Truth be told, I really don't care that much if the colors are wrong. Those can be corrected, mostly. It's the content, CGI, and other changes that bother me.
"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars
Agreed, Puggo, I'll never watch these official versions, I only look at them as sources, so as long as it's the same screwed up master, it doesn't really matter whether you colour correct from pink or purple. The advantage here is, that if there are any further changes, we already have the previous version in 1080p.
Those boys at blu-ray.com are in unbelievable denial. The mods ban anybody who points out faults of the transfer while allowing misinformation and blind fanboyism to pervade.
I dealt with various childish attacks by providing screenshots other posters such as Adywan have provided to demonstrate. Since that's not enough logic, I went so far as to show the Sith lightsabers in the PT and ask why Vader's should be any different shade of red than those, as it originally was (or closer to) before 2004. As expected, not one decent answer (other than some trolling).
All my posts in the last 20 or so hours were deleted. Other posters kept picking fights and I just responded coolly with logic and evidence. Then they hurled insults at me (bully, asshole, hater, complainer, whiner) when they realized they have no argument. I didn't express anger or attack anybody.
It's frustrating because this film franchise is the only one dominated by self-loathing fans who are afraid to question or doubt anything because they fear it would compromise their love for SW and Lucas. It's absurd. There's no room for rational discussion because, well, most of the predominant voices are either children or childish enough to appear so.
That said, I hope I find a nice home here.
“Grow up. These are my Disney's movies, not yours.”
Welcome to your nice new home :-)
Oh, give me a home where the banthas roam
Where the wampas and the ackleys play
Where seldom is heard a discoura....
...second thought, nevermind.
good to see you over here georgec. I think you'll like your new home here.
That discussion over at the blu-ray forums is getting pathetic, especially the ones coming from danny_boy. no matter how much solid proof you give them there are those who continually refuse to listen. The whole red vs pink/magenta sabre thing is laughable. You have people like danny_boy posting screenshots comparing photos taken at the technicolor Baltimore showing and comparing them to the 2004 editions and saying how faithful the 2004 versions are when its clear that they look nothing alike. And then there's the whole pink sabre core thing. Even though we have been clearly talking about the glows of the sabres turning from red in every version pre 2004, to ink/ magenta glows since 2004 he continues to post images to say that the cores were always pink with a mild red glow, thus actually proving our point about the colours of the glows. But then he continues to post images taken from VCD's and other sources to continue to say the cores were pink, yet almost every one he posted the cores were clearly white in his pictures. He's either viewing these pictures on a seriously bad monitor or he has problems with colours. He likes to bring me into his arguments and call anyone who agrees with me on the subject of the colouring of the 2004 DVD's as "mindless followers of Adywan" or things like this:
Only if it does not conform to what you and the other Adywan influenced believers---want to believe
Well, i actually think that last one is a good thing. If i'm influencing people to be able to see the colouring errors of the 2004+ versions, then I'm quite happy about that ;)
It wouldn't surprise me if i get another suspension or fully banned this time while people like danny_boy will go unpunished, even though he likes to resort to personal insults. There are some moderators there that do seem to side with the "george" worshippers while even the site manager, Deciazulado, gave clear arguments that the sabres were indeed red and never pink throughout the trilogy. I don't see them daring to insult him though.
In my experience many of the the blu-ray forum members range from insane to trollish to morons.
It's still not half as bad as theforce.net though.
On that site you can't even curse or say anything remotely "offensive". I'm not even saying I want to sit there and curse away. But realistically it's like walking on damn glass.
ZERO fun.
I don't know what planet those mods and admins are living on. Being on that forum means you have to talk as if you are in the middle of a G rated movie theater. It's as if the place if filled with toddlers and hypersensitive parents who will throw you out if you say one thing that makes their ears bleed or their children cry.
But oddly enough, every now and then some jackass can give you a sarcastic, cunty answer or something clearly trollish, but if you talk back to them you'll get warned or banned.
The over sensitivity and blatant hypocrisy is beyond ridiculous
Ooof that place! It's so dumb to go full superfan on a home theater-type forum like that. There's no fans of fucking blu-ray, only customers. I can't believe how much this thing has been romanticized into anything other than a product quality issue. "Stop criticizing my Shamrock Shake! It's always delicious!"
Well I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels that way.
Adywan, I appreciate your welcome. I've followed your posts over there and it's amazing how much you hand those idiots their own asses over and over only for them to break out childishly and call you names.
