Complete Comparison of Special Edition Visual Changes — Page 42

Wow, yet another completely unnecessary tinker is found. There are probably still more, unfortunately.

none said:

This could be an example of EU clarification.  One costume, two characters.  http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Saurin

Yeah, that could've been an explanation for it but there are more glimpses of this alien race in the cantina where both are in the same shot and got their green shirts colored red. See the "Sorry about the mess" scene for one example, I'm more amazed they actually bothered doing it at all in such quick glimpses these characters appear in, it's inconsistently done and doesn't follow any logic, but at this time I guess we've become used to this when it comes to his "enhancements" of the films.

What's so bizarre about this one IMO is that it's a thing only discovered by accident or sheer coincidence, a thing like this can or should normally never be spotted if you're not an obsessed "Saurin freak" that is, so why go through all the trouble. One things for sure, Lucas really have his priorities on what needs ILM's attention. :)

none said:

different line of questioning:

I stumbled upon it by accident when matching the aspect ratio of my Technidisc LD against the 2004 transfer.

How close of an alignment between the two are you getting with this? Are you trying to do the whole movie or just pieces? Asking as a DIF comparison is on my to do list, but haven't organized enough to find two versions which align in a semi-meaningful way to return an understandable result.

I got it fairly close, as close as you can get it really with all the warping. I only needed to do this correction on some segments in that transfer, see here: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/STAR-WARS-Special-Widescreen-Edition-Technidisc/post/584419/#TopicPost584419

It actually doesn't align precisely in that sense you might think, it's still different in framing/cropping compared to the '04 transfer, but sometimes it align pretty damn well, especially compared to GOUT which distortion is quite severe sometimes. So what is this planned DIF comparison of yours exactly? Maybe the Technidisc laser could be of some help to you.

Are those the only shots we've noticed so far? I'll try to get them added this weekend if I have time.

So, new issue: Has it ever been decided what's up with the scanlines being different on different releases? I'm mainly talking about Leia's hologram in SW. Now, in GOUT, there are some vague horizontal scanlines, but the are also some hardly recognisable vertical scanlines (heavy sharpening can reveal them). Now in this video from the Technidisc LD posted by msycamore, there are very clear horizontal scanlines. In the SE recomped hologram there are only vertical scanlines, so you could conclude that the horizontal scanlines were simply dropped in the SE and only the vertical ones remained, which were pretty vague before and that's why you can't really see them in those low-res LD transfers. And that's all nice and peachy, except that in MV's IB Print references, there's no trace of horizontal scanlines but there are very clear vertical scanlines. What's up with that? Could the low-res scanning process of the LDs have actually created the horizontal scanlines from the slightly tilted vertical ones?

Harmy said:

So, new issue: Has it ever been decided what's up with the scanlines being different on different releases?

Those damn scanlines again... it's a very good question Harmy. I recall seeing them on some 35mm sources but it's interesting that you say that there are no traces whatsoever of such elements on the IB print. My theory was that the low-res quality of the LD transfers tended to exaggerate the effects of them, just see the examples I posted a few pages back with the binocular shot in ESB. But with your statement I now don't know what's going on, how does it appear on Puggo's 16mm transfers? It's a little mystery alright, in ESB the SE broadcasts clearly displays the scanlines on the Emperor for example and I believe Puggo mentioned they are visible on his 16mm transfer as well, so this cannot just be resolution related. Maybe -1 can provide a short video sample from their prints?

doubleofive said:

Are those the only shots we've noticed so far?

No, I noticed a few more in the cantina since I posted those three, I can post the rest of them if you're interested.

You can just post the 04 frames if you want, I can find them from there.

I must say that I'm not entirely sure about the first three, but they surely look suspect when comparing against multiple sources.

In scene order:

^ the saurin's shirt to the left in the bar seems more brownish-red than the original green. But I must admit that I only make that statement now when we know some scenes were tweaked so I don't know.

^ the same thing here, more brownish than green. Mirrored footage or vice versa from the other example posted on the last page.

