logo Sign In

STAR WARS: EP V "REVISITED EDITION"ADYWAN - 12GB 1080p MP4 VERSION AVAILABLE NOW — Page 1105

Author
Time
 (Edited)

@wexter sorry it was cut off at the top bar to show difference in distances above the bridge

@Alanfae yeah on purpose or not it's the lens effect that is causing the appearance of difference in distance...

you also are right on the flip... Because the lighting direction and as muddy knees pointed out...

But to flip that reveal shot adds more weight to either remove it entirely and replace or make it grey and a star destroyer at least that is what I keep coming to when thinking of it.

The problem of making it a star destroyer is the executor camp will be looking at a grey executor... even if you flip it and recolour it... It's burnt in

The star destroyer camp have always been used to seeing the blue star destroyer so it should not make much odds to them really?

Wexter said:

But you do realize there really is no difference in distances, right?

YEP clear as a bell my point was it was not an angular appearance of difference 
Author
Time

But you do realize there really is no difference in distances, right?

Author
Time

Come back Chewie's foot particles all is forgiven.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Bingowings said:

Come back Chewie's foot particles all is forgiven.

School Boy error bingo

The snow particle of which you speak dislodged itself from in between chewies toes and blew onto the lens of the camera on the miniatures set... Although it looks like a star it is in fact the very same snow particle.

Since it looks quite similar and does not stand out as being too unlike the stars in the picture ILM never bothered to remove it.

Author
Time

Anyone else think Ady's just sitting on his hands enjoying watching another "great debate" unfold? It's been so long since there's been anything worth arguing over on this board that it's good to see again. Am I the only one who wants ROTJ:R to start just so there's fresh things to fight over?

 

If once you start down the dark path... wear comfortable shoes.

Author
Time

Darth Stewie said:

Anyone else think Ady's just sitting on his hands enjoying watching another "great debate" unfold? It's been so long since there's been anything worth arguing over on this board that it's good to see again. Am I the only one who wants ROTJ:R to start just so there's fresh things to fight over?

I want ROTJ:R to start cause it will mean ESB:R's long journey to being finished is past!

“Lifes a song you don’t get to rehearse, and every single verse can make it that much worse”

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Thinking Laterally....

It's a better idea if any flipping of shots happens... Then the Reveal should be left in tact and the horizontal Executor travelling left to right and any other subsequent shots with errors should be flipped in preference of flipping the reveal in my opinion.

The empire arrives at Hoth travelling from Right to left so the executor and the fleet for continuity should mirror this and the reveal should be treated as correct and all other shots should be fixed in terms of lighting direction and improving the flow.

How about that idea as a better alternative?

Or do a lot of people just want to pick at the first shot because they want it to be a star destroyer?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

 

adywan, although I'm gonna be satisfied with *either* way this whole 'Executor' vs 'standard Stardestroyer' issue turns out, I've now come to a conclusion about what my own preference would really be, for what it's worth. :) 

To recap how I've been used to imagining this sequence play out over the years - as just another 'standard' Stardestroyer that was part of the overall 'regrouping fleet', which eventually is the one that gets 'overshadowed'...but was then uncertain once I saw the haphazard colour-timing of the 2004 release...and was even more uncertain when I then came across the older 1997 'Special Edition' screenshots showing an even 'bluer' hue to the 'bridge tower' close-up than the 2004 release -making it *seem* like the 'Executor' after all...at which point it was confirmed to me that you had colour-corrected your AVCHD 'Theatrical' release to definitely show a whiter 'standard' Stardestroyer after all - which resolved things for me thankfully...until you muddied the waters for me all over again, lol.

But I gotta admit that *this* particular discrepancy below which was first highlighted by Niflamol on page 1102 started to niggle me when he brought it up...and I see it's been mentioned by others too -  

Niflamol said:

Hi,

Isn't it odd that the light change direction when we assume that this is the executor?