The main culprit in my opinion over there is the mod 'crazyBLUE'. He began deleting my harmless posts a couple months ago. He definitely doesn't like people pointing out obvious flaws with the disc transfers. He didn't suspend danny_boy, starwarsagent, or others for thread derailment even though it was those guys who just kept coming back for more. One guy called "lilgig" swore at me twice, calling me an asshole, and he wasn't suspended.
Earlier this summer I made this video as a joke and crazyBLUE deleted it multiple times before moving it to the other SW forum on there. I personally thought it was funny and lightened the mood. http://forum.blu-ray.com/movies/172642-star-wars-wars-uot-strikes-back-other-pez-dispensers-18.html#post4794582
I wish I saved my posts that were deleted. Since other posters like us are already suspended and Adywan wasn't posting much last night and early today, it was me against all those guys and my straightforward logic and evidence from Adywan and others just got into their heads. I took no pleasure but felt compelled to explain to them why they are grossly wrong.
Sorry, have to vent a bit because I just don't get how serious and hypocritical people have to be on a message board that is meant for technical and film discussion. I'll go back when my suspension is up but be careful to not let the trolls bait me.
Oh, and who wants to bet that few, if any, official site reviewers criticize the color issues (which are all but confirmed)? There's no way someone criticizes this release openly. That would mean a risk of receiving future discs for advance review from 20th Century Fox. Bill Hunt will probably give the V a "20."
“Grow up. These are my Disney's movies, not yours.”
Thanks for the link, georgec. I love the discussion, mainly "starwarsagent"'s posts.
Like this one :
Lightsabers contain crystals..made of different colors that can change at any given time...its like light going thru a diamond and the diamond putting out different colors of the spectrum. A red lightsaber crystal can diminish overtime in color like a glass would lose its shine or a dirty crystal.
The lightsaber crystal in Vaders saber in the PT was somewhat red in the edges. How do you know he didn't change or found a more pink crystal and put it into his lightsaber in 30 years? The color of the crystal could have faded also.
Why do I have a feeling he had never sex ?
It seems like anyone who does not agree with special edition changes or isn't really into the PT gets cyber bullied over there lol.
There was a discussion a while back about the PT, and I basically said of all the prequel movies I liked TPM in terms of film making process the most, because it was the last movie to be shot on film and using real sets as opposed to digital hd cameras and green/blue screen rooms. Like many here, I got shot to pieces with what seemed like 4 or 5 members over there ganging up on me saying my claims were absurd. It's like nobody is allowed to have a point of view that doesn't conform with their own little 'group'. I am actually starting to wonder if they are a cult group or something.
With regards to the saber changes, it's so obvious that those that cannot see it are clearly in some sort of denial - or they are so deluded by their asskissing to all Lucas' changes that they cannot see what other people see. I actually do wonder at times how so many of them can throw their faith into Lucas with every change having some sort of importance/intention and not being accidental changes or errors. Do they really believe every change has a special reason behind it and it should not be questioned? lol
well danny_boy is spouting his shit again, but he isn't goading me into getting suspended. Funny how he hasn't got the bottle to come back in here, where we can actually have a discussion about these problems without being suspended or banned, to post the same crap he's been posting over there with his camera shot/ vcd proof. But that's because people here don't just blindly follow all the crap excuses for all the errors and here they know the errors with the 2004 transfers and can prove him wrong. Bloody pink lightsabres...
originally posted by fanny_boy:
LOL!
I guess it's just a coincidence that only the scenes in that techniclor print that contain vader's saber are the one's where the white balance of the camera that took these fotos was thrown out(convenient huh?)
Seriously ---when are you going to understand/concede that the original versions never had any consistency(which is something to be acknowledged and quite frankly celebrated).
And your very subjective bias that the 2004 DVD(and the hidef master from which it is derived) is an inferior product is laughable.
In terms of clarity,dynamic range and resolution,it is light years ahead of any previous laserdisc/VHS transfer.
That is why you used it as the basis for your own fan edit?
Just thought I would highlight that contradiction.
For the record I really like your edits.
But that is all they are and ever will be-- an exceptionally well executed fan edit---nothing more or less.
I hope you understand that.
How come these mindless followers feel the need to bring my edits into the argument, when they have nothing to do with the subject? And the other thing they bring up is clarity and resolution. You can present a turd in HD but it will still be a turd. Don't these people even care about quality any more?
They do seem to be like a little cult (or something that sounds quite similar. lol). The way they all gang up on anyone who has their own opinions about the movies.
