Harmy's STAR WARS Despecialized Edition HD - V2.7 - MKV (Released) — Page 182

I have to agree, x264 should be the best choice.

Harmy said:

So, I was thinking; there are many small colour anomalies in the original colour timing, like one shot having a blue cast and the next having a purple one and such. Most of the time kept true to them but I did make one rather major exception: the two shots from this angle:

 

The top is how it appears in the WP, the bottom is almost exactly how it appears on the I.B. print; all the other shots in the print look pretty much the way they look in the WP, so these two stand out quite a bit. What do you guys think, should I make them look like this?

 

Top one!

I can't imagine this was anything else but an error. Is the IB print really an indication about what a pristine theatrical copy looked back then? Either way, the miscoloring wasn't a result of a technical limitation, budget constraints or lack of production time... someone just made a mistake after the film was finished.

Harmy said:

What do you guys think, should I make them look like this?

 

Top one, I think you should treat those colour anomalies like you did with the garbage mattes as there's no artistic intention for them.

Either way you go is fine with me, I am kind of partial to the technicolor timing, mistakes or not. 

I don't know which one is more legitimate but the top one looks much much better than the bottom one

djchaseb said:

Either way you go is fine with me, I am kind of partial to the technicolor timing, mistakes or not. 

This. I'd love to be accurate as possible to the IB print, flaws and all. So, I suppose my vote is for the bottom one.

Harmy said:

That's the thing though, those were mistakes that someone made back then and millions of people saw the film with those mistakes. And again, garbage mattes always seem to come up in these kinds of discussions and I always have to repeat that I only try to remove them because in optimal projection conditions, those wouldn't have been visible, and if I knew they were always visible, I'd probably be putting garbage mattes back where they were removed in the SE, just like matte lines or colourless lightsabres.

Good point, but I still think this goes in contradiction to the goal of getting away from the poor GOUT quality. Perhaps we should compare it to the burning mark ;)

I like them both but if had to choose i would go for the bottom one.

Bottom for historical reasons...

Do we have any idea how it looks in the LPP print negative1 uses for his project?

The top shot looks better, but if the bottom one really represents what it looked like on the Technicolor print, then that's where my vote would have to be, for the sake of accuracy to the original appearance.

It does, however, raise the question of whether the Technicolor version was timed exactly the same way as the regular prints were.  Does Mike Verta have any particular insights about this?

stretch009 said:

TV's Frink said:

re encoding, I've had good results with hcenc.

I don't know that much about the topic but I'm pretty sure he'd rather use the far superior x264 over hcenc's mpeg2 encoder.

Edit:  If you were talking about the DVD5 than ,yes, I totally agree.

 

-

I vote for the top version, but I can understand the argument the other way.

Bottom please I want this to look as close as it did when my father saw it at the theater. Please Harmy.

Although it would be a shame to throw your superb color correction out the window by having that shot look like ass...