^ see the shoulder on the one close to the camera, again a more red-brown color, but the overall timing may be the reason for what we are seeing in these three examples. We may need to track down some on-set photos or behind the scenes pics of their costumes if we want to be really sure.

The only one that I'm entirely sure about:

Both were given a red shirt here. This one particularly was a much needed change, fans around the world have clamored that something needed to be done to their shirts for years.

msycamore said:

You have this one mislabeled as an '97 update, it is a 2004 change.

Forgot to mention that even if they still used the original matte shot in the '97 SE, it's still an '97 alteration as the shot was shortened by about 70 frames with the re-editing that took place.

Another one of those digitally moved rank badges in ESB.

Top: GOUT Bottom: 2004 DVD

"But sir, the Hoth system is supposed to be devoid of human forms."

Like all the others it is a 2004 change. If you want to be nitpicky, contrary to what the official site-description says, they're actually moving the badges to the wrong side of the uniform when doing this, as their costumes aren't symmetrical. ;) Not that visible in a shot like this though.

Another 2004 digital recomposite.

Top: GOUT Bottom: 2004 DVD

Comes right after the 33rd change on your list.

Harmy said:

So, new issue: Has it ever been decided what's up with the scanlines being different on different releases? I'm mainly talking about Leia's hologram in SW. Now, in GOUT, there are some vague horizontal scanlines, but the are also some hardly recognisable vertical scanlines (heavy sharpening can reveal them). Now in this video from the Technidisc LD posted by msycamore, there are very clear horizontal scanlines. In the SE recomped hologram there are only vertical scanlines, so you could conclude that the horizontal scanlines were simply dropped in the SE and only the vertical ones remained, which were pretty vague before and that's why you can't really see them in those low-res LD transfers. And that's all nice and peachy, except that in MV's IB Print references, there's no trace of horizontal scanlines but there are very clear vertical scanlines. What's up with that? Could the low-res scanning process of the LDs have actually created the horizontal scanlines from the slightly tilted vertical ones?

Thinking about this again, maybe it is a possibility like you said that the scanlines we are seeing on the Leia hologram on various old video releases is just a moiré pattern of some sort: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moir%C3%A9_pattern but it doesn't look like it to me, they are so clearly defined for being just that, but it's damn weird they are only visible on some versions. Hmm... just when I thought everything was clear regarding this you had to bring this up again. ;)

In '97 they updated the cast credit roll with the voice work by James Earl Jones in addition to his earlier credit in Star Wars and for some reason they also removed Lord from Darth Vader.

top: GOUT bottom: 2004 DVD

Originally, James Earl Jones didn't get a credit until Return of the Jedi, I think '83 was also the first time they got Denis Lawson's name spelled correctly (he's still credited as Dennis in the Special Editions). Oddly enough they never did add a credit for James Earl Jones in the SE of ESB. A different font was also used for the titles for all three films.

"The Special Edition cuts to Luke's fighter a frame before the original does." (1997 Change)*

^ The 2004 transfer actually lost two frames around the reel change here, I checked my '97 transfer and those frames are present there. 1 frame omitted at the end of reel 2 and 1 frame omitted at the beginning of reel 3. Reel 3 begins with the matte-shot. (The 2004 transfer also lost one solid black frame at the end of reel 4) Why these got omitted on such a modern transfer, I don't understand.

"This shot begins one frame earlier in the Special Edition." (1997 Change)*

^ The reason for them not being in sync on the splitscreen you watched, is that this recomped shot below is 1 frame shorter than the original.

none said:

I think there's a different term then moire. (not sure what it is called)  We're not dealing with two overlapping patterns, just the dot display which creates the pattern.

Yeah, that's why I said some sort of moire pattern, even though moire is just that - what you described, because I'm not sure what the term is either. :)

none said:

Take the image below and go into the post editor and grab a corner and scale the images and you'll see how possibly the larger waves of the holograms may have come about.