I got shot to pieces with what seemed like 4 or 5 members over there ganging up on me saying my claims were absurd
:DD
I wouldn't even bother frequenting blu-ray.com these days - what's the point? Life's too short! Let them believe what they will about Lucas and all his revisionist shite - we thankfully know better.
The Home Theatre Forum has a good discussion going on about the blurays at the moment. A nicely moderated forum where (for the most part - 'Fellowship of the Ring' green tint thread aside!) people generally make their points without crapping on anyone else. Some well balanced arguements on there and the mods don't delete you for having an opinion! Many posters are very knowledgable about film and film preservation on there - and therefore sympathetic to the notion that the original Star Wars films should be released - not to mention the added bonus that many industry insiders apparently read many of the threads to get feedback on their releases...
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/forum/thread/303111/star-wars-on-blu-ray-fall-2011
Let blu-ray.com disappear up it's own exhaust port I say ;)
Without blu-ray.com, I would never have found out that I'm not actually a Star Wars fan.
Since they're like poetry, what with the rhyming and all, I find that I only need to watch three out of the six films.
adywan said:
well danny_boy is spouting his shit again, but he isn't goading me into getting suspended. Funny how he hasn't got the bottle to come back in here, where we can actually have a discussion about these problems without being suspended or banned, to post the same crap he's been posting over there with his camera shot/ vcd proof. But that's because people here don't just blindly follow all the crap excuses for all the errors and here they know the errors with the 2004 transfers and can prove him wrong. Bloody pink lightsabres...
originally posted by fanny_boy:
LOL!
I guess it's just a coincidence that only the scenes in that techniclor print that contain vader's saber are the one's where the white balance of the camera that took these fotos was thrown out(convenient huh?)
Seriously ---when are you going to understand/concede that the original versions never had any consistency(which is something to be acknowledged and quite frankly celebrated).
And your very subjective bias that the 2004 DVD(and the hidef master from which it is derived) is an inferior product is laughable.
In terms of clarity,dynamic range and resolution,it is light years ahead of any previous laserdisc/VHS transfer.
That is why you used it as the basis for your own fan edit?
Just thought I would highlight that contradiction.
For the record I really like your edits.
But that is all they are and ever will be-- an exceptionally well executed fan edit---nothing more or less.
I hope you understand that.How come these mindless followers feel the need to bring my edits into the argument, when they have nothing to do with the subject? And the other thing they bring up is clarity and resolution. You can present a turd in HD but it will still be a turd. Don't these people even care about quality any more?
They do seem to be like a little cult (or something that sounds quite similar. lol). The way they all gang up on anyone who has their own opinions about the movies.
Well I guess provoking me by distorting my username is one way to bring me over here---lol!
If the 2004 DVD is a turd---then why use it's template as the basis for your own edit?
Why not use the 1997 or 1993 laserdiscs?
Oh wait---it is because they are inferior to the 2004 DVD.
I saw Star Wars in 1977. Many, many, many times. For 3 years it was just Star Wars...period. I saw it in good theaters, cheap theaters and drive-ins with those clunky metal speakers you hang on your window. The screen and sound quality never subtracted from the excitement. I can watch the original cut right now, over 30 years later, on some beat up VHS tape and enjoy it. It's the story that makes this movie. Nothing? else.
http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8
danny_boy said:
If the 2004 DVD is a turd---then why use it's template as the basis for your own edit?
Why not use the 1997 or 1993 laserdiscs?
Oh wait---it is because they are inferior to the 2004 DVD.
Is this a joke?
Quality: better.
Content: worse.
Original: should be preserved regardless.
Fan Edits: not the original.
Easy enough for you, simpleton?
twooffour said:
Quality: better.
The colors would like a word with you.
Fair enough, I haven't seen the OOT in its best HD quality. Still, stuff was made crisper and clearer as far as I'm aware.
Man, the older transfers are inferior in some technical things, because they're older transfers done in lower resolution but the 2004 transfer is inferior in terms of quality control - wrong colours, crushed blacks and so on. That's why Ady had to do extensive colour correction for his edit. The thing is that the 2004 transfer is now also an old transfer and an all new transfer should be made.
This topic is for discussing the Star Wars BDs.
Discussions about blu-ray.com forum members should be started in a new thread in off-topic.
Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here
Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here
danny_boy said:
adywan said:
well danny_boy is spouting his shit again, but he isn't goading me into getting suspended. Funny how he hasn't got the bottle to come back in here, where we can actually have a discussion about these problems without being suspended or banned, to post the same crap he's been posting over there with his camera shot/ vcd proof. But that's because people here don't just blindly follow all the crap excuses for all the errors and here they know the errors with the 2004 transfers and can prove him wrong. Bloody pink lightsabres...
originally posted by fanny_boy:
LOL!
I guess it's just a coincidence that only the scenes in that techniclor print that contain vader's saber are the one's where the white balance of the camera that took these fotos was thrown out(convenient huh?)
Seriously ---when are you going to understand/concede that the original versions never had any consistency(which is something to be acknowledged and quite frankly celebrated).
And your very subjective bias that the 2004 DVD(and the hidef master from which it is derived) is an inferior product is laughable.
In terms of clarity,dynamic range and resolution,it is light years ahead of any previous laserdisc/VHS transfer.
That is why you used it as the basis for your own fan edit?
Just thought I would highlight that contradiction.
For the record I really like your edits.
But that is all they are and ever will be-- an exceptionally well executed fan edit---nothing more or less.
I hope you understand that.How come these mindless followers feel the need to bring my edits into the argument, when they have nothing to do with the subject? And the other thing they bring up is clarity and resolution. You can present a turd in HD but it will still be a turd. Don't these people even care about quality any more?
They do seem to be like a little cult (or something that sounds quite similar. lol). The way they all gang up on anyone who has their own opinions about the movies.
Well I guess provoking me by distorting my username is one way to bring me over here---lol!
If the 2004 DVD is a turd---then why use it's template as the basis for your own edit?
Why not use the 1997 or 1993 laserdiscs?
Oh wait---it is because they are inferior to the 2004 DVD.
well you want to provoke me over at blu-ray.com because you know i'll get either suspended or banned if i continued the argument and the little cult of Lucas posse just constantly spout the same old crap.
My god, you are really pathetic coming out with crap like that. yet again you are the same as the other worshippers that have to bring my edits into the discussion. The amount of work i had to put into the 2004 sets to get them anywhere near acceptable was ridiculous. Why should it be up to the fans to do all this kind of work just because Lucasfilm screws things up over and over again? But even then they're still pretty crap because of the crushed blacks. The films were restored in 1997 and these were the versions that were the most faithful to the technicolor print than the horrendous crap that is the 2004 version. And your arguments that the 2004 version is the closest we have ever had to how star wars originally looked is laughable. Let's post some of the stuff you have said over at blu-ray.com just so people know what all this is about:
Origin ally Posted by danny_boyOnly if it does not conform to what you and the other Adywan influenced believers---want to believe.
But the 2004 DVD and the corresponding Hidef master from which it is derived is as as close as we have EVER gotten to the original:
Tech print on left/darker 2004 DVD on right:
As for Adywan--he fled to OT.com and shamlessly baited me from there.
And regarding the 1997 special edition---it is the screen shots that you don't show--like this one from my own VCD that was released in 2000 that prove that you see only what you want to see(the so called flaws in the 2004 version----even though those flaws(i.e a predominantly pink saber) have always been there :
And for the record---I have no problem with Vader's saber being pink.
It's so funny because your mate Adywan can't even bare Mace's purple saber in ATOTC.
Those 1997 special editions,in terms of resolution, never got past the inferior quality of laserdisc and VHS ports---except on one occasion......
Some clips from the these 1997 special editions were used for the empire of dreams documentary in 2004---and hence they were anamorphically enhanced theyby increasing their effective resolution and qualitybeyond what was possible with laserdisc(or VHS)
And the result---Vader's saber retains it's original pink tint(just like it would do in the actual 2004 DVD):
Consider yourself thouroughly debunked.
Actually the core of Vader's lightsaber is pinkish/white with a mild red outer glow.
And the 2004 DVD honored this fact which can be confirmed in the below comparison:
1977/1981 Technicolor print on the left/2004 DVD on the right.
In other words the 2004 DVD(and it's hidef master--to be used for the blu rays) is a faithful(although different ) rendition of the original cinematic print(in terms of color reference).
It is because they are not flawed!
