Puggo Strikes Back! (Released) — Page 5

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

It would be fun to try, but I fear there would be too many slight variations in the centering of each frame, such that it would just make it look less sharp.

 Yeah, that's what I figured.

Maybe there's a script out there somewhere to line them up automatically?

I just downloaded the PG recently and I now prefer it to the gout dvd - so thanks for all the hard work. I would still prefer watching the PG to a cleaned up version of the gout - probably becuase i like the grit and aging of the film, that is from the 16mm print.

I've been tampering with fanedits of star wars and trying to work out the software as i go - but i think ive gone as far as im prepared to go with it - a lot of what you guys are discussing i dont understand, regarding the white balance etc...    i just enjoy watching the PG as it is.

So im sure what ever work you do on PSB will be cool and looking forward to adding this to my collection as well.

Cheers for taking the time to do this)

thorr said:

Hi Puggo,

- I gave it a shot and I took the frame of the two walkers and cropped it to 624x462 to get rid of the borders.

- Then I stretched it to 1236x462 and it looks pretty close to correct.  Your scan is very slightly crooked so it doesn't match perfectly, but I can't get it any closer.

So at 462, the height of the material actually matches exactly?  I was assuming that the whole thing would need to grow or shrink somewhat to make it match.

Thanks a lot for your analysis!  This sort of thing helps me out a lot.  I'll post a short clip and if you (or anyone else) wants to try running a BD test using your formula above, that would give us an idea of how well this might work.

thorr said:

Yes, I was keeping the height constant on the PSB and only stretching the horizontal until the width and height matched the original aspect ratio.  I also had to grow and shrink the original frame by dragging the corner so both dimensions would grow and shrink and keep the original aspect ratio.  Eventually I got the original frame to the right height and then stretched the PSB until the width matched.  It was kind of a pain.  :-)  Then when I overlaid the two, I pasted the new onto the old and then did undo, redo, undo, redo so I could flip back and forth to make sure it matched and that is when I noticed the PSB frame was very slightly crooked.  The edges are straight so it is the frame inside that is crooked (definitely not a big deal).

Ok, that's a great method.  So the horizontal stretching factor appears to be about 1.98.  That matches the basic definition of 16mm scope being 2x.

It was more important to me to make the edges straight, so that when it comes time to crop, there won't be much image loss.  By the way, it is not at all easy to get the frame straight with the workprinter.

thorr said:

Here is the picture with the 1236x462 overlaid onto the original:

http://i52.tinypic.com/2mrfmz7.jpg

-Mike

Thorr, I admire the effort you put into this.

The 16mm was cropped more than I thought :-(

Actually it is cropped less than I was fearing.

I'll admit the cropping bugs me, but I've seen the same amount lopped off at theaters all the time. (The image spills out onto the curtains above and below.)

IIRC, some camera viewfinders have marks to take this into account when framing a shot, similar to the old "safe area" marks for keeping the important stuff inside the 4:3 tv boundaries.

Interesting info. I wonder if there are any "adapted scope" prints out there somewhere?

thorr said:

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

Ok, that's a great method.  So the horizontal stretching factor appears to be about 1.98.  That matches the basic definition of 16mm scope being 2x.

Actually it is more like 2.68:1.  I was going to say that the reason for the cropping the way it was was due to the way the anamorphic lenses were defined for 16mm, and that may still be true.  If the lenses are about 2.68:1, then they would need to crop the top and bottom to match the lens while maintaining the correct aspect ratio, or add black bars to the frame. 

Hey, my theory is correct and so is yours.  I found this: http://www.film-center.com/scope1.html

So the original frame is 1.33:1 and then it is 2x'd to 2.66:1 which is what we are seeing.

 

Right. By 2x, I meant that I need to take the raw image of the frame and expand it by 2:1.  Since the original image wasn't square to begin with, the end result ends up being more like 2.68:1.

SilverWook said:

Interesting info. I wonder if there are any "adapted scope" prints out there somewhere?

Complete prints not likely though i believe there were extracts.

Too much of the frame would be lost to make the print true 2:35:1 on super 8mm or 16mm though when stretched.

I once say a very bad faded adapted scope print of American Graffiti with french subtitles below the image and it looked horrible like it was zoomed in almost pan and scan.

There are quite a few 16mm prints of the OT out there.  They pop up on eBay and the 16mm forum periodically.

If the PSB up-conversion goes well, I may go back and do an upconversion of PG.  It would be a fair amount of work, as it might entail having to redo a bunch of the edit/assembly.  But at least I kept the original raw scans.

Plan to do three more scans of reel three of ESB today.  I'm having a problem with the Workprinter... takeup arm is sluggish and I've been trying to repair that.  It still works, just means I have to stay there every second so it doesn't spill film.

Are all the SW prints looking the same as PG or would there be others that have more color like TESB print?

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

There are quite a few 16mm prints of the OT out there.  They pop up on eBay and the 16mm forum periodically.

If the PSB up-conversion goes well, I may go back and do an upconversion of PG.  It would be a fair amount of work, as it might entail having to redo a bunch of the edit/assembly.  But at least I kept the original raw scans.

Plan to do three more scans of reel three of ESB today.  I'm having a problem with the Workprinter... takeup arm is sluggish and I've been trying to repair that.  It still works, just means I have to stay there every second so it doesn't spill film.

 You kept the original scans? How many gigs is that?

LexX said:

Are all the SW prints looking the same as PG or would there be others that have more color like TESB print?

Most of the ones I've seen are similar to PG.  I think one came up on eBay with better color, and it brought a high price.  PG color is pretty good except for reel 2.

boba feta said:

 You kept the original scans? How many gigs is that?

Not bad, only about 20.  Although I do several scans, I edit them together into a single scan and that is all I keep.

Finished scanning.  I now have three scans of reel 1, four scans of reel 2, and four scans of reel 3.  Started assembly last night... am six minutes through reel 1.