logo Sign In

First Impressions of the OOT ... — Page 5

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: ShiftyEyes
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.


Look at the screenshot comparision page as I did (and posted here) and there is enough proof that they recomposited the opticals... But thanks for the further information.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: juicerino
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.
That happened to me with the SW SE disc- just screw around with the caption setting a bit and they should come on eventually.

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.
Ok, what does the "G" stand for?!



Author
Time
Post link
I'v just seen ANH GOUT PAL DVD on a friends setup. His dvd-standalone player is connected via YUV Component Out (Progressive Out) to his DLP Panasonic AE-9000 projector. We have a 2,4meter (over 7 feet) width screen wall.

At first it starts okay. We all know that the title crawl is not from the laserdisc master, so this scene is not represantative for what the movie is like in terms of quality. So we cut to the next scene...

Okay, the picture is dirty sometimes, but it's not only that, the most distracting (bad) is the shaking picture. It's not stable! Extremely irritating, and something like that brings you out of the movie.

To top that the noise is extremely visible on the big screen.

And I must say that I have never seen a movie more pixelized than this one on his setup. That brings you out of the movie, too.

Maybe some of those things are due to the NTSC2PAL Conversion they did for the PAL Release. I will try to get my hands on the NTSC GOUT as well. And I will do some tests via HDMI-connection to better use the native resolution of the dlp.

It was a bad cinema experience, really.

I've seen the SSE2004 DVD on the same setup. There are worlds between those two.

I am sure the X0-Project will do a far better job.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: boris
As a consumer, you have that choice. Let me ask you - if it was the same price but without the 2004 DVD - would you buy?


Yes. Even if it were twice the price I would buy this non-anamorphic version like that. As it is though, I'm too angry to consider this release.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Well....I've finally gotten a chance to look at the release. I bought 3 of the tins at Best Buy (for me and for two other people). I haven't opened mine yet, but my sister said I could open hers to check it out. If I liked what I saw, I wouldn't return mine.

Here's what I saw....

This release really doesn't look all that bad. There is a shitload of grain and such in SW. It's fucking all over the place!!! If you can get past this, it's not bad....not good, but not bad.

Sorry to say, the animated menus are retarded.

The thing I liked the most was the tin. It is kinda cheap and all, but it does look pretty neat even if it isn't perfect.....get rid of the roman numerals and the episode titles and the fucker would be perfect. I'm thinking of screwing with it somehow to eliminate that crap so I can use it for my own bootleg set.

I'm REALLY on the fence here.....I like it cuz it is the OOT.....but I hate it cuz it's giving Lucas money for a shit product. That's what really pisses me off. Still, I might keep it just to have a legal copy. Dunno.......jury's still out with me.

And the conspiracy theory.....come the fuck on, people!!! That is the biggest bunch of shit I've EVER heard. It looks like shit cuz they either picked a bad source or deliberately did a bad transfer. BUT ADDING CGI GRAIN?!?!??!!? Pardon me.....but that is some fucked up thinking.....
Author
Time
Post link
If it was anybody else, I'd dimiss it immediately as well. But George Lucas hasn't exactly proven himself to be an honest and reputable individual, now has he?

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
I just got mine in the mail today. Since I do not have a widescreen television right now I have to say that these transfers look great on a regular 4:3 screen. The colors are softer than than the 2004 editions and the picture is about as good as you can get for not being anamorphic. These are far better than the DE Laser Discs. I was banned from DVDActive today because I stood up for someone who had a different opinion than the site administrator regarding this release. here are my comments from DVDActive:

We are simply being given the chance to see the original trilogy on DVD. The limited release factor gives incentive to those who do not believe the originals will be featured in the big 30th Anniversary boxset. Everybody knows the 30th Ann set will have even more alterations and things that will piss off people like GOULDl. I look forward to every new Star Wars DVD release and view Lucas's changes like a man's personal evolution as a film maker. Don't get me wrong Lucas is a business man and knows where his bread is buttered. I truly think that these current DVD releases are like Lucas saying: "I'm giving fans what they have been crying for since the begining of the DVD format." If you stop and consider when the DVD format was "new" anamorphic widescreen was not the standard. Therefore it is entirely reasonable for Lucas to be giving us these editions preserving the classic look and standard of DVDs we would have gotten had they been released in 1997. It's the equivalent of say Criterion releasing the Star Wars Trilogy on DVD. A lot of times Criterion simply ported over their laserdisc transfers directly to DVD and look at how Criterion holds some of the most sought after movie titles. Another way this is rationalized is when you have the original trilogy packaged with the 2004 releases. The Alien movies have done it. If you look at The Alien Quadrilogy you have your choice of either the original theatrical releases or the SE. My point is that Lucas will continue to alter his movies until he feels he has fully realized his vision. Nobody can fault him for that because that is something few people get to do in life. Lucas should be commended for has passion and be praised for striving to bring us the full picture. The originals will never be forgotten but I do not see the changes in Star Wars as negative disrespect for the theatrical releases, but rather as more pieces to the ever evolving puzzle that is Star Wars. Someday Lucas will accomplish his goal in this lifetime and people will still complain. I for one will continue to purchase the various releases until the circle is finally complete.
Author
Time
Post link
I don't think they should have banned you, but I gotta disagree with you about Lucas. His is more of a de-evolution than an evolution. I don't think he deserves to be praised, either.

Author
Time
Post link
Think about how each new release gives everybody new things to talk about. Really it is quite an exciting time to be a Star Wars fan. I love all of Star Wars that is why I do not like to see people who don't hate the 2004 editions being attacked. Originaltrilogy.com is a site that is devoted to film preservation. It's a beautiful thing. DVDActive, particularly their site administrator gave the OOT a favorable review yet bashed everybody who said there was nothing wrong with the release being non-anamorphic. I stuck up for another person who was simply pointing out that no matter what people are always going to be unhappy with Lucas. I perfer the OOT but enjoy the 2004 editions too. Now we can at least legally choose which version we want to watch. It's great having both.
Author
Time
Post link
I watched Star Wars last night, and I have to say I wasn't overly impressed, and I bought it with low expectations. Sure it was grainy (and super-grainy) at times, but what really bothered me was the aliasing. Maybe it's my setup (50" WS DLP, Samsung "upconverting" DVD player via HDMI) but any time there was a line, even a curved one mind you, it became a jaggy. Seriously, it looked like Charles Schultz drew on top of the filmstock.
40,000 million notches away
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Windexed
I watched Star Wars last night, and I have to say I wasn't overly impressed, and I bought it with low expectations. Sure it was grainy (and super-grainy) at times, but what really bothered me was the aliasing. Maybe it's my setup (50" WS DLP, Samsung "upconverting" DVD player via HDMI) but any time there was a line, even a curved one mind you, it became a jaggy. Seriously, it looked like Charles Schultz drew on top of the filmstock.


The DVD's do have some serious aliasing problems.


Author
Time
Post link
I'm watching ANH (77) right now on my regular 4:3 tv and the aliasing is appearing here as well. It seems like the result of interlacing issues.

I think it looks better than my old VHS and Laserdisc so far.

One thing I am really digging is the film grain. I love the SE's grain-free look, but this just feels like a film again. I feel more like I'm in a theater watching celluloid than when I watch the SE. It all helps to take me back in time.

I have to say the Wal-mart deal is the way to go. The comics they include are full sized cardboard bound graphic novels.

I remember reading those back in the day and these images are like brand new better than the originals I read.

It's all just flooding back now.

Playing Star Wars legos before they had the Star Wars license (I had to make my own X wings and snow speeders out of leftover parts from the "firefighter" lego set!), playing the storybook record for ANH and playing along with my action figures (this was before VCR's) man this is sweet.
Your focus determines your reality.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Originally posted by: mverta
... Another curious move is making up shit to make yourself sound intelligent. Alright, there was no need for that.
Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen
It almost sounds like a conspiracy theory to say they added film grain. No...
Originally posted by: mverta
http://www.mikeverta.com/Posts/SW_Compare_1a.png