My only suggestion is to flip the shot so everything is in place.  Executor will have the sun from its left and it will keep its present direction, with the rest of the shots.

When the 'bridge tower' was simply imagined to be part of the 'standard Stardestroyer' that ends up underneath the 'Executor'...then the direction of the 'light source' on the 'close-up' shot nicely matched that of the 'overshadowed' shot of the 'standard Stardestroyer' that immediately followed it.  And all was well.

But as Niflamol said, if this 'bridge tower' is coloured to be part of the 'Executor' instead, then the 'light source' on it will be the *opposite* to how it appears when we come to the 'underbelly' and 'side-on' views of it shortly afterwards.

I seem to remember that you once mentioned that you weren't too fussed about certain 'lighting discrepancies' throughout these movies, because it was not possible/or too time-consuming to fix absolutely every instance of them...and that's absolutely understandable...but I reckon this particular one would really stick out as jarring between the shots now, compared to how the 'light source' worked fine when it was supposedly a 'standard Stardestroyer' close-up.

So my conclusion is this - *if* you decide to definitely keep the shot's movement exactly as it is currently, where the close-up of the 'bridge tower' is moving in a downwards motion from RIGHT to LEFT of the screen...then I'd prefer to see it kept 'white' like a 'standard Stardestroyer' to match the next shot's lighting...

...however, *if* you decide to definitely make that 'bridge tower' a blue colour to confirm it's part of the 'Executor'...then I'd prefer to see the shot (and it's motion) 'flipped' as Niflamol and others suggested...even if it means the 'gathering fleet' above it are moving the opposite way to how we're used to seeing things too. 

(Yes, the detailing on the back of the 'bridge tower' will be an exact reversal of the way it currently is, if you go with this choice...but I don't know of any footage or behind-the-scenes miniature shots that would contradict this anyway, so it would work fine...and I think I'd rather see things 'flipped' in this shot if you go with this option, rather than be distracted every time by the particularly obvious 'lighting' contradiction between the shots that this would throw up otherwise)

* alternatively * - While drafting this up, I've just read Ronster's suggestion of 'flipping' all the various shots that follow the current motion of the original 'fleet reqrouping'/'bridge tower' shot...which is certainly an option to maintain the 'light source' continuity if you decide on that.  But I reckon that's a bit much to be honest, and would prefer to *only* 'flip' the first shot, if you choose to make the 'bridge tower' blue.

 

Either way, I'm certainly gonna be interested in what your final decision will be on this one. :)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I have no idea how many shots would actually need to be flipped if the original reveal was left intact and treated as correct but shots of the star destroyers would not always need flipping as there are star destroyers on either side.

So It may only be the executor travelling left to right that would need to be flipped and the underbelly I think.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

On the whole light source direction thing...... I guess everyone has forgot the shot of the belly of the Executor where the light source is completely different compared to the following shot? ;) And throughout the whole film the light sources are different between shots. For one example, when the stardestroyer is chasing after the falcon after it leaves Hoth.

ANH:REVISITED
ESB:REVISITED

DONATIONS TOWARDS MATERIALS FOR THE REVISITED SAGA

Author
Time

Good point. But since you fixed most of the light direction errors, for continuity reasons, why not fix that light position by flipping the shot?

Author
Time

I think ImperialFighter sums it up perfectly, there are about three possible ways one could lay out the scene/sequence - depending on your preferred point of view ;-)

 

@Ronster: I made a collage of different shots, though some details seems different, it is always the same ship ...

Author
Time
 (Edited)

 

adywan said:

On the whole light source direction thing...... I guess everyone has forgot the shot of the belly of the Executor where the light source is completely different compared to the following shot? ;) And throughout the whole film the light sources are different between shots. For one example, when the stardestroyer is chasing after the falcon after it leaves Hoth.

