Sign In

First Impressions of the OOT ... — Page 4

Author
Time
Lets have a look at another scene.

A quote from John Lowry:

Most effects in the original trilogy were achieved, at least in part, with the aid of optical printing -- a process in which one piece of film is passed through a printer multiple times, once for each effects element. With each optical effect layer, grain can be introduced and some of the original clarity reduced. "Every time there was a lightsaber in frame, it was exceedingly grainy due to opticals," Lowry recalls.


The 2004SE of course looks best, since all optical elements have been recomposited in the computer
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.aptirrelevance.com/otscreenshots/images/resized/aofficial-r-017.jpg

The 2006 DVD matches what John Lowry says. Like in the shot mverta posted here, grain is now present due to the optical effects. This image is even worse!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.aptirrelevance.com/otscreenshots/images/resized/GOUT-PAL-r-017.jpg

And now, do the Laserdiscs show the grain, which MUST BE THERE, since this scene was optically processed?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.aptirrelevance.com/otscreenshots/images/resized/moth3r-r-017.jpg

Nope. For me, this is proof that the Laserdiscs have been processed with heavy grain removal. On ALL Laserdisc transfers, you see NO GRAIN, but a unusual very mushy picture.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: mverta
Vigo -

I don't have more solid proof than the images themselves. I agree not all shots are equally grainy. I also have nothing more than my professional expertise to draw conclusions from, and my eye has spotted things in the transfer I recognize as digital post work. This is what I do. It's what Lucasfilm hires me to do for them, from time to time. You can no more make a blanket statement saying such alterations weren't made, then anyone can say they were. I didn't say they were, difinitively, I said I thought so, and still do. I have my experience to draw on; nothing more, and of course, you can completely invalidate my expertise to make your point if you want. Speculations and theories are how things start; then you go off in search of proof to refute or support the theory. This is what I've done. In this case, that proof must largely come from informed supposition and analysis, by expert eyes. I've done that, too... In any case, I hope you never get the proof you're looking for, which I think you're saying would have to come from Lucas himself. Or somebody from Lucasfilm coming right out and saying, "yes, we want to have permanently satisfied the demand for an OT while not infringing upon the sales of the remastered versions, so we made sure they looked like shit." The chances of which, I daresay, are slim.

In any case, just chalk me up as a nutjob who has a whole lot of nothing to say, and bask in the self satisfaction of your rapier perception. Then at least I will have the satisfaction of having entertained you, if I can't inform you. Six of one, really...

_Mike


I think you are being paranoid.


Author
Time
Well Arnie, we're not really debating whether film stock has grain - it all does, and certainly you can tell generational differences between stocks from the 70's 80's and 90's. This was really a focused discussion centering around a tremendous amount of grain visible in the OUT DVD's. Some people feel it's natural, while I believe that at least some of it has been increased, deliberately, for any of a million reasons. In the end, it's a difficult case to prove to non-pros, I think. My discussions with fellow post guys has been a lot of, "yep, looks like it to me." But every one of us does grain matching for a living. On the other side, there really are a bunch of totally "non-conspiracy" reasons why it could be grainier, even without enhancement. Which led me to a secondary point, which was, "how bad does it suck that my pre-93 LD transfer looks better than yesterdays DVD?" Somewhat fortunately, nobody wants to jump in on that sinking ship of subjectivity, and for that I'm grateful. But in the end, the opening crawl has been re-created and presented as authentic. My feeling is that if they'll lie about that, why not lie about something else? Especially in light of what I certainly regard as decent evidence.

_Mike

View the Restoration and join the discussion at StarWarsLegacy.com!

Author
Time
Case closed! I'm such a fool.

However, for the record, the images were NOT recomposited in the computer, eliminating the grain from optical effects. Lowry's method uses an algorithm to remove grain from the entire image as a flat element. The lack of grain in the optical effects is just from de-graining processing. Oh! How it would be cool to recomposite, digitally, all the elements as you suggest! We could finally kill all those garbage mattes and roto lines, which are still wall-to-wall in the 2004 and 2006 DVD's!