You claim older source material from the 1970's/1980's is not reliable as a reference---yet the original making of star wars documentary actually broke down the composition of the sabers:
Here is the original optical element used for both Obi and Vader's sabers:
Note the extreme red:
And here it is superimposed in the final composite(as seen in the same 1977 documentary):
Which conforms to both the 2004(and hence blu ray)DVD and 1977 techniclolor print:
This was all from the argument that vaders saber glow was never pink but in fact red. Now you constantly kept going on about how the photos taken at the baltimore technicolor print screening proved that the 2004 versions is faithful to how it looked originally. Even when we told you that we were talking about the glow and not the core you kept posting all this above, which actually proved our point because Vaders glow is clearly red in your screenshots. Even the shots you show to try and prove your point that Vaders core is pink (not the technicolor shots because everyone can clearly see that the white balance is off,) actually have white cores. If you are seeing pink then you seriously either need to get your monitor sorted or get your eyes checked. And while you are at it you really do need to do these two thing if you thing that the technicolor screenshots look in anyway the same as the 2004 versions. The colour pallet is totally different. But, as i have said before, you can't use images taken from a cinema screen as proof as to how it actually looked unless these pictures were taken by someone who had set up a correct white balance previously to this and used the correct exposure. This cannot be used for accurate representation if someone has just used auto settings on a digital camera.
Now look at the final screenshot in that batch . you are seriously saying that the 2004 versions are faithful to the colouring featured in the technicolor print? Vaders glow is pink/ magenta in the 2004 shot while you can clearly see that it has a prominent RED glow in the technicolor screenshot. In the shot from the making of, again clearly a red glow.
And what the hell has the fact that i can't stand Mace's purple lightsabre have anything to do with how i perceive the correct colouring of the sabres to be?
Why is it that you think that anything that came before the 2004 versions is inferior just because of lower resolution? You and your cult members think that just because the image is sharper or higher definition that it's superior. Well i'm sorry to burst your bubble but it isn't. If they hadn't screwed about with the transfer and just given us how the films colouring looked in 1997 then they would have been perfect. Those are the versions that are more faithful to how they looked originally not the 2004 versions, as these are far from how the films have ever looked.
Now why did i use the 2004 version for my edit? well that is easy. there were no high quality copies of the 1997 or original versions available. When combining new FX with original material i needed to use the highest resolution versions available. And it's thanks to people like you and the cult of Lucas why we will only ever get an inferior release of the original trilogy. Your types would buy a piece of crap as long as it come from Lucas and had the star wars logo on it and you have proved that by saying just how superior the 2004 versions actually are. Even when the flaws are pointed out to you in great detail you continue to argue that the 2004 versions are how star wars has always looked and that only "adywan influenced" people believe the colour of these versions is completely screwed up.
Now it looks like the Blu-rays have gone even further with screwing up the lightsabre colours, but there will still be those that will argue that they are how they have always meant to be.
Now that is all i have to say. I have proved my point and have proved your points to be incorrect. I will not reply to any more of your posts about the true red colour of the lightsabres
EDIT: sorry Moth3r, i was typing all that out before your post appeared.
It's funny I have been banned over there for almost 3 weeks now and for doing nothing. Did not start a fight or anything! But at least I took Mace Windu and Shelldweller with me on this 3 week suspension so you all dont have to deal with them. :)
AKA Cowboy at Bluray.com
Harmy said:
Man, the older transfers are inferior in some technical things, because they're older transfers done in lower resolution but the 2004 transfer is inferior in terms of quality control - wrong colours, crushed blacks and so on. That's why Ady had to do extensive colour correction for his edit. The thing is that the 2004 transfer is now also an old transfer and an all new transfer should be made.
I think I stated in another thread that I personally prefer watching my original VHS tape from 82' for purely aesthetic and nostalgic reasons---but I am not going to deny that the 2004 DVD tears it to shreds in every sense from color to clarity.
I do have very good DVD rips of the 1993 laserdiscs and the general consensus seems to be that these are as close to the original theatrical prints as it has ever got for home video releases in terms of colour reproduction.
But they simply pale in comparison to the 2004 DVD.
That is why most reviewers reacted positively at the time of it's release:
The films look nothing short of fantastic: vastly better than you can have ever seen them before
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/3680820.stm
Why do you think they wrote that---because resolution and sharpness also count.
Quality control also encompasses those factors too.
I saw Star Wars in 1977. Many, many, many times. For 3 years it was just Star Wars...period. I saw it in good theaters, cheap theaters and drive-ins with those clunky metal speakers you hang on your window. The screen and sound quality never subtracted from the excitement. I can watch the original cut right now, over 30 years later, on some beat up VHS tape and enjoy it. It's the story that makes this movie. Nothing? else.
http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=SkAZxd-5Hp8