True, the shot of the 'Executor's underbelly is lit very differently to how it looks in the wide shot that we immediately cut to afterwards, and that's a good example to mention. (I've shown the enhanced 'Revisited' version at the bottom)

Thankfully, you've been able to nicely match the look of those 2 shots together now...but I just think it'd be a pity if we ended up with a different, even more jarring example of badly matching lighting in it's place, than the underbelly shots were (depending on which option you decide on, of course).

Anyway, here's the actual shot sequence from the 2004 release so everyone can properly study the 'lighting' throughout at a glance, and the link to the latest preview clip (which I've still to go into sometime) is at the bottom to see how things move in motion once again, too -

Light source hits the right-hand side of this 'bridge tower' -

Light source also hits the right-hand side of these ships (*note* - this is very start of shot, before the shadow of the 'Executor' affects the lit half of the nearest one)  -

And this is approx. the end of the above shot, where we now see the 'Executor's shadow on the lit half of the hull -

And this is the start of the next shot as the 'Executor's shadow now begins to envelop the 'bridge tower' seen here, too -

And this is approx. the end of the above shot -

And the 2 halves of the underbelly of the 'Executor' are badly lit at this point -

Whereas the 2 halves of the underbelly are better lit during this shot, in a way which makes it (correctly) seem as if the overall lighting is still coming from the right-hand side of the Stardestroyer beneath it -

 

And here's adywan's correctly-matching version of the 2 underbelly shots -

And here's the link to the actual clip again - http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=415356061905210 

Author
Time

^ Watched it again and I'm even more firmly on the Executor bridge side. It's the movement that sells it for me. The bridge moves, then the shadow moves, then the executor moves... therefore all 3 are the same thing.

How about a vote just for sh*ts and giggles. All of you repost the follow at the end of your posts with your vote/names added...

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

Votes for Executor-Bridge:

= Ryan,

Votes for SD-Bridge:

=

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

(Remember to repost the latest ^ one so the list of names keeps growing, got it??)

Then we can see how this thing goes down.

VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.

Author
Time

 

Votes for Executor-Bridge:

= Ryan,

Votes for SD-Bridge:

= Niflamol (unless a flipped shot of the executor),

 

Author
Time

I'm pretty sure if Ady wants a vote we can do it a little better than that. Please don't clog the thread with this.

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress

Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Putting it to a vote is a silly thing to do. 

Ady can do what he likes. ESB:R isn't going to be any worse if it's the Executor rather than a normal SD.
As I said, I can see it going either way, but even if it was intended to be Executor, it was done poorly. And making the tower ever so slightly blue not only doesn't really fix any issues with the scene, it just raises more questions. It just doesn't seem to be in Ady's nature to purposely exacerbate a problem with a scene/shot in Star Wars.

Author
Time

If the end result is unsatisfying for me (for this particular topic) then I can just fix that one part myself and have ESB:R the way I prefer. It IS a fanedit afterall. So I don't particularly care how it turns out as long as progress happily continues so the release can finally happen! I'm pumped for it.

“Lifes a song you don’t get to rehearse, and every single verse can make it that much worse”

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The points about the lighting and movement of objects in space are of course very good observations for the flow/continuity of shots and for helping the audience locate where they are. When seeing something for the first time, though, it's also important to have the revealing sequence done properly - a "grand entrance", especially if it's of something important. And just in my humble opinion, it would feel more dramatic if the shadow were the first reveal of the Executor, rather than first seeing its blue bridge (a bridge we have already seen before, therefore only suspecting it to be just another SD, along with the others we see in this same shot). I view the entering bridge as a ploy, to remind you just how big these are on the SDs, only to soon show it being engulfed by a shadow.

*If* we actually saw a part of the Executor before seeing that shadow, it'd be more expertly-done if it wasn't of something we are already familiar with (the bridge). But what else without mimicking the beginning of ANH? This is why I believe the shadow is the perfect starting point, because it is showing us something new without first showing exactly what it is; from there, it is gradually revealed, more and more, what this new monstrosity is.

