chyron8472 said:

My question is: How do you/Puggo know that Puggo's 16mm is unfaded? Is it standard for film that when it fades, it red shifts (as opposed to blue shifts or else fades uniformly)?

All I'm saying is that I wonder how one declares any such print as unfaded. How can you be certain that Puggo's print is the actual original color?

Please, forgive my ignorance.

Personally, I'd rather defer to Adywan's grasp of common sense regarding proper coloring over relying on the color of potentially improperly maintained prints.

Suffice it to say, Adywan... to quote Star Trek IV: I "feel safer about your guesses than most other peoples' facts."

I am glad someone asked this question, because I to was wondering how it was determined that the 16mm film is the correct unfaded colour.

I know, in reading articles, that film ages even when kept under lock and key in a vault.

However, in the age of computers it can be corrected. Film makers such as Kodak ect... know how the colour shifts based upon the degradation of the chemicals of the film itself. They even know it down to the date of manufacture and type of film that was used. Using that data, the computer can automatically correct.

Was something like this used for Puggo's 16mm film? Is there a color distortion from the 35mm to 16mm conversion when it was originally made? Is there a reason the 1997 ESB:SE release is not being used for colour matching?

Again, this is not meant as a criticism just some questions into the technical aspects behind the project.

I to am anxious to view the film as close to the original colour as possible.

Matticon