Sign In

4K restoration on Star Wars — Page 236

Author
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

Careful, saying stuff like that out in the open about a “new” membet might get you a ban from the Thought Police around here these days.

(Also, I’m not sure if it’s Jedi Master Skywalker, greenlanternslight, or both, but at least one of them is definitely JMOW.)

I’m not JMOW

Author
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

Careful, saying stuff like that out in the open about a “new” membet might get you a ban from the Thought Police around here these days.

(Also, I’m not sure if it’s Jedi Master Skywalker, greenlanternslight, or both, but at least one of them is definitely JMOW.)

Please don’t accuse - or allude to - fellow members of being socks or trolls etc in public here on the forum.

If you have any concerns or suspicions about a certain users, PM one of the moderators to let us know.

Or in ChainsawAsh’s case, the Thought Police.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

I find that answer vague and unconvincing. Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves?
Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? And say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

You can’t leak something that was never released in the first place. And even if somebody actually had it, nobody here would put Mike in potential legal hot water by doing such a thing.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

You can’t leak something that was never released in the first place. And even if somebody actually had it, nobody here would put Mike in potential legal hot water by doing such a thing.

True

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

I don’t doubt that all unaltered footage has been preserved digitally, even if it hasn’t been reassembled. I bet every single frame of film shot for all of the movies has been scanned and filed in the Lucasfilm archive.

Hope springs eternal. Didn’t they hack up the OOT negatives to create the SEs?

NeverarGreat said:

Possessed said:

I don’t quite get how high definition is an alteration but okay. What, do they think the original films were shot on vhs or something? That’s a common misconception that bugs the crap out of me with ignorant people, that hi def is a new thing. Sure it’s new for HOME MEDIA but films have always been made at a high resolution, or whatever the analog term for that would be.

I have never seen this misconception except in the case of Star Wars. It’s baffling that it keeps being repeated.

Yeah, it’s really strange.

SilverWook said:

NeverarGreat said:

Possessed said:

I don’t quite get how high definition is an alteration but okay. What, do they think the original films were shot on vhs or something? That’s a common misconception that bugs the crap out of me with ignorant people, that hi def is a new thing. Sure it’s new for HOME MEDIA but films have always been made at a high resolution, or whatever the analog term for that would be.

I have never seen this misconception except in the case of Star Wars. It’s baffling that it keeps being repeated.

There is a belief that “old” movies aren’t HD or won’t look good in HD. It’s not just Star Wars. Not sure where it comes from. The people citing it specifically about the OT are just grasping for straws at this point.

Show them a restoration of an older film and you can quell that pretty quickly. Look at The Wizard of Oz or Gone With the Wind on Blu-ray. They look stunning.

yhwx said:

I think it’s because people hear high definition technology marketed as a new thing and see TV shows shot on tape as the old thing. I’m not sure if people really know how high-quality 35mm film can be.

Given that film will probably be dead by the end of next year, I doubt it.

SilverWook said:

Tv shows are still being shot on tape, only now in HD. Some 70’s sitcoms shot on tape look really bad now for some reason, especially Norman Lear productions. Maybe the video masters on those need restoration?

Would it even be possible to restore something shot on videotape?

On the flip side the first two seasons of Saturday Night Live look great for their age. I’ve only seen one video glitch so far, and I’m not sure it would even have been visible on a CRT. You can tell NBC didn’t allocate their best cameras to the show early on though. It’s a shame they didn’t remaster the film inserts because the telecine they had at the time was pretty awful. (I could get better results shooting a projector aimed at a blank wall.) Whether that footage still exists is anyone’s guess.

It’s a shame a lot of Universal’s 60’s/70’s tv output shot on 35mm hasn’t been remastered. Some of what I see airing on Cozi TV are from really old broadcast video masters.

Weren’t most 60s shows finished on film because broadcasting was still done via telecine, thus making remastering them more practical?

Fang Zei said:

The next time you hear someone say film isn’t hd, remind them that The Shield - a show shot in 16mm - is being remastered in 4k.

I have a Blu-ray of the original Texas Chain Saw Massacre from a 4K scan that’s quite breathtaking.

Slavicuss said:

SilverWook said:

Tv shows are still being shot on tape, only now in HD. Some 70’s sitcoms shot on tape look really bad now for some reason, especially Norman Lear productions. Maybe the video masters on those need restoration?

