wider spacing.

SW comparison 9: "The camera also panned down too fast to miss its original musical cue in 1981." this is also the case with the '97/'04 SE

SW comparison 10: "The entire first shot was recomposited for the 1997 Special Edition." this is also the case with the '81 opening, you could also add "1981 change, 1997 redo" to comparisons 4-10

msycamore said:

Great work on the comparisons, doubleofive! a few minor corrections and suggestions for you...

SW comparison 3: "The preface was rendered in a different font with wider spacing in 1997 (middle) and yet again in 2004 (bottom)." the '97 preface uses the same font as the original, it's just a little thinner with wider spacing.

SW comparison 9: "The camera also panned down too fast to miss its original musical cue in 1981." this is also the case with the '97/'04 SE

SW comparison 10: "The entire first shot was recomposited for the 1997 Special Edition." this is also the case with the '81 opening, you could also add "1981 change, 1997 redo" to comparisons 4-10

OK, question. Why did they restore the original starfield at all, instead of just using the 1981 intro in its entirety? Did they go back to the original film of the 1981 crawl to restore it, so they figured since they were redoing the whole shot anyway, might as well bring back the first starfield? That's the only reason that makes sense to me...

And not had the Star Wars logo fly away like it doesn't like being on the same screen as the crawl.