Yeah, those kind of waves is one thing, but those I'm talking about and those I think Harmy meant, are the thick lines and they looks to me like they are something entirely different and part of the composites. Good examples of the clearly defined horizontal lines of the emperor in this '92 Pan & Scan transfer:

The Vader holo in the walker also have these lines, and I'm pretty sure this is how they were made and not something created out of resizing and contrast, the holograms of the officers in ESB appears to have only vertical ones though. Maybe fine detail like this isn't visible on some prints due to the contrast that builds up in the internegative and print stages and on some video transfers due to DNR or poor vertical or horizontal detail. The only logical explanation I can think of. Maybe Lucas himself could chime in on this?

This is a fascinating thread.

The hologram effect is pretty simple, IMO. It's just a filmed element off of a television. The image on the television is all black except for the main hologram object (and they probably used mattes around the unused portion of the tv screen to avoid unwanted light spill), and this film fx element is simply superimposed over the main set element. No matting required since the hologram is trancelucent.

The television gives you that look of rows of pixels and the scan line "waves" - whose effect is caused by the difference in frame rates, but can be fine tuned to one's liking by adjusting the shutter on the film camera from the normal 180° to something else. I'm guessing they would have to close the shutter more.

Now, here's what I'm thinking which might explain the difference in patterns throughout the years. The original effect was probably shot on film and telecinéd to videotape, and then filmed off of a tv for the original effect. When they went in to recomposite everything in 97, they skipped the filmed off a tv element and went straight for the original film. The video effect was then added using computers.

Perhaps one should check the moment when the hologram distorts when it's turned on and off and see if the distortion is exactly the same between pre and post 97. It looks like the original effect was created by simply mucking with the tv signal. If the whole tv image was recreated in 97, they would have had to recreate that with cgi.

Having actually combined the two, I can tell you with certainty that the distortion is identical in the original and SE. And anyway, the issue we were talking about is differences between different releases of the original, not the SE.

This change/difference may surprise you, at least it did surprise me. A recomposite have taken place of this shot at some point,

first frame of the shot:

the one at the top is from the Special Collection LD, the 2nd is from GOUT. As you can see, the timing of the white spots/ships are different. Both Puggo Grande and Moth3r's bootleg match the Special Collection ('80's home video transfers) Puggo Krig is blown out making it impossible to compare, haven't watched anyone of the other sources out there yet. The composite we're seeing in the THX transfer (GOUT and Technidisc LD) is actually more crude - the first row of ships disappear and reappear for some frames, the other composite have some anomalies on the planet instead. When this change occured I have no idea, maybe for the '81 re-release. It never ends... ;)

I don't think Harmy or anyone else cares about this one though, you only notice the difference when going through it frame-by-frame really. But it's fascinating that these subtle differences exists even on older prints, this may actually be a case of a '77 variation. And no matter what, Harmy's I believe is yet another composite. ;)

msycamore said:

...and for some reason they also removed Lord from Darth Vader.

The answer to this can be found in zombie's book.

msycamore said:

This change/difference may surprise you, at least it did surprise me. A recomposite have taken place of this shot at some point,

first frame of the shot:

the one at the top is from the Special Collection LD, the 2nd is from GOUT. As you can see, the timing of the white spots/ships are different. Both Puggo Grande and Moth3r's bootleg match the Special Collection ('80's home video transfers) Puggo Krig is blown out making it impossible to compare, haven't watched anyone of the other sources out there yet. The composite we're seeing in the THX transfer (GOUT and Technidisc LD) is actually more crude - the first row of ships disappear and reappear for some frames, the other composite have some anomalies on the planet instead. When this change occured I have no idea, maybe for the '81 re-release. It never ends... ;)

here's our version, it matches the GOUT mostly..

--------------------------------------------------------------

later

-1

Isn't it possible that the difference was somehow caused by the DVNr on the GOUT? I'm surprised it didn't delete the ships altogether.

Not if it also appears that way on the Technidisc version.