Do you think Disney will release the unaltered versions for DVD and blue ray? — Page 7

I still don't see what's wrong with using an IP as the basis for restoration. Scanning the negative in this case just doesn't seem worth it to me.

towne32 said:

When comparing SW restoration to the love and attention *some* other major films get, much time has been spent discussing the limitations of restoring the original film. The negatives and elements are obviously in a sorry state. But as far as ESB and Jedi go, is there any reason they can't perform restoration as good as, for instance, Jaws? There is no such thing as flawless, and as stated above, there will always be complaints. They'll have to make decisions that can never please everybody. But a professional quality release should actually be possible for those two, right?

Yes, the reason is this guy:

Yes, it really is that simple. And it goes for all his films. Why this have been and continues to be so hard to grasp for some people I will never understand. It's not like all the films directed by George Lucas are somehow impossible to restore, it's the director and producer who is impossible. It's not just a coincidence that his feature-length directorial debut THX 1138 (just like his other films) last saw a home video release in the early nineties.

Yeah, where are all those threads around the internet who asks, "Do you think Warner Bros will release the unaltered version of THX 1138 on DVD and/or blu-ray?" :)

Yes, his THX is of course nowhere near as important and loved as Star Wars but when scenes cut from the SW-movies are now available in higher resolution than what the films themselves ever has been despite their rough shape, you would think people would get the point. There are cheap pornos out there treated better than Star Wars and Lucas himself is the sole reason behind that.

Fang Zei said:

Do we really think, even for a moment, that she actually wanted to type those words as part of the form reponse letter?

Of course we don't, the level of absurd reached its zenith. Just to give such a response to its fanbase (FUCK YOU) is worthy of preservation on its own. :)

Fang Zei said:

While we're once again on the subject of THX-1138, I continue to wonder if there is anything legally barring WB from releasing the original version, ditto Universal with American Graffiti.

I have no idea, I may be completely wrong about this but I think THX is nowadays fully owned by American Zoetrope, and that distribution rights are still with Warner. And no idea about Graffiti.

It's just sad that he won't let his films be available like all other directors. We know that he doesn't like them, but no one will force him to buy them, right?

The key thing here is Lynne's use of the word "earlier". It implies that the current versions are upgrades rather than alterations and it legitimizes them in consequence.

AntcuFaalb said:

The key thing here is Lynne's use of the word "earlier". It implies that the current versions are upgrades rather than alterations and it legitimizes them in consequence.

"earlier versions" also sounds like a very Lucas-esque way to describe them.

AntcuFaalb said:

I still don't see what's wrong with using an IP as the basis for restoration. Scanning the negative in this case just doesn't seem worth it to me.

 I would prefer that. The more straightforward things are then there will be less opportunities for anyone to mess things up

slask said:

So on one hand I'd love to see new stunning transfers for these three movies, on the other hand I realistically think there are not many chances of seeing state of the art HD remaster without scanning proper source material.

It has been demonstrated that the '77 35mm IB Technicolor release prints have more visible detail than what's available on the current BD.

Disney can acquire (100% of them are in the hands of collectors currently) one and use it as the basis of restoration or they can go back to one of the IP or IN prints they have lying around in the archives and use that.

There's absolutely no need to go back to the negative. It would be nice, yes, but there's enough evidence now for me to say with confidence that it's not a requirement.

pittrek said:

including some Technicolor prints if I remember correctly

Nope. By agreement the one used by LFL in 1995/6 for color-correcting the 97SE was shipped back to the collector they borrowed it from.

What about it?

slask said:

Maybe 35mm prints have more visible detail, but what about the color timing?

IB Technicolor prints take a long time to fade. A really, really, really long time.

So long that it's safe to say that (color-wise, at least) they look exactly as they did in 1977/8.

Eastman Kodak prints... now that's a different story.

slask said:

It that's the case, let's hope so.

That *is* the case and it's why LFL sought one out when color-correcting the 97SE.

I've seen one 4K 35mm IB Technicolor film scan of SW and I know of the existence of at least 3-5 more. They're beautiful.

AntcuFaalb said:

It has been demonstrated that the '77 35mm IB Technicolor release prints have more visible detail than what's available on the current BD.

I am aware that you are bound by "grey area" legalities with regards to divulging who owns these prints-but do you have any screen shots to demonstrate the above?

because that is one hell of a statement.

It would contravene scientific studies which have shown that release prints have resolution significantly lower than HD. 

IB prints could look visibly sharper relative to standard 35mm delux prints---but only because of higher contrast-not because they were  inherently sharp.

the blu ray for all it's lack of adherence to the original color timing-does have very good detail.

If you did an A-B comparison with a 35mm release print-what display were you using for the blu ray( a plasma or LCD tv--or did you screen it in a local cinema)

I am using a 4KSony 1000es projector to upscale the blu ray onto a 77inch screen(still quite small compared  to other high end home theatre enthusiasts)  and I doubt a 4th generation release print(full of optical dupes like Star Wars) would have any where near the same resolution.  

Fang Zei said:

pittrek said:

What are the 2011 Blurays?

Something like : Original negatives -> 1995 scan -> SE digital version -> 1997 SE prints -> 1080p scan with colour "correction" -> Lowry "restoration" -> 1080p DVD master -> more stupid digital changes -> 2011 Bluray master

So yes, the BDs are done from an early century 1080p scans of SE masters, but no, they didn't do it because "original negatives are nowhere to be found" but simply because GL for some reason considered the old horrible looking scans to be "good enough" and didn't want to spend money for doing it correctly.

Even if the rumours that the original negatives were modified to contain 1997 SE material (which I doubt, I simply refuse to believe they were THAT stupid), they still have finished prints of the original theatrical editions (including some Technicolor prints if I remember correctly). Even scanning these prints would be "good enough" for most of us

I think it's been documented that the o-neg was in fact re-conformed for the SE. That is why they were able to just scan it in '04 and all the '97 changes were already there.

 As the negative for Star Wars was cut A / B roll, each and every shot could be easily disconnected from those on either side and replaced or removed, without damage or loss of frames.

However, for the sequels, the modus operandi was for some reason different - interpositives and internegatives was largely the base for their work. That's why you for example at times have loss of frames on either side of a new or enhanced shot in the Special Edition of The Empire Strikes Back but not in Star Wars (ANH).

danny_boy said:

I am using a 4KSony 1000es projector...

I am stunned, actually shocked! Do you actually own a 4K projector!! Why haven't you told us before?!

msycamore said:

I am stunned, actually shocked! Do you actually own a 4K projector!! Why haven't you told us before?!

I also own a laserdisc player(newly acquired), VHS and V2000 player too-quite happy to watch star wars on any of them.