Anyway, I surrender.

_Mike

View the Restoration and join the discussion at StarWarsLegacy.com!

Author
Time
I've watched SW and ESB so far, and I don't see any additional grain. If there is any additional grain visible, I'm pretty sure it's because these DVDs are so much sharper than the LDs. I own both the DC and the Faces LDs, and they are much fuzzier than the DVDs. I think the softer picture of the LDs hides a multitude of sins- including film grain and some of the aliasing.

I think that so many people here are so used to watching the 2004 DVDs, that these new DVDs look grainy in comparison. You have to remember that the images were not digitally composited in 1977/1980/1983, so a lot of grain built up due to optical printing. This is not a fault of the master tapes- the grain was present on the original prints.

I never watch the '04 DVDs, so the OOT DVDs look fantastic to me. I would rather have the extra film grain than all of the crap that was added to the SEs.


Originally posted by: MeBeJedi
Ran across this. Anyone else ever hear of this?



As dilineated in the classic VIDEO WATCHDOG article, Lucasfilm, when
making these transfers, were apparently SO exasperated in the
pre-digital age by the appearance of ONE LOUSY HAIR at the VERY
beginning, in the top center of the screen, which can be seen for a
few frames superimposed onto part of the Star Destroyer... that they
RE-COMPED the entire film, lopping off a dozen or so scan lines and
cropping it down to about a 2.20:1 image.

Of course that same article mentions it could have been done
independently by the telecine operator...but still....every version of
JEDI since then, including the one used as the basis for the 1997
special editions, has also been re-comped... .

I've heard about the hair in the gate on Jedi, supposedly it was cropped off for the DC set, but fixed for the Faces disc. I really don't know if there's any truth to that- I see no evidence of the cropping on the DC disc.

If they were so worried about hair- why didn't they fix the huge one that hangs down on the Fox logo on all 3 movies?!



Author
Time
Originally posted by: mverta
However, for the record, the images were NOT recomposited in the computer, eliminating the grain from optical effects. Lowry's method uses an algorithm to remove grain from the entire image as a flat element. The lack of grain in the optical effects is just from de-graining processing.


Which of course brings the question why the lighsaber looks different on the 2004SE than in all other versions...


Oh! How it would be cool to recomposite, digitally, all the elements as you suggest! We could finally kill all those garbage mattes and roto lines, which are still wall-to-wall in the 2004 and 2006 DVD's!


I did not say they did their best job to make the 2004SE transfer. Do you need another picture which clearly suggests they recomposited the optical effects?

Here is the original optical composite

http://www.aptirrelevance.com/otscreenshots/images/resized/GOUT-PAL-r-014.jpg

And now, you can clearly see that they newly recoposited it. They added vertical scanlines, and changed the shape of the projection beam. You can also see that they changed her position slightly.

http://www.aptirrelevance.com/otscreenshots/images/resized/aofficial-r-014.jpg

Btw, the newly composited picture looks like shit...
Author
Time
I just thought I'd mention, on the DVD inserts it says , "The Original Theatrical Versions - On DVD for the first time ever!" No where on here does it say the last time ever.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: AJ
I just thought I'd mention, on the DVD inserts it says , "The Original Theatrical Versions - On DVD for the first time ever!" No where on here does it say the last time ever.
Interesting...I hadn't noticed that.

Author
Time
A new artcle on StarWars.com talks about the DVDs being released on DVD for the first and only time.


Author
Time
It's good to hear that the picture of the O-OT is looking great.

I just picked these up myself and have yet to sit down with them.

It's so nice to be able to have both versions of the films on DVD.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
What would the purposefully-added-grain conspiracy accomplish?

So that when people see them, they realize the SE versions look better and they'll buy those instead? Oops - both versions are included, so you can't buy one without the other anyway.

So that when people watch the grainy version, they decide it's bad and only watch the SE versions from then on? Well, that also gains no sales since they are both included so who cares which one you actually watch?

