Making our own 35mm preservation--my crazy proposal — Page 55

-1: Excellent job! Please start the new thread. I have a few questions and a dirt/dust removal AviSynth script I'd like to share with you. (It's a motion-compensated version of what I used for my now-defunct SWOLT project.)

AntcuFaalb said:

-1: Excellent job! Please start the new thread. I have a few questions and a dirt/dust removal AviSynth script I'd like to share with you. (It's a motion-compensated version of what I used for my now-defunct SWOLT project.)

thanks.

yeah, well when we're a little closer to the final

stage, we'll kick it off.

all discussions of scripts can be (and should be)

done over here in the the technical forum. we

started a cleaning up dirty frames one already:

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

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/cleaning-up-dirty-frames-for-scenes/topic/14044/

please post there..

yeah, technical talk spills over into the general

release thread.

from what i've seen every major release thread

boils down to these:

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

1) where/how can i get it?

2) great job / amazing /excellent, thank you!

3) what's next?

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

and that's what that thread will pretty much be....

along with the details, etc.

i'm more interested in reading about people's reactions

and stories about it... that's all i would be checking in on.

because once it's done, there won't really be any more

status updates to make.

later

-1

-1: OK, I'll post it there when I get home tonight. It works very well and manages to retain small details (unlike DeSpot), but cleans too much in shots composed mostly of stars. If you choose to use it, I'd suggest using it on non-space shots.

Perhaps a 70mm print...from which to extract the 70mm mix????


EDIT: ah nm, -1 denies any 70mm print.

red5-626 said:

I know what it is.

This guy has the missing

seen of Luke missing with

the grappling hook. LOL

 

You know, all those people who saw it in May of '77 can't all be imagining things....

Considering the changes in the credits and the sound mixes, it wouldn't surprise me if the grappling hook shot really happened, but only on certain prints in the limited release...

1990osu said:

red5-626 said:

I know what it is.

This guy has the missing

seen of Luke missing with

the grappling hook. LOL

 

You know, all those people who saw it in May of '77 can't all be imagining things....

Considering the changes in the credits and the sound mixes, it wouldn't surprise me if the grappling hook shot really happened, but only on certain prints in the limited release...

if we had the 'misses throwing the grappling hook'

scene. you would be the first to know. since it never

existed. obviously that's not it. haha

later

-1

hairy_hen said:

negative1 said:

70mm theatrical - english (recreation)

Wait, does this mean you'll be using my 5.1 version?  I have no objection, of course, but I thought you said that this wouldn't be synched to the GOUT due to frame count differences, and my version is exactly GOUT-synched.  I guess the lossless files could be edited to match a video of different length, though . . .

hey hairy_hen,

thanks for the offer, we haven't quite gotten to the point where

we can use it. but when the time comes we'll let you know when

we could use the help.

i'm not familiar with the issues for fixing the sound. but we'll

let you know what's up with it, or provide you with an early

version to sync to, or the data you need to make it work.

later

-1

negative1 said:

as i mentioned, its someone that

isn't on this board..

 Ah, so it's Mr. Thief Cobbler himself ;)

other things to think about:

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

1 - image stabilization

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

some shots will be stabilized due to the nature

of the film, whether this was in the original or

not remains to be seen

2 - dirt / dust and scratch cleanup

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

if it's on the print, it will probably stay in there,

unless its very distracting from the film

3 - sprocket damage

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

will be cleaned up

4 - cropping 

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

the standard 5-10% of the image will be done

and this helps with the stabilization also

5 - grain removal / reduction

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

only the harshest scenes will have some grain 

removed if we have sharper frames for them

6 - duplicate, dark, or 'lost' frames 

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

we'll try to match the original reel lengths

(NOT the gout counts) as naturally as possibly

there may be a few extra frames near the

reel breaks

7 - headers and tails

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

will be preserved

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

maybe an index for this would be like

GOUT = 100%

how original is our version?

(shorter is better for image effects,

longer is better for resolution/image size,

if its 100% it should match evenly)

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

0 ----------------------------50------------------------100

total frames

------------------------------------------------------------+

sound resolution (35mm stereo)

------------------------------------------------------------+

resolution (1080p HD)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

noise reduction

----+

image per frame (even with cropping)

-----------------------------------------------------------------+

subtitle placement

-------------------------------------------------------------+

stabilization, jitter, weave

-------------+

anything else?

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

well the colors will be the biggest and most critical issues.

we have the lpp print colors to start with, and now with

harmy's ib tech based DE2.0 for a few more hints, along with

a few other unnamed sources we'll have it pinned down.

whether you think some scenes will be too dark or different

we're still going with what looks best in context of the original

film and the references. of course you can tweak it to your

liking. and as seen in several examples in the cinematography

thread, you can compare it to what we have.

later

-1

i guess the image source quality would

be (from lowest to best)

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

8mm - vhs/beta - ced - 16mm - laserdisc

then

dvd - 35mm /70mm / bluray - ib tech - negatives/original masters

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

so

again with the GOUT at 100%

0--------------------------50--------------------------100

===========+8mm        

======================+vhs/beta/ced          

============================+16mm

================================+laserdisc/dvd

==================================================+35mm/   70mm/bluray

======================================================= IB tech/negatives                                                                              

later

-1

I am glad to see you are going to try and remain true to the original coloring, which in some places is radically different from what we have been seeing on home video.

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

jero32 said:

With the han shot first scene. Is it stil better than the gout (overall) quality wise or is it just technicly a higher resolution?

The video you posted of it looked pretty ok.

it's a lot better.

frankly, the whole movie is on an entirely different

level than the GOUT. seriously, this will set the new

standard for the time being. we're confident that you

won't be mentioning GOUT for a long time at least in

regards to star wars.

this will be apparent in all variations, even the DL DVD,

and the SD ones.... i've watched it on even smaller

resolutions like my zuneHD media player at 480x248, and

EVEN there it looks better! (mostly because of the

colors)...

later

-1