On the left, a pre-93 laserdisc image. On the right, the 2006 "1993-laserdisc-master" DVD. The image is grainier. This either means that the '93 laserdiscs were sourced from a different, and grainier print than the pre-'93 laserdiscs, which would mean they went through the re-issuing and quality actually went down in some respects, or this image has been artificially grained-up. There are some other differences in the images to suggest a different print, as well, so it's not 100% clear. The comment "mixed bag" is especially appropriate to describe the 2006 DVD, which is why I said I'd bet money, and not that I was definitively sure. Having done grain matching on more than 100 projects in the last 10 years, I see a good amount of evidence for post-added grain, which has a look you can recognize if you're familiar enough with it. Ditto the digital gate-weave added to the recreated crawl - it's very distinctive, and easily recognizable. This is a compelling compare; judge for yourself. NOW it sounds like a conspiracy theory!
Originally posted by: mverta
I have personally seen the source files Lucasfilm claims don't exist to produce restored OT discs.
...
In the end, there are just too many of us, with too much material and expertise, too many inside contacts, and too many privileged sources to make the idea of a deliberately substandard release anything less than fact. Oh yeah, that certainly sounds like a conspiracy-theory to me!Originally posted by: Mentor
More grain is revealed simply because the DVD's are encoded from a higher resolution source than a laserdisc.
I think you've hit the nail on the head there.Originally posted by: mverta
In this case, the pre-93 laserdisc is unquestionably a touch softer than the 2006 transfer, but not by a significant enough margin to justify the extra grain; not by a long shot.
But Mike, Lowry Digital was told to do the highest level of grain removal for the 2004 SE.In fact, even Lucasfilm is aware the images are substandard: they're deliberately posting compares on the StarWars.com site to show you how shitty the OT DVD's you just bought are.
I was really impressed by the level of detail in the 2004 DVD's. But honestly, it's not that much more then the detail in the OUT:

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/6523/goutpalr035sc0.jpg
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/9350/aofficialr035ug8.jpg

Spot the difference.

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/91/goutpalr027yi3.jpg
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/1313/aofficialr027ck3.jpg

Just a hint of ghosting on the OUT disc there.Originally posted by: mverta
in the interest of preservation, accuracy, and love for the trilogy, I'm not going to turn a blind eye to the deficiencies which are patently obvious in these transfers.


mverta: There is a lot of evidence for deliberate image-quality reduction in the 2006 DVD. It's not a fact; it's an informed opinion.

mverta: In any case, the degradation of the imagery isn't an opinion, it's a quantifiable fact.

Nice flip-flop there. Which is it?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.
Thank you for backing up something I've been flamed at for, many times - on the issue of grain removal on the 2004 DVD's. I also know that they also manually removed deficiencies.



Mike, I don't think you're a fool. I have a lot of respect for you, as I'm aware you do work in the industry. Some others may also realize this "authority" with which you speak. I was challenging your claims (and then others did as well). Enjoy the rest of your week Mike.
Some were not blessed with brains.
<blockquote>Originally posted by: BadAssKeith

You are passing up on a great opportunity to makes lots of money,
make Lucas lose a lot of his money
and make him look bad to the entire world
and you could be well known and liked

None of us here like Lucas or Lucasfilm.
I have death wishes on Lucas and Macullum.
we could all probably get 10s of thousands of dollars!
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Boris
Mike, I don't think you're a fool. I have a lot of respect for you, as I'm aware you do work in the industry. Some others may also realize this "authority" with which you speak. I was challenging your claims (and then others did as well). Enjoy the rest of your week Mike.


This is the kind of attitude I love seeing around here. It reminds me how it used to be before the GOUT was announced. For your wonderful response, you went up a notch in my book, Boris.


Author
Time
Post link
mverta: There is a lot of evidence for deliberate image-quality reduction in the 2006 DVD. It's not a fact; it's an informed opinion.

mverta: In any case, the degradation of the imagery isn't an opinion, it's a quantifiable fact.

Nice flip-flop there. Which is it?

These are two different statements, Boris. If we take the second statement first: "The image has less quality". THe other statement says "there is evidence the loss of quality is deliberate"

More grain is revealed simply because the DVD's are encoded from a higher resolution source than a laserdisc.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there.


The 2006 DVDs are NOT encoded from a higher resolution source than a laserdisc.

But Mike, Lowry Digital was told to do the highest level of grain removal for the 2004 SE.


