Sign In

FINALLY watching the GOUT Trilogy properly — Page 2

Author
Time

Fang Zei said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

The GOUT is just a low-resolution early 90s master from Lucasfilm (so, ostensibly, from earlier generation sources like the O-neg or separation masters). The SSE is based on release prints, I believe. They’re entirely different.

The GOUT transfers were done in 1993 from interpositives struck from the o-neg in 1985.

NERD

TV’s Frink said:

I would put this in my sig if I weren’t so lazy.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

LordZerome1080 said:

Mielr said:

35mm film still has more resolution than HD. 4K comes closer.

It’s not normal for a film to be noticeably “scratched”. Scratches occur on theatrical prints after heavy use.

So is this why the GOUT and the SSE look like they do? Or is the gout different in some way?

The GOUT discs weren’t made directly from prints—that’s the whole reason the GOUT is so derided in the first place, why they’re non-anamorphic, and why they’re considered such a slap in the face from Lucasfilm. They were made from leftover 4:3 video masters (originally made from prints) that were used to make the 1993/95 laserdiscs, probably some sort of tape-based masters, I would imagine.

I’m sure there’s someone here who has a better understanding of the 1990s print>>>laserdisc-release workflow.

DarkJedi’s anamorphic versions are one of the most watchable versions of the GOUT, IMO.

Author
Time

For any home video release. They would telecine from 35mm intermediates (the interpositive or the internegative) to master tape. They would forward a copy to the director. So the 2006 DVD’s were made from one of the master tapes (either the one sent to Lucas or the one sent to make the LD masters). They spliced on the 1977 crawl, but otherwise it is the same as the Definitive Collection and Faces set, only it is noticably higher quality (well a higher generation anyway).

Author
Time

LordZerome1080 said:

While this does solve the anamorphic problem it doesn’t solve the motion blur but at least it looks nice when played in a Blu Ray player.

It will also crop off portions of the subtitles.

Author
Time

Speaking of which, did we ever determine what film element the unaltered GOUT crawl would’ve been scanned from?

Lucasfilm’s form response letter at the time stated that existing prints were in “bad condition” or something to that effect, but they didn’t exactly help their case by splicing in a newly transferred piece that looked just fine to me.

Author
Time

Fang Zei said:

Speaking of which, did we ever determine what film element the unaltered GOUT crawl would’ve been scanned from?

Lucasfilm’s form response letter at the time stated that existing prints were in “bad condition” or something to that effect, but they didn’t exactly help their case by splicing in a newly transferred piece that looked just fine to me.

Well, if you have seen Empire of Dreams, it was probably done from that. So whatever one they scanned for that is the one they probably tacked on to ANH (while leaving the 1993 sound mix).

Author
Time

Fang Zei said:

Speaking of which, did we ever determine what film element the unaltered GOUT crawl would’ve been scanned from?

Lucasfilm’s form response letter at the time stated that existing prints were in “bad condition” or something to that effect, but they didn’t exactly help their case by splicing in a newly transferred piece that looked just fine to me.

I’m curious if it’s a recreation after watching this video. In the GOUT the SW logo fades out sooner than it does on 4K77 and the SSE.

https://youtu.be/P1b47UP6ZGI

Author
Time

Mocata said:

Is there a benefit to actually watching these versions at all today though?

They’re really the best version of the OT that we have. The anamorphic fan-edits take care of the subtitles problem so that you don’t have to zoom in and chop off the titles.

Or, are you comparing them to the Harmy edits?

Author
Time

Mielr said:

Mocata said:

Is there a benefit to actually watching these versions at all today though?

They’re really the best version of the OT that we have. The anamorphic fan-edits take care of the subtitles problem so that you don’t have to zoom in and chop off the titles.

Or, are you comparing them to the Harmy edits?

And the other various and sundry restorations, I’d wager.

“I believe in copyright, within limited precincts. But I also believe in fair use, public domain, and especially transformation.” — David Shields

“To be good and lead a good life means to give to others more than one takes from them.” — Leo Tolstoy

Author
Time

Mielr said:

Mocata said:

Is there a benefit to actually watching these versions at all today though?

They’re really the best version of the OT that we have. The anamorphic fan-edits take care of the subtitles problem so that you don’t have to zoom in and chop off the titles.

Or, are you comparing them to the Harmy edits?

Well there are multiple versions.

Yub Nub for life

Author
Time

Mielr said:

Mocata said:

Is there a benefit to actually watching these versions at all today though?

