Sign In

Post #591990

Author
negative1
Parent topic
Making our own 35mm preservation--my crazy proposal
Link to post in topic
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/591990/action/topic#591990
Date created
28-Aug-2012, 3:11 AM
Last modified
28-Aug-2012, 3:19 AM
Edited by
negative1
Reason for edit
None provided

so how authentic will it be?

========================================

that's a tough question to answer.

 

it all depends on a certain point of view...

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

what if you restored the 'reel change' marks... well

that wouldn't be true to the film, because they're

actually on the film.. so filling those in is altering

those frames.. so we're leaving those in...

 

what about de-warping and stabilizing images.

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

again, these are digital alterations made to the original

frame data... due to the film shrinking or bending due to

time..the video although straight in the frame, could

compress and decompress and look like warping..

 

of course, we have ways of digitally fixing that so you

would never know that it was changed unless you

looked at the original frames..

 

also, for stabilization, due to the alignment of certain

frames.. like in the crawl for example, you might see

the original picture move slightly.. again, we can

digitally alter the sequence by using fixed points as

references and then continue the animation per frame

to smooth out the shifting.. you wouldn't notice this

also, since we'll be cropping around the edges.

 

isn't fixing the damage altering the images too?

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

yes it is, because when you replace the damage with

pixels or color data from other frames, it's not going

to be original either...

 

the thing is this was probably done for the GOUT anyways,

so even there it's been altered somewhat from the 

'originals'... that's always going to be the trade-off,

better picture quality vs original data.

 

of course, if you watch a completely raw transfer of the

movie (which for the most part, you could for the lpp), you

wouldn't have to think about too much of any kind of 

alterations, besides color corrections mostly to get the

'just projected' type of experience. again the lighting

and colors were meant to imitate the type of bulbs

used back then.. 

 

the pictures going to look soft?

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

yeah, it might. but guess what, when you project it, that

kind of thing happens which compensates for the dust

and scratches on film. the reason it seems that way on

the digital version is you're seeing it at sharper resolution

in some cases than it would seem in a theater. of course

watching it on a monitor/crt or tv, is completely different

from the effect of watching projected film onto a screen.

 

are we going to using sharpening/contrast filters?

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

no we are not. this could introduce more artifacts than were

originally there.  granted, when you do some of the dirt and

dust cleanup, there APPEARS to be either a softening or

sometimes a sharpening effect. these will be minimized,

but most likely this is to emulate the effect of how it would

have appeared projected.

 

are there are any major scenes variations?

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

the opening scene is made from 3 different stocks of films.

the crawl is the original splice in. the flyover is 2 different

lpp prints, and most of the rest of the film is one stock.

the han shoots first scene is also an original red faded

kodak stock. you WILL notice a difference in the quality

of these scenes..

 

any scene that had major composites, like the mos

eisely entry scene, the falcon taking off, will also appear

degraded due to several generations of reproduction.

there will be slight digital alterations of these also..

 

in the end, about 90-95% of the films should be considered

very close to the 'original'... the rest should be negligible

and not easily detected, even if using the GOUT as a 

reference.

 

why not use the Bluray or other high def for references?

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

because due to the nature of those versions, ignoring

the main cg alterations. even then the colors and sharpness

and clarity will not be able to be replicated by us. there

may be some scenes or a few frames that may be of

use. but as a whole we didn't need to refer to them during

the processes.

 

will there be other improvements or revisions, or is this it?

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

for the time being, this will be the 1.0 version. we're making

every effort to not miss out on anything significant so we

don't envision returning to this anytime soon.. unless there

are some future developments?????????????????????????

 

i know there will be several side projects that will be a lot

less serious (like including deleted scenes, or more orignal,

and grindhouse versions).. but those will not be up to the

reference standard. and not be as comprehensive as the

main release.

 

 

we'd like to see how this does, and gauge the response and

interest in it. as we contemplate future projects and releases.

 

later

-1