DVD-BOY wrote:
You're looking at 4-6 weeks beforehand to get stock into the logistic and fufillment warehouses.
So this is 4-6 weeks for production, there's also shipping/distribution. Working backwards from Sept. 19, going with 2 weeks for shipping/distribution worldwide (seems low, would crates of disc be shipped overseas by ship or plane?), that's two months which could make the drop dead point for revisions being mid-July 2011. canofhumdingers introduced the Humdinger to the public's attention June 26, so it's possible if LFL didn't know about it before then, they had a small window to fix it.
A VT Op should have spotted the Humdinger glitch
One of the team for the 2004 was asked about the Humdinger and they were unaware of it. Yes LFL had 7 years to spot it, but with all the extra eyes of the public they just barely found it in time. I just don't think it's well known enough to have SW bboards influencing LFL work. I don't think in this recentpress conference anyone would know what the Humdinger was.
TV's Frink wrote: Seriously, I don't understand why people want to defend the 2004 DVDs.
It is fascinating how you've chosen this issue and timing to hardline. "All his life has he posted away... to the off-topic ...to the horizon." This turn of events is almost as fascinating as Adywan's blu-ray.com obsession.
Erikstormtrooper wrote: Ultimately a poor release is still a poor release.
I think the idea DVD-BOY is saying is they go into these with the best of intentions, but when that doesn't happen with something as big as Star Wars with lead times that go years, what other choice is there but be quiet about the mistakes and move onto the next task. The difference this time around is we will be able to see what they've changed between 2004 and now and get a better idea which were actual 'deliberately creative' decisions and those which were just 'opps dang... fudge's'. Once those are figured out, it'll be time to re-evaluate how people discuss the changes over time.
Might as well mention it here, but Lowry in 2004 was expecting to rescan the films for the future HD-DVD release: link via: boards.theforce.net
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article/restorer-star-wars-trilogy-and-thx-1138-john-lowry
Posted October 1, 2004
But the high-def digital material was fine for the standard-resolution DVD release?Yes. My guess, knowing George, is that maybe he'll be back when they do the HD-DVD
From the same article answer this:
captainsolo wrote:
Hmm...Lowry did talk about cleaning up the negatives...sooo they did work with o-negs?
Did George Lucas actually let you borrow the original camera negatives of his Star Wars films to do your high-resolution scan for the restoration?No. We sent one of our 6-terabyte servers up to Skywalker Ranch in San Rafael , California, where they loaded it with full RGB [red, green, and blue] data without having to go through the component output that tape masters would demand. We processed those images, cleaned them up, and sent them back in little packages of discs. The net result was that we never lost a bit in the process of moving all the data back and forth, and we were able to work on full high-definition-bandwidth imagery. It was an unusual approach, but we got some pretty stunning results.
corellian77 wrote: If enough people vote with their wallets and don't buy a product
Equating money changing hands with Voting is dangerous. Actions speak, talking can convince others, but this issue involves a little more and a bunch of luck since the resources are so scarce.
So this San Fran press event went down Friday, and there's no articles or blog posts about it yet, everyone's checking their punctuation on this one.
*EDIT*
Thinking about these 360 views of models and locations, you wonder if this is a test to see if the fan editing public can figure out a way to take those shots and figure out how to use them in people's movies. If that could be figured out in a semi easy to use fashion, it would definitely speed up production on the live action tv show, something they supposedly need for cutting the costs but getting the level of production they'd like. The 360 shots (if they include up and down, not just spin information, more of a panorama) could be dropped into shots. they wouldn't cast the right shadows as they are flat, but... thinking out loud.