Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

danny_boy said:

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

danny_boy said:

The highest resolution that the assessors could still discern in the sharpest part of the screen(not neccassirily it's center) in the most performing movie theater was about 875 Lines/PH

I could see that, for the "most performing movie theater". I'm not interested in the quality of the "most performing movie theater". That's irrelevant for high quality film restoration. A proper restoration would try to achieve the quality of the highest quality projection, such as in a high end 70mm theater with a brand new print. Do your studies indicate the resolution of high quality 70mm projections of brand new prints?

And 70mm contact printing will suffer the same degradation through an analogue duplication workflow as 35mm.

Point taken, although I still question the "most performing theater" source. I saw SW in three theaters in 1977, with quality ranging from stunning to grungy. And wouldn't I want to get a source from the "least performing" theater? It would seem that a print from there would be less worn out.

I envy you for having been there at the beginning!

Were those all 35mm presentations that you saw ---or was the stunning one a 70mm projection?

I first saw SW in 81'(back to back with ESB) and again in 83' (as part of a triple bill with ESB and ROTJ)---now I would be lying if I said I could remember what the quality of the picture was like on either occasion -----other than the image was huge and spectacular!

Until we can get a roll out of an original 35mm,70mm and digital print---run them side by side and compare them all together---all we can do in the meantime is speculate.