If they included the OUT to try and shut up the fans who have been shouting for it, then purposefully degrading the image would not do the trick, since now people are going to shout for a non-grainy version.

So unless I'm missing another motive, for Lucasfilm to purposefully degrade the image quality only hurts them. There is no benefit for them at all. Therefore, why would they spend the extra time, effort, and money to do that?
Author
Time
Originally posted by: AJ
I just thought I'd mention, on the DVD inserts it says , "The Original Theatrical Versions - On DVD for the first time ever!" No where on here does it say the last time ever.

But since the first part of that sentence is a blatent lie, why accept any potential truth of the second part?


(This is not the original theatrical release, of Star Wars at any rate.)

Author
Time
I think they mean "Original" as the versions as they were before the SE's.

They got it close enough. They even went so far as to remove the title and episode number from ANH. This is the first time they have released a version of ANH that was this close to the original theatrical release.

Still just because they don't say this is the last time they are doing it, doesn't mean it isn't the last time they are doing it.

With the way a lot of people bag on Lucas either way, I can't say I would expect them to bother again.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
I have watched now many frames, and I come to the conclusion that:

a) The Laserdiscs were heavily processed through a grain removal filter, since all optical shots are grain-free but heavily "mushy" looking.
b) The GOUT has all the grain the original transfer print had, which was removed for the Laserdisc. It looks more like film.

Now what a great release this could have been using a modern film scanner and a reasonable well surviving print. But at least, with the release of this DVD, the foot is now in the door...

Author
Time
Yes, and the foot in the door has GOUT. Sorry, couldn't resist. I watched both versions; GOUT last night and watched the SE with comentary on. The picture was okay, but damn the laser fire kept making me want to convulse. I hadn't seen that much pink flash about since I went to the strip club.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: casualimp
Yes, and the foot in the door has GOUT. Sorry, couldn't resist. I watched both versions; GOUT last night and watched the SE with comentary on. The picture was okay, but damn the laser fire kept making me want to convulse. I hadn't seen that much pink flash about since I went to the strip club.


Hey! Those are the original colours! I hate Lucas decision, and the transfer is really shitty inferior, but at least the colours are exactly as Star Wars is supposed to look!

Author
Time
Sorry Vigo. I was refering to the SE version as they seemed to have up the colours a lot. The OOT looked fine to me.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
If you guys honestly think that LFL would take the time to purposely screw up the OOT, just to "stick-it" to the "fans".... it's beyond the time to take a step back from all this and grow-up.

The Luca$ conspiracy theories know no bounds, apparently.


It's not really a theory; it's right there on starwars.com. If you have eyes, you can see it. And no one said LFL did; Lucas did.

“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
Originally posted by: Mike O
Originally posted by: JediRandy
If you guys honestly think that LFL would take the time to purposely screw up the OOT, just to "stick-it" to the "fans".... it's beyond the time to take a step back from all this and grow-up.

The Luca$ conspiracy theories know no bounds, apparently.


It's not really a theory; it's right there on starwars.com. If you have eyes, you can see it. And no one said LFL did; Lucas did.


But they DID NOT ADD cgi grain to the movies. They have deliberately chosen an inferior transfer because they did not want to invest any amount of work into the OOT.

BUT THEY DID NOT ADD CGI GRAIN!

Let´s have patience. The foot is now in the door, and the OOT has become sort of official now again. If those who wanted are sending their scratched SE discs back to Lucas with a nice letter, I think it make some people there think.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: mverta
It doesn't even "feel" softer, while watching it, and probably for good reason - even in this frame-by-frame scrutinization, the sharpness difference is quite subtle. Is that progress? 1% sharper, 20% dirtier? You guys are an easy crowd, I guess.

i disagree. every laserdisc release "feels" and is softer than the dvd since the image is of much lower resolution. i own them all and performed an AB switch comparison against the pre-93's american release, the japanese laserdiscs, the faces laserdiscs, and the definitive laserdiscs.
the improvement in resolution is dramatic; certainly more than 1%. it's more like a 20% gain at least.

