Sign In

Post #915848

Author
towne32
Parent topic
How accurate are the Harmy versions?
Link to post in topic
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/915848/action/topic#915848
Date created
10-Mar-2016, 4:49 PM
Last modified
10-Mar-2016, 4:59 PM
Edited by
towne32
Reason for edit
None provided

Return of the Jedi 2.5 is ridiculously accurate, because Harmy seemed to be comparing every shot to the 35mm print. He discovered recomposited shots that no one had ever noticed before, because they never had a high enough quality source. He also discovered that some shots that we presumed were re-comps were actually not, just well restored.

I know of very few things that he ‘missed’ in “Star Wars” 2.5, but the quality of many of the shots he restored is far lower due to the sources he had at hand.

Empire Strikes Back 2.0 has many recomposited shots (from the Blu-ray) remaining. Since it only slightly affects the positioning of things, he was right to not downgrade them to the GOUT’s sub-480i low quality image. But they’ll probably all be upgraded using 35mm shots in the near future.

But if you’re asking ‘how close is it’ experience wise, focusing on the kinds of changes that the general fanbase would notice, like CGI ships and creatures and other nonsense, then you would consider it 100%. Anything less is what we around here would call ‘semi-specialized’. It’s the finer details that we obsessives notice that end up getting saved for last.

Charles: I know you have a common name, but you wouldn’t happen to be a Doctor Who fan and a film collector? Edit: Based on your posts, I suspect you may be. Great to have you here and welcome to the forum (even if you’re someone else 😃 ).