On the flip side the first two seasons of Saturday Night Live look great for their age. I’ve only seen one video glitch so far, and I’m not sure it would even have been visible on a CRT. You can tell NBC didn’t allocate their best cameras to the show early on though. It’s a shame they didn’t remaster the film inserts because the telecine they had at the time was pretty awful. (I could get better results shooting a projector aimed at a blank wall.) Whether that footage still exists is anyone’s guess.

It’s a shame a lot of Universal’s 60’s/70’s tv output shot on 35mm hasn’t been remastered. Some of what I see airing on Cozi TV are from really old broadcast video masters.

I’d like to see KOLCHAK: THE NIGHT STALKER remastered for a Blu-ray release.

Look at it this way: it’s more likely than Babylon 5 or the theatrical cut of THX 1138!

John Doom said:

Realistically, what’s keeping Disney from releasing the OOT? Costs? Low interest? But I’d argue that, since we know they’re already scanning every negative, even deleted scenes (see Rogue One), they may as well have scanned all of the original trilogy at this point, anyway. And even if they don’t find printing new discs worth the costs, they could release it as a digital download: granted, it’s not the same, but it’s a viable solution that would cost them virtually nothing.
So, I don’t think these are the problems. I think they just don’t want to release it at this point, probably because they want to focus on marketing the new movies.

Well, let’s remember that even if they do acquire Fox, there’s the level of interest they do or don’t have in restoring the OOT, not to mention what kind of profit it’d turn given the limited interest level from a small portion of the fanbase. And that’s also not forgetting that there are a dozen dozen mistakes they could make in the restoration. I hate being Debbie Downer, but as an OOT fan, I’ve gotten burned way too many times. The excitement of reading that originals would come out only to find out that they would just be the GOUT still stings after all these years.

joefavs said:

I think a lot of the 35mm preservations here tend to over-correct the grain thing, though. I don’t necessarily want a blu-ray to recreate the experience of watching a print in a theater; I think home video ought to be mastered for, y’know, the home, and on home systems excessive grain tends to look like noise. The more recent of the Goodfellas transfers strikes a good balance, I think. It’s got enough grain to be able to tell instantly that it was sourced from film without hitting you over the head with it.

I’m a little torn about this. I’m inclined to believe that once you’ve released a film, you should have the definitive cut right there, but what’s that? Especially back in the day, there are so many variables, especially with 35mm projection. But if I’m being honest, I’d probably say that I’d like the home video version of a film to recreate the original theatrical experience as closely as possible.

ChainsawAsh said:

Depends if you’re talking camera negative, interpositive, internegative, or release prints. Each one is a step down generationally and each one will have less detail to be captured than the last.

So in theory, camera negative is the way to go, as it has the most detail. But then you have no color timing information - you’ll have to go the interpositive or internegative from which the release prints were struck for that, and boom, you’ve lost two-three generations of detail. Or you could scan the o-neg and match the color grading to a reference print (interpositive or release print), but that still opens the door to revisionist color timing.

This is fascinating stuff. Where’d you learn all this, just over the years?

Swazzy said:

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1D62GU

Here’s a curveball. What does this spell for Fox’s holdover on a potential OT restoration?

Didn’t that fall through?

Jedi Master Skywalker said:

[John Doom said:]

“Realistically, what’s keeping Disney from releasing the OOT? Costs? Low interest? But I’d argue that, since we know they’re already scanning every negative, even deleted scenes (see Rogue One), they may as well have scanned all of the original trilogy at this point, anyway. And even if they don’t find printing new discs worth the costs, they could release it as a digital download: granted, it’s not the same, but it’s a viable solution that would cost them virtually nothing.
So, I don’t think these are the problems. I think they just don’t want to release it at this point, probably because they want to focus on marketing the new movies”.

good thinking dude I agree in all of that but if fox deal works out then the unaltered cut could be on the way very fucking quickly

God willing.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time

Mike O said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I don’t doubt that all unaltered footage has been preserved digitally, even if it hasn’t been reassembled. I bet every single frame of film shot for all of the movies has been scanned and filed in the Lucasfilm archive.

Hope springs eternal. Didn’t they hack up the OOT negatives to create the SEs?

NeverarGreat said:

Possessed said:

I don’t quite get how high definition is an alteration but okay. What, do they think the original films were shot on vhs or something? That’s a common misconception that bugs the crap out of me with ignorant people, that hi def is a new thing. Sure it’s new for HOME MEDIA but films have always been made at a high resolution, or whatever the analog term for that would be.

