logo Sign In

Harmy's STAR WARS Despecialized Edition HD - V2.7 - MKV (Released) — Page 334

Author
Time

OK, I looked into why the (R) in the Fox logo appears first and found that while it is part of the original Fox logo's compositing, it doesn't appear that way in SW, because the fade in and fade out were re-timed in Star Wars to make room for the Lucas film logo while the fanfare is still playing, so I went to my AE Project file for the first quarter of the movie and fixed this.

This means that I'm officially announcing that the BD version will be v2.5.

Author
Time

Harmy said:

This means that I'm officially announcing that the BD version will be v2.5.

And just to be completely sure, there will be a v2.5 AVCHD also, right?

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Likely, but so far the only change is the Fox logo, so if it remains the only change, it would seem pointless but I'm sure that now that the box is opened, there will be more changes to follow; and in that case I'm gonna do a v2.5 AVCHD as well.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Okay, Harmy. You asked me to put up screenshots comparing the AVCHD from the M4V Handbrake made for me at RF21. I was going to do that, but then I noticed that yes, looking at both of them side-by-side I can tell the difference.

=\ All I know is that I want to put all my movies on my PS3, and it doesn't support files larger than 4GB.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

Harmy said:

Are you sure your TV's brightness and contrast are calibrated properly? I have to turn my TV's brightness way up to see the line. This would also cause the grain in the logos to be more intrusive.

The flickering is there and I'm well aware of it and I don't know how or why it happened but it's only in a few shots (I can't recall any beyond those you mentioned) and would probably again be exaggerated by improperly set contrast.

I'll check my contrast and brightness later, but I don't think they're pumped up. My TV is known to suffer from rising black levels, so I wonder if that's an issue.

You know of the rebellion against the Empire?

Author
Time

chyron8472 said:

Okay, Harmy. You asked me to put up screenshots comparing the AVCHD from the M4V Handbrake made for me at RF21. I was going to do that, but then I noticed that yes, looking at both of them side-by-side I can tell the difference.

=\ All I know is that I want to put all my movies on my PS3, and it doesn't support files larger than 4GB.

Lair!

Author
Time

Erikstormtrooper said:

Harmy said:

Are you sure your TV's brightness and contrast are calibrated properly? I have to turn my TV's brightness way up to see the line. This would also cause the grain in the logos to be more intrusive.

The flickering is there and I'm well aware of it and I don't know how or why it happened but it's only in a few shots (I can't recall any beyond those you mentioned) and would probably again be exaggerated by improperly set contrast.

I'll check my contrast and brightness later, but I don't think they're pumped up. My TV is known to suffer from rising black levels, so I wonder if that's an issue.

Well, black levels set too high would do exactly that.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

darth_ender said:

chyron8472 said:

Okay, Harmy. You asked me to put up screenshots comparing the AVCHD from the M4V Handbrake made for me at RF21. I was going to do that, but then I noticed that yes, looking at both of them side-by-side I can tell the difference.

=\ All I know is that I want to put all my movies on my PS3, and it doesn't support files larger than 4GB.

Lair!

 

:D

 

It's not a big difference, but you can see it when they're side by side.

 

I didn't notice artifacts, but I did notice a difference in grain/fine detail. The amount of grain/detail on the left of R2's dome is different, as well as the left of Vader's helmet.

(click thumbnails to enlarge)

 

 

 

 

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

Well, if the changes are small enough, you presumably could make a patch of it for everyone that's already grabbed 2.1 and someone make a new torrent with the updated 2.5 version AVCHD so the 2.1 stops getting served after that...

Author
Time

sorry for the off topic post.

thanks for verifying that I have the 1.0.

can someone from the US private message me? maybe even someone from California?

Thanks!

Author
Time

Just wanted to chime in and ask if the 2004 dvd commentary track is supposed to have the people speaking being drowned out with the film soundtrack just after the death star explodes? Just got done watching it and it's really difficult to hear what people are saying after that point.

Edit: watching it until the end you realize there are two different tracks playing at the same time.

What’s the internal temperature of a TaunTaun? Luke warm.

Author
Time

Noticed when checking out your screencaps Harmy, that you seemed to have used what must be the GOUT for (0-42-05-01)?

DeEdv2

SWE LD (Technidisc)

Now, I haven't seen it in motion yet so the loss of detail here might be perfectly acceptable and blend in much better compared to utilizing a low-res DVNR-free LD source with its own set of shortcomings, and I guess 35mm sources might come available for you, but I just thought I would throw it out there in case you want me to upload the LD source for this transitional shot, it's hard for me to tell but it is possible if you or someone did a quick upscaling and videonoise reduction you would get a much better result than the GOUT footage there. Although, as with the infamous Mos Eisley pass by shot there's the trouble with the actual speeder element ending up being somewhat less detailed. :(

We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions. 

Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com

Author
Time

Erikstormtrooper said:

  • On my TV, I see a faint green line at the top of the screen during the text crawl.

I also spotted this line, it is in 2.0 also, making the black levels a little darker on my tv eliminated the line.

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

msycamore said:

Although, as with the infamous Mos Eisley pass by shot there's the trouble with the actual speeder element ending up being somewhat less detailed. :(

How does the 1985 CAV P&S LD look here? I'm not home right now, so I can't check my copy.

