logo Sign In

Info Wanted: 70mm OT digital restoration? Are there any?

Author
Date
Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link

Since the 70mm versions supposedly have more detail than the 35mm films, wouldn’t they be a better source for restoration?

Are there any known 70mm sources of any of the three OT films?

And how do they compare to the original negatives quality-wise?

Thanks,

LG

Children in the backseat of a car can cause accidents, but accidents in the backseat of a car can cause children.

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link

Probably not as most of the reels were destroyed after being sent back from the cinemas, unless some are in private collections.  I have seen reels for empire and jedi being sold on Ebay but since owning them is illegal i never put myself in harms way by bidding on them.

Plus they were faded to almost no color left and pink.  And who knows what condition the mag tracks would be in since they apt to warp over time and even desintegrate.

 

The 70mm masters themselves if they are in the Lucasfilm Vault would most likely need to be restored if the collectible cels from willets designs are any indication.  Star Wars and Empire were pre LPP Eastman Kodak.  Almost all prints are useless as a source.

I wonder if they made a 70mm printing master of the special edition before adding all the cgi, even if they did it would have had the final changes and audio mixes.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time
Post link

The 70mm is an upscale anyway, so what's the point? A lot more cost for no benefit to going to a more "original" source. Like mastering a 70mm negative of AOTC when the movie was shot in digital?

Author
Time
Post link

There is definitely at least one 70mm print of Star Wars in the hands of a private collector, according to this link: http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/archive/index.php/t-141011.html

Steve Hoffman was lucky enough to see it a couple years ago, and according to him, it still looked and sounded fantastic despite its age.  Obviously going from a theatrical print may not be ideal, but given all the alterations that have been made to the original, possibly even at the negative level, this might actually be the best surviving copy of the film in existence.  At least it is in the hands of someone who treats it with care and respect, even if the chances of it being transferred and released are very slim at best.

What I find interesting is his assertion of its superiority over the SE in quality terms.  That the '97 soundtrack is significantly less dynamic is obvious from even a casual comparison with the DC mix--but he also says the image of the SE was much softer than what he saw.  I wonder if that means they really did scan the whole film to digital for the sake of re-compositing the effects.  They only had 2k scanning in the 90's, which is less resolution than 35mm film to be sure, and if true it would certainly account for the disparity.

Author
Time
Post link

hairy_hen said:

What I find interesting is his assertion of its superiority over the SE in quality terms.  That the '97 soundtrack is significantly less dynamic is obvious from even a casual comparison with the DC mix--but he also says the image of the SE was much softer than what he saw.

 Yeah, that's really interesting when he wonders if it's voluntary done...

I wonder myself if showing the superiority of such an "old" format wouldn't be somehow a threat for the new technologies, including blueray.

Anybody has never mentionned any relation between Lucas and the blue ray to my knowledge, so I almost wonder if my far memories are so real, but here they are:

At the time of RotJ (1983/84), I had a special magazine entirely about the making off. Lucas spoked of one of his project: developping a new technology: the blue laser. I'm 90% sure it was said in it...

 

"Starfix magazine, hors serie n°1" (french)

ESB AUDIOPHILE EDITION

 

The EMPIRE STRIKES BACK Score: "All-Sourced" Restoration & Sonic Achievement.

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link

jfett said:


The 70mm is an upscale anyway, so what's the point?

I think even if the original negative is 35mm, a 70mm print is still preferable to a 35mm print due to the size of the frame and the grain structure within.

Author
Time
Post link
I still have that "Starfix magazine, hors serie n°1" (french) and it's great.
Author
Time
Post link

Mielr said:

jfett said:


The 70mm is an upscale anyway, so what's the point?
I think even if the original negative is 35mm, a 70mm print is still preferable to a 35mm print due to the size of the frame and the grain structure within.

Maybe, but I doubt the film size is going to be the most important factor. After all, you can only digitize to 4k Max either way (on most scanners), you're not going to digitize to a higher spec. When a film is as old as Star Wars the film has aged, it has faded, and developed many, many scratches and possibly warping. It'll need to be professionally cleaned first. You'll need a highly calibrated set-up to scan the film, you're going to scan in four channels for every frame one exposure at a time R, G, B, IR (for infrared correction).

Problem of course is that while technology gets better, the film stock gets older. If you had a print in your possession, it's going to take a lot of money to get it looking anything like the 2004 retail DVD. It can't be done by one person on a shoe-string budget.

Author
Time
Post link

Upscaling relates to video, not film.

Even if someone had a good 70mm print lying around, there aren't a whole lot of telecines around that can handle them. Unless someone has one in their basement.

We can still drool over these frame scans, and lament that we'll probably never get to enjoy a 70mm OT screening.

http://www.jedi1.net/

 

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
Post link

I think he meant 70 mm blow-up rather than upscale.