They’re really the best version of the OT that we have.

Not really if you’re a member of this site.

And in the time of greatest despair, there shall come a savior, and he shall be known as the Son of the Suns.

Author
Time

They are the best legally available copies of the OT. But many people have enhanced, color corrected, and done new versions of the GOUT and then there is Harmy’s Despecialized, and better yet there are the 35mm scans (with any gaps filled out by the Blu-ray).

Author
Time
 (Edited)

LexX said:

Mielr said:

Mocata said:

Is there a benefit to actually watching these versions at all today though?

They’re really the best version of the OT that we have.

Not really if you’re a member of this site.

They’re the best commercially-released versions of the OT. And I am a member of this site. Since 2006.

I said above that DarkJedi’s versions were one of the most watchable versions, IMO.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Technically they were the best commercial versions of the OT we HAD since now even the GOUT is OOP.

Author
Time

crissrudd4554 said:

Fang Zei said:

Speaking of which, did we ever determine what film element the unaltered GOUT crawl would’ve been scanned from?

Lucasfilm’s form response letter at the time stated that existing prints were in “bad condition” or something to that effect, but they didn’t exactly help their case by splicing in a newly transferred piece that looked just fine to me.

I’m curious if it’s a recreation after watching this video. In the GOUT the SW logo fades out sooner than it does on 4K77 and the SSE.

https://youtu.be/P1b47UP6ZGI

Does anyone want to chime in on this?

I’m curious myself.

Author
Time

This just makes me love 4K77 more!!

I can answer almost all questions anyone might have about the Sith from Star Wars Legends, and please do PM me for the bd25 DEED(Despecalised Editions), as I have this version, though I can’t answer technical questions about them. Auntie Derry/Rumpelstiltskin.
Do not go gentle into that good night, Though wise men at their end know dark is right, They
Do not go gentle into that good night. “Star Wars is a buffet, enjoy the stuff you want, and leave the rest.” - SilverWook Feel the love.

Author
Time

crissrudd4554 said:

Fang Zei said:

Speaking of which, did we ever determine what film element the unaltered GOUT crawl would’ve been scanned from?

Lucasfilm’s form response letter at the time stated that existing prints were in “bad condition” or something to that effect, but they didn’t exactly help their case by splicing in a newly transferred piece that looked just fine to me.

I’m curious if it’s a recreation after watching this video. In the GOUT the SW logo fades out sooner than it does on 4K77 and the SSE.

https://youtu.be/P1b47UP6ZGI

The star field is also less pronounced, so it could be a matter of contrast levels making it seem to fade to zero faster than it actually does.

TV’s Frink said:

I would put this in my sig if I weren’t so lazy.

Author
Time

Mielr said:

LexX said:

Mielr said:

Mocata said:

Is there a benefit to actually watching these versions at all today though?

They’re really the best version of the OT that we have.

Not really if you’re a member of this site.

They’re the best commercially-released versions of the OT. And I am a member of this site. Since 2006.

I said above that DarkJedi’s versions were one of the most watchable versions, IMO.

Well, that’s clearly a different thing. Mocata surely refers to the point that there would be no reason at all to watch the GOUT as “we” already have SW in 4K and many other HD options. So if you are already posting on this forum where you can get access on these goodies I’m not sure why there would be any reason to watch the GOUT anymore. Except to know the right magenta hues on your monitors.

And in the time of greatest despair, there shall come a savior, and he shall be known as the Son of the Suns.

Author
Time

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

crissrudd4554 said:

Fang Zei said:

Speaking of which, did we ever determine what film element the unaltered GOUT crawl would’ve been scanned from?

Lucasfilm’s form response letter at the time stated that existing prints were in “bad condition” or something to that effect, but they didn’t exactly help their case by splicing in a newly transferred piece that looked just fine to me.

I’m curious if it’s a recreation after watching this video. In the GOUT the SW logo fades out sooner than it does on 4K77 and the SSE.

https://youtu.be/P1b47UP6ZGI

The star field is also less pronounced, so it could be a matter of contrast levels making it seem to fade to zero faster than it actually does.

Hmmm not sure about that. The logo does seem to disappear rather instantly on the GOUT at the 0:40 second mark.

Author
Time

Z6PO said:

But you absolutely need to do a HD scan if you want to capture all the details that are on film.

A lot of people think wrongly that old films aren’t HD no need for blu-ray when those old films do look far better on blu-ray.

I knew a guy who made that basically made that same argument back when dvd first came out.