If there's a frame with a full shot of the speeder, then Harmy could use that to replace the Technidisc or GOUT speeder (via tracking, etc.) with a much more detailed "model".

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time

2.5 - nice! ...if the title is the only minor change, I don't see a huge deal leaving the AVCHD "as is."

 

Author
Time

I really don't see much difference there, except the Technidisc shot being blurrier and less detailed on the speeder.

Author
Time

Harmy said:

I really don't see much difference there, except the Technidisc shot being blurrier and less detailed on the speeder.

the shadows in foreground rocks are deeper in the Technidisc and the background feels more detailed in the color variation of the blurs, though that's a bit more subjective.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Yeah, but in movement I don't think it would make a noticeable difference. The speeder on the other hand...

Author
Time

The speeder's very noticeably more detailed in the De2.1, and as that's the most stable element of the shot, it's the most important part to be detailed. I doubt its worth it to redo the shot if you needed to composite the HD speeder into the LD rock blurs, but maybe put it on a wishlist for revisiting if you do a 3.0.

Author
Time

box said:

I doubt its worth it to redo the shot if you needed to composite the HD speeder into the LD rock blurs, but maybe put it on a wishlist for revisiting if you do a 3.0.

No need.  3.0 is going to be 100% GOUT-free - all HD sources!

Well, that's my dream anyway... :)

“In the future it will become even easier for old negatives to become lost and be “replaced” by new altered negatives. This would be a great loss to our society. Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten.” - George Lucas

Author
Time

I think it actually looks pretty decent in motion too, FWIW :)

One question/thought on the film scan for the sandcrawler coming over the hill. First, let me just say it looks good as it is, and I really dig knowing it came from an actual film cel scan :)

Was that color corrected in any of the editions? Maybe it's just me, but it seems a tiny bit bright. Almost like it could use a tiny bit less brightness, tiny bit more something, maybe tiniest little bit towards green with the hue, I don't know. If this has already been hashed out, forgive me!

Author
Time

@analog: The brightness and color of it were determined from the references.

re 3.0: Yes, if I did a v3.0, there would be no GOUT footage in it - it would be all 35mm.

Author
Time

I downloaded (and am currently seeding) the 2.1 AVCHD at the spleen and it looks awesome.  Practically every tiny little thing you could think of that wasn't quite right before has been taken care of, and the movie has never come this close to visual perfection, especially in terms of colour timing.  I salute you, Harmy, for doing such amazing work, because it most definitely paid off in the best possible way.  :)

 

It's just as well if there's going to be yet another release, though, because there's something I want to do to for the audio as well.  For the sake of my academic career in sound I recently obtained a new Macbook Pro in order to be able to run Pro Tools, the professional recording software, and this means I'm now able to make use of the official DTS-HD MA encoder suite as well.  The AC3 copy of the original '77 stereo mix which I provided for the Despecialized Edition was made from the analogue capture, because the digital version has numerous defects such as audio dropouts and pitch distortion which have gone uncorrected.  The source for the analogue capture reportedly contains these same defects, but since Belbucus had already corrected them all, the simplest solution was to use his version instead, since to my ear the errors make for an unacceptable listening experience.

However, when I went to encode the various mixes of the movie in DTS-HD MA for the Bluray release, I decided to listen again to the digital version of the stereo mix and compare it in fine detail to the analogue capture.  As expected, the digital does show a slight increase in overall fidelity, but my main discovery was far more significant and startling: the analogue capture has actually been dynamically compressed to a great extent in certain scenes.

What the reasoning for this is I don't know, though perhaps it has something to do with available headroom on analogue laserdisc audio compared to 35mm Dolby Stereo on film.  Other parts of the tracks seem virtually identical, but there are numerous places in the film where the levels have been brought down significantly, and this leaves them sounding underpowered in comparison.  Without even closer inspection, I can't say for sure whether the track has been put through a compressor to reduce the peaks or whether someone simply sat there with a fader and manually reduced the gain of the whole mix when they felt the levels were getting too high; but I'm starting to suspect it was the latter, since in one scene I can actually hear the level go back up by a large amount after first being much quieter—this happens in an obvious and obtrusive way and definitely isn't supposed to sound like that, so either way someone wasn't paying attention at the board!

What this all boils down to is that the dynamics of the digital version have clearly not been tampered with, and that it represents the 35mm stereo mix more accurately than the analogue version.  Because of that, I'm taking it upon myself to remove all the defects in order to provide the best possible copy.  Had I been aware of this discrepancy sooner, I would have done this a long time ago, but I had previously believed the two tracks to be identical.

Thus far in the digital version I have identified 13 audio dropouts, two instances of pitch distortion due to tape damage, and one spot in which the entire stereo image shifts radically to the left due to the right channel dropping in level before returning to what it should be.  I'm not nearly as experienced or capable as Belbucus when it comes to audio work, so left to my own devices I'd probably have been at a loss to correct these errors, but since he took care of them all in the analogue capture already, all I really have to do is splice in short sections of that version to cover them up (making sure, of course, to level-match the two for a seamless transition).

As soon as I have more time I'll be taking care of this, and then uploading DTS-HD MA encodes of the stereo, mono, and '93 mixes for use on the upcoming Bluray.  The '85 and 70mm mixes have been provided already, I believe.  There is a slight problem in that I'm not actually able to listen to the resulting files once they're encoded, but since I have the official DTS software and its verification capability, there shouldn't be any problems.