I have never seen this misconception except in the case of Star Wars. It’s baffling that it keeps being repeated.

Yeah, it’s really strange.

SilverWook said:

NeverarGreat said:

Possessed said:

I don’t quite get how high definition is an alteration but okay. What, do they think the original films were shot on vhs or something? That’s a common misconception that bugs the crap out of me with ignorant people, that hi def is a new thing. Sure it’s new for HOME MEDIA but films have always been made at a high resolution, or whatever the analog term for that would be.

I have never seen this misconception except in the case of Star Wars. It’s baffling that it keeps being repeated.

There is a belief that “old” movies aren’t HD or won’t look good in HD. It’s not just Star Wars. Not sure where it comes from. The people citing it specifically about the OT are just grasping for straws at this point.

Show them a restoration of an older film and you can quell that pretty quickly. Look at The Wizard of Oz or Gone With the Wind on Blu-ray. They look stunning.

yhwx said:

I think it’s because people hear high definition technology marketed as a new thing and see TV shows shot on tape as the old thing. I’m not sure if people really know how high-quality 35mm film can be.

Given that film will probably be dead by the end of next year, I doubt it.

SilverWook said:

Tv shows are still being shot on tape, only now in HD. Some 70’s sitcoms shot on tape look really bad now for some reason, especially Norman Lear productions. Maybe the video masters on those need restoration?

Would it even be possible to restore something shot on videotape?

On the flip side the first two seasons of Saturday Night Live look great for their age. I’ve only seen one video glitch so far, and I’m not sure it would even have been visible on a CRT. You can tell NBC didn’t allocate their best cameras to the show early on though. It’s a shame they didn’t remaster the film inserts because the telecine they had at the time was pretty awful. (I could get better results shooting a projector aimed at a blank wall.) Whether that footage still exists is anyone’s guess.

It’s a shame a lot of Universal’s 60’s/70’s tv output shot on 35mm hasn’t been remastered. Some of what I see airing on Cozi TV are from really old broadcast video masters.

Weren’t most 60s shows finished on film because broadcasting was still done via telecine, thus making remastering them more practical?

Fang Zei said:

The next time you hear someone say film isn’t hd, remind them that The Shield - a show shot in 16mm - is being remastered in 4k.

I have a Blu-ray of the original Texas Chain Saw Massacre from a 4K scan that’s quite breathtaking.

Slavicuss said:

SilverWook said:

Tv shows are still being shot on tape, only now in HD. Some 70’s sitcoms shot on tape look really bad now for some reason, especially Norman Lear productions. Maybe the video masters on those need restoration?

On the flip side the first two seasons of Saturday Night Live look great for their age. I’ve only seen one video glitch so far, and I’m not sure it would even have been visible on a CRT. You can tell NBC didn’t allocate their best cameras to the show early on though. It’s a shame they didn’t remaster the film inserts because the telecine they had at the time was pretty awful. (I could get better results shooting a projector aimed at a blank wall.) Whether that footage still exists is anyone’s guess.

It’s a shame a lot of Universal’s 60’s/70’s tv output shot on 35mm hasn’t been remastered. Some of what I see airing on Cozi TV are from really old broadcast video masters.

I’d like to see KOLCHAK: THE NIGHT STALKER remastered for a Blu-ray release.

Look at it this way: it’s more likely than Babylon 5 or the theatrical cut of THX 1138!

John Doom said:

Realistically, what’s keeping Disney from releasing the OOT? Costs? Low interest? But I’d argue that, since we know they’re already scanning every negative, even deleted scenes (see Rogue One), they may as well have scanned all of the original trilogy at this point, anyway. And even if they don’t find printing new discs worth the costs, they could release it as a digital download: granted, it’s not the same, but it’s a viable solution that would cost them virtually nothing.
So, I don’t think these are the problems. I think they just don’t want to release it at this point, probably because they want to focus on marketing the new movies.

Well, let’s remember that even if they do acquire Fox, there’s the level of interest they do or don’t have in restoring the OOT, not to mention what kind of profit it’d turn given the limited interest level from a small portion of the fanbase. And that’s also not forgetting that there are a dozen dozen mistakes they could make in the restoration. I hate being Debbie Downer, but as an OOT fan, I’ve gotten burned way too many times. The excitement of reading that originals would come out only to find out that they would just be the GOUT still stings after all these years.

joefavs said:

I think a lot of the 35mm preservations here tend to over-correct the grain thing, though. I don’t necessarily want a blu-ray to recreate the experience of watching a print in a theater; I think home video ought to be mastered for, y’know, the home, and on home systems excessive grain tends to look like noise. The more recent of the Goodfellas transfers strikes a good balance, I think. It’s got enough grain to be able to tell instantly that it was sourced from film without hitting you over the head with it.