This kind of revealing could also be comparable to when we view the AT-AT reveal...

First, the Rebel troops look out to an empty snow horizon, but they see nothing (we instantly begin anticipating something will happen here - all we know is there will be a "surface attack").

Later, we see that same snowy horizon and this time we do see ambiguous "dots" out there (the audience is now wondering what those are).

Then, we get a (hazy) first-person glimpse via binoculars showing a bit more of what these "dots" are (with this, we learn that these "dots" are actually massive and they are "Imperial walkers").

Finally, we get a much closer and clearer view of these walkers as they begin opening fire (and the battle begins).

Notice the flow and the build up? This has always stood out as outstanding to me. It goes from something very ambiguous/unknown, to gradually teasing us with more until we eventually see the whole object(s). It's this gradual building-up of shots that also builds up the tension, especially when revealing something monumental (To me, the Executor is no exception). It wouldn't make as much sense to mix that AT-AT reveal in any other order (such as first showing the Binocs shot, then showing these "dots" on the horizon, then seeing their full bodies) - You go from very small/unknown to bigger/known.

Even though I could certainly live with and respect Ady's decision if he has the opening bridge as the Executor's (and also having this shot be mirrored, so it's moving from left to right, is a good idea), to me it makes more sense (in terms of the narrative) to let the shadow be the first reveal (something unfamiliar to us, unlike a SD bridge), and from there we increasingly see more of it. Does this make sense to anyone else? Because what's at stake is how the Executor is first revealed to us.

I don't know if he will, but if Adywan were to ever have a poll, it may be better on Facebook where more people can find it and have the opportunity to vote. Maybe if he posted a question along the lines of (without bias): "At the sequence when Darth Vader's massive super star destroyer, the Executor, is first revealed in ESB, which did you interpret as its initial reveal? "Like" if you thought it was that bridge at the opening shot, or "Dislike" if you thought it was that shadow on the Star Destroyer." The problem with a poll is I don't want Ady to feel pressured either way just because of a majority vote, but perhaps it would still be helpful and he could take note. I just want him to choose what he honestly feels will tell this sequence the best.

Wishlist Of Ideas/Suggestions For Improving ROTJ

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Kapheen said:

Regardless, this is Adywan's project, and ultimately his vision of what ESB should have been. If he wants to put taun tauns in space, it's his right. 

(I'm secretly hoping that he sneaks in another battle droid head into the scrap heap on Cloud City, like he did in the Jawa crawler in ANH:R)

BTW I really like this idea... And I wanted to comment earlier but the big debate has swallowed your good idea... But I did not want it to get lost in a sea of opinion about other things that I guess are taking precedence right now.

so I bumped it for you.

Has anyone got anything fresh to add to the debate because it has become circular... In my mind I feel at the moment the possibilities are comprised of 3 choices... But if anyone cares to expand please do.

1. Leave it alone faults intact

2. Leave reveal in tact and flip underbelly and wide shots of executor

3. Remove confusing reveal shot and replace with a traditional SD Reveal (as opposed to flipping or recolouring confusing bridge shot) with option to also flip executor wide shots and underbelly for continuity of arriving at hoth or flip both shadow shots.

That is my final thoughts until something new comes up I am done but to me these are the only options I would personally consider at the moment. I think if it were to become a star destroyer you need to make it a traditional reveal.. But that is perhaps just me.

Being in the executor camp myself I would also like to thank the SD camp for making me see things a different way that never before occurred to me but I don't think you can flip the bridge reveal or re-color it grey sorry.... well you could but it would just look too weird

 

 

Author
Time

If Adywan replaces that IG-88 looking thing with a battle droid it would be a pleasantly surreptitious wink at the prequels.

Author
Time

It might be tricky or impossible to pull off, but it would be cool to see the head of a battledroid on the conveyor belt just ahead of C-3PO's parts.

“Lifes a song you don’t get to rehearse, and every single verse can make it that much worse”