Info: Digging up those blacks - using the STAR WARS Blu-ray for preservations — Page 6

TServo2049 said:

And that laser...awful. That shot is recomposited, notice how the difference in grain between the 70mm and the Blu-ray is much more visible than in the other comparison.

 Are you sure about that? the difference in grain, could it not just be the result of Lowry?

TServo2049 said:

A lot of the recomposited lasers in that sequence have the same problem - the glow element is way too saturated and fat, there's no difference in opacity/density between the beam and the surrounding glow, and the actual beam shape just looks like a stencil on top of the glow.

This same unnatural effect is seen on these lights in the walls as well:

I doubt there's any recomposited lasers in there, just screwed up levels, it affects everything. I guess some details can be restored but the real damage cannot be undone, once clipped...

TServo2049 said:

You may well be right. The heavy smoke may have caused more visible grain with each generation than other scenes, so the negative might not look as grainy as this print.

I shouldn't have said that the shot IS recomposited, because I really can't prove it. I guess I just got that impression from looking at the comparison. The lasers look so different that I just assumed that they were recomposited, like the lightsaber scenes.

When I come up with a theory, I sometimes get carried away and start talking about it like it's definitely true. I apologize for that. The truth is that I have no clue as to whether the lasers were recomposited or not.

It's cool, I was just curious if you happen to know something about it, definitely no need to apologize, I don't state any facts either, I just see the similarities with other red boosted objects, like those lights. It may be a combination of the Lowry algorithm, the artificial sharpening that was applied and of course the unnatural amounts of reds. I have noticed that whenever there is recompositing done on the trilogy, the original timings and/or positioning of those elements are never exactly the same.

Thanks for the update Yoo_Too

You_Too said:

TServo2049 said:

I'm absolutely not faulting you, Y_T - the red information in the transfer is just that screwed up.

No, of course I understand you're not! It sure is screwed up.

frank678 said:

Can someone help me with my knowledge on this - how much of the blu-ray redness is red damage/red shift now in the original damaged negative and how much is redness boosted in the color correction moves done by Lucasfilm.

It is all by Lucasfilm. They call it "George's vision".

Check this, a 70mm frame:

And the same from the blu-ray:

Now let's compare the part at the upper left:

In the original it can clearly be seen that there's no red clipping. You can see that the red light shines through some glass/plastic which has it's own reflection. In the blu-ray the red light shines stronger than the reflection on the outside of it.

EDIT:

Thought about another thing that shows it even more.

Harmy posted this re-timed 70mm frame in the color timing thread, which should look like the original technicolor version:

Here's the same from the blu-ray:

  THE blu-ray has DNR and over saturation.