Sign In

Complete Comparison of Special Edition Visual Changes — Page 39

Author
Time

While 2004 Jabba might be a more detailed model, the '87 one actually looks more like the puppet.

Author
Time

Treadwell said:

While 2004 Jabba might be a more detailed model, the '87 one actually looks more like the puppet.

Wow. It was made in '87 ? 

No wonder it looks like shit.

;)

Star Wars Episode XXX: Erica Strikes Back

         Davnes007 LogoCanadian Flag

          If you want Nice, go to France

Author
Time

Got something. I believe that the shot of Luke directly preceding this one:

is an alternate take.

Author
Time

^ What is the change description?  One sign of recompsitioning is the white streak just below the bottom most edge of Vader's TIE.  In the GOUT there's a space between the black wing and the white streak.  (but it could be they've painted in a bit more of the wings, as the left bottom Vader TIE wing edge is pointer in GOUT)  In 2004 and DeEd the white streak seems to go under the TIE wing.  But most of the edge relationships seem the same, even the star locations.  Otherwise this seems to be part of the color debate.  Will look at it in motion.

ASIDE: when did imageshack require login to upload images?

Author
Time

Well, on one hand, it is a colour change, on the other, only a part of the image is selectively altered, so I'd say it's a deliberate change, rather than just a colour-timing issue.

Author
Time

none said:

One sign of recompsitioning is the white streak just below the bottom most edge of Vader's TIE.  In the GOUT there's a space between the black wing and the white streak.  (but it could be they've painted in a bit more of the wings, as the left bottom Vader TIE wing edge is pointer in GOUT)  In 2004 and DeEd the white streak seems to go under the TIE wing.  But most of the edge relationships seem the same, even the star locations.  Otherwise this seems to be part of the color debate.  Will look at it in motion.

What you describe is most likely caused by the DVNR, the same frame on the Special Collection LD:

I would say this one is a transfer issue as opposed to deliberate change, these color oddities, mostly on opticals, exist between transfers of the unaltered films as well. How they happen is a little mystery to me, especially on the older video transfers as you cannot just get the correct color back by adjusting the timing. A green TIE laser can suddenly be either completely yellow, pink or blue in one scene where everything else in that frame is normal and accurate, the same can also be seen with explosions, graphics on screens, lightpanels etc. But it's of course easier to determine what is a color glitch on the unaltered films compared to what is seen on the 2004/11 versions.

We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions. 

Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com

Author
Time

One thing that I've tried to point out earlier in this thread is that the wide-shot of the binary sunset wasn't only re-timed in '97, and getting clouds in '04, it was also digitally re-composited in '97, an easy way to spot this is on the different shape of the real on-location sun.

In the original film the red sun was composited into the shot and can actually be seen moving (setting) as Luke walking up to the edge. In the SE where both suns are "digital", you can see that both of them are moving (setting). This is actually hard to see if you're watching the film as you're supposed to, but if you are jumping between the first and last frame it's very visible. Just thought I would point that out as I am still not seeing any description for it.

We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions. 

Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com

Author
Time

^ With a Google login, anyone can comment on any of the SE Guide pics.  But only the pic poster (doubleofive in this case) can port that info into the main description.

Author
Time

Added your finding, msyc.

Speaking of which, my Star Wars one has been reshared on G+ like 80 times in the past week. None of the others have though. And a few commenters seem to think I'm trying to point out that the changes are all for the better! ;-)

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress / Facebook / Twitter

Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress / Twitter

Author
Time

none said:

With a Google login, anyone can comment on any of the SE Guide pics.  But only the pic poster (doubleofive in this case) can port that info into the main description.

 Oh, I see. Didn't know that.

doubleofive said:

Added your finding, msyc.

Speaking of which, my Star Wars one has been reshared on G+ like 80 times in the past week. None of the others have though.

Great to know it's gettin attention. :)

doubleofive said:

And a few commenters seem to think I'm trying to point out that the changes are all for the better! ;-)

That's a little weird, could perhaps be the remains of the official descriptions that makes it seem that way, to me they were clearly done in that way. (haven't checked if you got rid of those or not)

We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions. 

Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com

Author
Time
 (Edited)

First of all, since I haven't written it before: doubleofive, I love these galleries. You've done a seriously good job, and I can waste hours on end looking at these.

Now for my question... I was watching the '95 LD of SW last night, and I thought something seemed different to what I'm used to from the SE's in the scene where Luke first triggers Leia's hologram. Specifically, the reverse angle of the hologram didn't show up where I expected it to. This shot turned up in its place.

I know the elements were recomposited, but was the sequence re-cut as well, or am I imagining things here? I'm sorry that I don't have any screenshots/clips to back it up with right now, but I do figure most of you would be able to answer this question on a whim.

Author
Time

It seems you never got any answer to your question... the sequence wasn't re-cut so either you imagined it or there's a screw up on the LD.

Noticed that this '97 re-comp wasn't on your list:

GOUT

2004 DVD

We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions. 

Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com

Author
Time

A weird one... this shot was oddly enough zoomed in on in '97 but reverted back to the original framing in 2004.

Top: GOUT Middle: '97 Broadcast Bottom: 2004 DVD

To make it easier to see the amount of zooming as the '97 broadcasts were a little tighter framed and lost a few pixels on all sides, here's an demonstration on how much.

Top: GOUT Middle: '97 Broadcast Bottom: 2004 DVD

We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions. 

Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com

Author
Time

msycamore said:

It seems you never got any answer to your question... the sequence wasn't re-cut so either you imagined it or there's a screw up on the LD.

I realised that next time I viewed it, yeah. It wasn't an LD glitch either; it was just me seeing things. Probably because I hadn't watched the OOT regularly in years prior to that viewing. Thanks for your answer, though!

Author
Time

Another '97 digital re-comp not on your list:

GOUT

2004 DVD

An animated shadow from the tauntaun was added, and the snow around it was tweaked.

We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions. 

Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Hey guys, newbie here with an interest in the preservation of the SW OT. Great work throughout this thread--I'm amazed at the number of small tweaks made even before the SEs of 1997!

I have one question about a particular change in ANH, though.

It seems to me (viewing the 2004 version of ANH on an HDTV) that Leia's hologram recording was changed twice, once in 1997 (when the blue tint was added) and again in 2004. Specifically, it seems the hologram's vertical scanlines got a LOT fatter in the 2004 version, whereas the 1997 Leia hologram (judging by pictures you guys have posted) had very thin, very hard-to-see vertical scanlines.

Am I just hallucinating? I'd love to have somebody verify this for me--I don't yet have all the digital copies of the various releases. Thank you!

“That Darth Vader, man. Sure does love eating Jedi.”

Author
Time

Oh, OK. Thanks for checking, though! :)

“That Darth Vader, man. Sure does love eating Jedi.”