But this is not talking about the 2004 SEs.
Darth Lucas: I am altering the trilogy. Pray I don't alter it further.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: ronlaw
The 2006 DVDs are NOT encoded from a higher resolution source than a laserdisc.
I think you'll find the colour bandwidth is higher on the digital master then it is on analogue laserdisc. At any rate, they were mastered from a source higher in quality then a laserdisc.

Take a look at the screenshot I posted of Luke (from Zion's site)... It's my favourites to compare with, because in some parts of it the 2004 has more detail... but in other parts the 2006 OUT seems to have more detail. Take a look at the seatbelt... a side-effect of all the grain removal done for the 2004 version is that the stripes are now much less distinct. Also, if it wasn't for the difference in grain the quality of both images could even be equal. Whenever people here still complain about the quality of the 1993 masters, saying that they should have re-scanned the film from scratch I just think of that one frame – and I think what little difference it would have really made.
Some were not blessed with brains.
<blockquote>Originally posted by: BadAssKeith

You are passing up on a great opportunity to makes lots of money,
make Lucas lose a lot of his money
and make him look bad to the entire world
and you could be well known and liked

None of us here like Lucas or Lucasfilm.
I have death wishes on Lucas and Macullum.
we could all probably get 10s of thousands of dollars!
Author
Time
Post link
Sure the stripes are gone and other detail from the Lowery cleanup.
But the problem isn't the lack of a clean up, it's the lower lines of resolution in the source used.
A new anamorphic transfer would still have film grain but it would have even BETTER detail than the '04 DVD.
THAT'S what we are all bitching about.

I mean if he really wanted to screw us, he could have dubbed the DVD from a VHS tape.

Dr. M

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Doctor M
Sure the stripes are gone and other detail from the Lowery cleanup.
But the problem isn't the lack of a clean up, it's the lower lines of resolution in the source used.
A new anamorphic transfer would still have film grain but it would have even BETTER detail than the '04 DVD.
THAT'S what we are all bitching about.

I mean if he really wanted to screw us, he could have dubbed the DVD from a VHS tape.
And if he did it again, it may come out looking like the 2004 DVD... colour and all. It's not bad how it is.
Some were not blessed with brains.
<blockquote>Originally posted by: BadAssKeith

You are passing up on a great opportunity to makes lots of money,
make Lucas lose a lot of his money
and make him look bad to the entire world
and you could be well known and liked

None of us here like Lucas or Lucasfilm.
I have death wishes on Lucas and Macullum.
we could all probably get 10s of thousands of dollars!
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: boris
Whenever people here still complain about the quality of the 1993 masters, saying that they should have re-scanned the film from scratch I just think of that one frame – and I think what little difference it would have really made.

A new transfer would have gotten rid of a much bigger problem, the nasty ghosting that plagues this release from start to finish:

http://img103.imageshack.us/img103/1192/anhdcbi8.jpg

(Above is a cap from the LD, but the GOUT looks exactly the same with a slight edge in "detail".)

http://img457.imageshack.us/img457/8917/anh2004mi4.jpg

Spot the difference?

The screenshots on my site were hand-chosen to make each transfer look good and ignore flaws like this. But it's hard to ignore this flaw when watching them.

My Projects:
[Holiday Special Hybrid DVD v2]
[X0 Project]
[Backstroke of the West DVD]
[ROTS Theatrical DVD]

Author
Time
Post link
I didn't have time to go to Circuit City today...DAMMIT!!!!

Anyone think the lithiodgraphs will still be in stock on Saturday?
Watch DarthEvil's Who Framed Darth Vader? video on YouTube!

You can also access the entire Horriffic Violence Theater Series from my Channel Page.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Zion
Originally posted by: boris
Whenever people here still complain about the quality of the 1993 masters, saying that they should have re-scanned the film from scratch I just think of that one frame – and I think what little difference it would have really made.