Originally posted by: Mielr
I own both the DC and the Faces LDs, and they are much fuzzier than the DVDs. I think the softer picture of the LDs hides a multitude of sins- including film grain and some of the aliasing.


this i agree with. the limitations of the laserdisc format are hiding and softening a lot of the detail that the dvds are capable of capturing. i also happen to own plenty of other (non-SW) laserdiscs, and everything looks a little soft and mushy in this format, and for good reason ... laserdisc records images at a significantly lower resolution than dvd. it is entirely possible that the lasers were filtered, but the format is limited.

huzzah for archival THEATRICAL OT!!!
it is our duty to preserve star wars history...

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Mielr
Originally posted by: AJ
I just thought I'd mention, on the DVD inserts it says , "The Original Theatrical Versions - On DVD for the first time ever!" No where on here does it say the last time ever. Interesting...I hadn't noticed that.

That seems to have occured to Lucasfilm as well.

Tell me, Mr. Verta, do you think that we will ever see proper releases of the originals?

Originally posted by: Vigo
Originally posted by: Mike O
Originally posted by: JediRandy
If you guys honestly think that LFL would take the time to purposely screw up the OOT, just to "stick-it" to the "fans".... it's beyond the time to take a step back from all this and grow-up.

The Luca$ conspiracy theories know no bounds, apparently.


It's not really a theory; it's right there on starwars.com. If you have eyes, you can see it. And no one said LFL did; Lucas did.


But they DID NOT ADD cgi grain to the movies. They have deliberately chosen an inferior transfer because they did not want to invest any amount of work into the OOT.

BUT THEY DID NOT ADD CGI GRAIN!

Let´s have patience. The foot is now in the door, and the OOT has become sort of official now again. If those who wanted are sending their scratched SE discs back to Lucas with a nice letter, I think it make some people there think.


I don't know, I mean, look at the link above. I really do think that this release is a sign of things to come, but it might be bad just as easily as it can be good. We can just hope and pray at this point.

“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
I find it to be extraordinarily sad that the first shot of STAR WARS looks exponentially better than the rest of any of the films, since it was from a new transfer of the original crawl. That pisses me off more than anything.

But other than that gripe, I'm very pleased with these, though I'm definitely waiting anxiously for the X0 project's results.
Author
Time
anyone else have the captions not come up on jabba's dialogue in rotj?

it might be a defect, but they just didnt come on, even when i turned them on.
it was actually my friend who noticed it. i realized i was just following along becuase ive seen it hundreds of time. lol.
thank the maker
Author
Time
In the setup menu of your DVD player there is probably an option to disable subtitles on DVDs. This has probably been turned on by accident and if it is , it doesn't matter whether you have the DVD's subtitles are turned on from the subtitle menu, the DVD player will still block them. To fix this problem open up you setup menu and turn off anything that blocks subtitles.


Author
Time
Originally posted by: mverta
However, for the record, the images were NOT recomposited in the computer, eliminating the grain from optical effects. Lowry's method uses an algorithm to remove grain from the entire image as a flat element. The lack of grain in the optical effects is just from de-graining processing. Oh! How it would be cool to recomposite, digitally, all the elements as you suggest! We could finally kill all those garbage mattes and roto lines, which are still wall-to-wall in the 2004 and 2006 DVD's!
They may not have been recomposited in 2004 for the DVDs, but they were recomposited digitally for the '97 SEs. Perhaps not all of it, and how effective it was, I do not know, but they did. They mention this on those "What has changed?" comparison articles on the official web site. Many of the models look drastically different in the SEs due to better compositing. Of course, I'm sure everyone's suspicious about the veracity of what gets posted on the official website.

BUT if you've ever seen some of the '97 press material (made available on disc by babyhum) you can actually watch a few minutes of a woman sitting behind a computer monitor, digitally recompositing Luke's training scene on the Millennium Falcon. Hell, she even switches it layer-by-layer for us.