I’m a little torn about this. I’m inclined to believe that once you’ve released a film, you should have the definitive cut right there, but what’s that? Especially back in the day, there are so many variables, especially with 35mm projection. But if I’m being honest, I’d probably say that I’d like the home video version of a film to recreate the original theatrical experience as closely as possible.

ChainsawAsh said:

Depends if you’re talking camera negative, interpositive, internegative, or release prints. Each one is a step down generationally and each one will have less detail to be captured than the last.

So in theory, camera negative is the way to go, as it has the most detail. But then you have no color timing information - you’ll have to go the interpositive or internegative from which the release prints were struck for that, and boom, you’ve lost two-three generations of detail. Or you could scan the o-neg and match the color grading to a reference print (interpositive or release print), but that still opens the door to revisionist color timing.

This is fascinating stuff. Where’d you learn all this, just over the years?

Swazzy said:

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1D62GU

Here’s a curveball. What does this spell for Fox’s holdover on a potential OT restoration?

Didn’t that fall through?

Jedi Master Skywalker said:

[John Doom said:]

“Realistically, what’s keeping Disney from releasing the OOT? Costs? Low interest? But I’d argue that, since we know they’re already scanning every negative, even deleted scenes (see Rogue One), they may as well have scanned all of the original trilogy at this point, anyway. And even if they don’t find printing new discs worth the costs, they could release it as a digital download: granted, it’s not the same, but it’s a viable solution that would cost them virtually nothing.
So, I don’t think these are the problems. I think they just don’t want to release it at this point, probably because they want to focus on marketing the new movies”.

good thinking dude I agree in all of that but if fox deal works out then the unaltered cut could be on the way very fucking quickly

God willing.

No it didn’t fall through they are still talking

Author
Time

^ Meanwhile, you can walk into a store and buy an actual 4k disc of a certain David Bowie movie George was involved in producing.

But you can’t get Star Wars.

Author
Time

Mocata said:

Yor: Hunter from the Future is coming to Blu Ray. But you can’t get Star Wars.

https://www.amazon.com/Yor-Hunter-Future-Anniversary-Blu-ray/dp/B076DQVTGK/ref=pd_sim_74_2?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=XC0ZPF8YXKV7N98TC2VA&dpID=51jUzh0sD9L&preST=SY300_QL70&dpSrc=detail

Awesome. Yor is one of the best “bad” movies of all time!

“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
 (Edited)

My hope is rekindled the new MST3K will get their hands on it.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

That’s a little bit dark, Ray.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

This thread should be shot and burned and buried.

Author
Time

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

Tv shows are still being shot on tape, only now in HD. Some 70’s sitcoms shot on tape look really bad now for some reason, especially Norman Lear productions. Maybe the video masters on those need restoration?

On the flip side the first two seasons of Saturday Night Live look great for their age. I’ve only seen one video glitch so far, and I’m not sure it would even have been visible on a CRT. You can tell NBC didn’t allocate their best cameras to the show early on though. It’s a shame they didn’t remaster the film inserts because the telecine they had at the time was pretty awful. (I could get better results shooting a projector aimed at a blank wall.) Whether that footage still exists is anyone’s guess.

It’s a shame a lot of Universal’s 60’s/70’s tv output shot on 35mm hasn’t been remastered. Some of what I see airing on Cozi TV are from really old broadcast video masters.

The company I work for is quoting on a lot of 70s sitcoms at the moment for restoration.
I’ve been looking at a bunch of master tapes of 70s shows over the last few months, and there is a rather awful historical footnote.
The ‘white’ sitcoms were shot on film, and occasionally in the highest tech tape based system of the day, the ‘black’ sitcoms at the same companies were shot on tape, with lower quality gear.
Make of that what you will, but it is why some US 70s tv shows look a lot better than others. Restoring the tape based ones is very hard to get looking good in hidef, but it is being done right now.

Donations welcome: paypal.me/poit
bitcoin:13QDjXjt7w7BFiQc4Q7wpRGPtYKYchnm8x
Help get The Original Trilogy preserved!