A new transfer would have gotten rid of a much bigger problem, the nasty ghosting that plagues this release from start to finish:

http://img103.imageshack.us/img103/1192/anhdcbi8.jpg

(Above is a cap from the LD, but the GOUT looks exactly the same with a slight edge in "detail".)
Does it? You know if that cap was off the OUT then you would have had a point. As it is, here is a real cap of that frame from the OUT - captured with VirtualDubMod, unretouched, just resized:

http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/7151/outcapxv3.jpg

Where did the ghosting go? Oh sure, it's still there.. but it's not much any more. Not to mention that it has a little more then just a "slight edge" in detail over the laserdisc, wouldn't you agree?

Some were not blessed with brains.
<blockquote>Originally posted by: BadAssKeith

You are passing up on a great opportunity to makes lots of money,
make Lucas lose a lot of his money
and make him look bad to the entire world
and you could be well known and liked

None of us here like Lucas or Lucasfilm.
I have death wishes on Lucas and Macullum.
we could all probably get 10s of thousands of dollars!
Author
Time
Post link
I got mine from C.C. and on my TV the Pic looks great. on my PC there are lines that can be seen slicing the video but they are very small.

the stereo sound 2.0 is good but not great. it was strange not seeing the "ILM" logo before the film, I guess that means they had nothing to do with this transfer. but there "THX" test was on there?? IMO Weard. its like testing your system for best playback of a Not so Perfect Print??

anyway this is nice set. and I heard the 2007 Six Pack with have twice the CGI Fx's in the 2004 Set had. this could make all the films even longer play times! like LOTR Maybe?
§ JxF §
http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k200/Jediii_2006/box/blu-sw.jpg

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k200/Jediii_2006/box/starwars_ani.gif
http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/489/bluraydisc2lk9.jpg
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Raul2106
I love all of Star Wars that is why I do not like to see people who don't hate the 2004 editions being attacked.

I don't attack people, but I will attack opinions if I believe they are wrong. "Hating" the 2004 editions is a complex subject. Do I hate the edited films as a whole? No, they're still decent works of entertainment. Do I hate many of the changes? Yes, because they directly destroy some of the beautiful concepts and feelings the film evokes. I do not like cheapened art and therefore I believe everyone should dislike most if not all of the special-edition changes to the Star Wars films. George Lucas is very fallible.


Originally posted by: Raul2106
DVDActive, particularly their site administrator gave the OOT a favorable review yet bashed everybody who said there was nothing wrong with the release being non-anamorphic. I stuck up for another person who was simply pointing out that no matter what people are always going to be unhappy with Lucas. I perfer the OOT but enjoy the 2004 editions too. Now we can at least legally choose which version we want to watch. It's great having both.


Well, it sucks that you were banned. That administrator sounds like a childish dipstick. But, I must inform you that there is something very wrong with releasing the films in a non-anamorphic format.

“People are always going to be unhappy with Lucas,” eh? And that somehow gives Lucas the right to avoid criticism when he releases some of the greatest films of all time in a style that is well below the industry standard? I should just shut up and be thankful that this is at least part of what I’ve always wanted and commend George Lucas?

I, and many others, would be perfectly happy if the OUT were given the same treatment as his crappy edited versions. That would be meeting standard expectations in the industry that George could easily afford and then easily make a profit on. That is all most of the complainers wanted. You and that fellow you defended are clearly insulting my intelligence in a passive way by claiming that I’d “always” be unhappy and I don't appreciate that at all. That is by no means a fact to “point” out.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Tiptup
I don't attack people, but I will attack opinions if I believe they are wrong.

[...]

That administrator sounds like a childish dipstick. But, I must inform you that there is something very wrong with releasing the films in a non-anamorphic format.
If I didn't know better, I might think you just attacked a person whose opinion you agree with.

However, in practice you must take into account the “fuckwit factor”. Just talk to Darth Mallwalker…
-Moth3r

Author
Time
Post link
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.


Yeah, Lucas sat down at a computer and screwed up the OOT trasfer all by himself. He was wearing a Jar Jar T-shirt and lighting cuban cigars with 100 dollar bills, too.

That's almost as good as Lucas opening the mail at Skywalker ranch.
"Among many things I have to be thankful for are you, the fans. I know that some of you haven't liked every single thing that I've done with the saga, and that you have a strong sense of ownership over all things Star Wars. But take that passion and devotion and channel it into a creative project of your own."
-George Lucas