Ok, but didn’t Mike do something like superposing/averaging Tech prints (supposed to be made by the same IP ?) to get a level of detail which is not on one of them individualy ?

There’s a video showing the Tantive’s door were we see very small details. Can a 4K scan of a very good print be as sharp as it is ?

So, what we call original negative is not the image directly captured by the camera for each shot.
What you say about the SE remastering is very interesting. Is this true only for recomposited shots of for all the film ? In this case, how faithful is the way of using the 2004 master for a restauration of the OT ?

I learn a lot about cinematographic technics on this forum and I’m surely not alone. 😉