logo Sign In

OBITUARY - Star Wars Fullscreen/Pan and Scan versions. R.I.P. — Page 4

Author
Time

red5-626 said:

 STAR WARS 
FULL SCREEN LASER DISC "NEVER BEEN OPENED" STILL IN ORIGINAL SEAL

the pan and scan full screen versions have been captured,

and posted on alt.binaries.starwars, the discussion is here:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Pan-amp-Scan-O-OT-Project/topic/2625/page/4/

 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time

I have a few different Full Screen tapes that I was eventually going to transfer.  I have been busy with my Droids set but doing a straight preservation of these tapes shouldn't be a problem.

I have a Faces set that was still in the wrapper until about 6 months ago when I got my hands on it.  I have only played Episode 4 for about 10 minutes just to check out how nice it still looks.

I also have the 1992 VHS Full Screen box set with Empire and Jedi still in the wrapper.  I also have the 1982 Rental tape as well.  Pretty good condition.

I have some decent SVHS decks and a capture card to do raw AVI captures.  

Here is a sample I just made of the 1982 Rental tape on my JVC SVHS deck. http://www.sendspace.com/file/1iz9lk

And here is a sample of the intro to Episode IV on the Faces set http://www.sendspace.com/file/4s9ewr

If anybody wants me to capture any of these let me know.  Although I must say my current Droids project already has me pulling my hair out :P

Author
Time

retartedted said:

 

I have some decent SVHS decks and a capture card to do raw AVI captures.  

Here is a sample I just made of the 1982 Rental tape on my JVC SVHS deck. http://www.sendspace.com/file/1iz9lk

And here is a sample of the intro to Episode IV on the Faces set http://www.sendspace.com/file/4s9ewr

If anybody wants me to capture any of these let me know.  Although I must say my current Droids project already has me pulling my hair out :P

very cool. thanks for the samples.

yes, if you can capture them. please do.

my parents didn't own a vhs, and i never did either (until

a few years ago).. i started off with laserdiscs..

 

anyways, take your time, there's no rush.

they're not going anywhere. hopefully it will be

easier to do just a straight transfer of the video.

 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time

Earlier in this thread on Post 33 I offered my IVTC script
for dark_jedi's "Standard Play" preservation of CAV laserdisc 1130-84.
By mistake I omitted this field:
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/2439/60083.th.png

So I've made a revised script and posted on a.b.starwars too.



http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/598/27510.png
above is dark_jedi's Standard Play - LD 1130-84
----
below is The Starkiller's 1982 Video Rental Library - VHS
http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/598/27510.png

Look at the overscan along the right edges. Then look at Threepio's wrists.
It can't be a coincidence -- I think those two are from the same telecine master tape!
But my conclusion isn't based solely one that one frame...

Recently-finished IVTC/GOUT-sync script for theStarkiller's VHS is there and also usenet.

If you study both scripts, you'll notice that both home video releases
are missing exactly the same frames&fields at every reel change
and a few that occur mid-reel, like the Obi-Wan field shown above "You'd've been killed too..."

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

Author
Time
 (Edited)

This is true - there were two telecine masters of the first film made for NTSC. There was the one used for the VHS/Beta releases (later used on the non-time-compressed LDs), and the one used for the time-compressed LD/CED releases (also seen on HBO - and it was time-compressed there too).

The only NTSC video masters to be made after 1982 were the widescreen transfer for the Japanese Special Collection in '86 (from the same film source as the earlier transfers), and the new widescreen transfer in '92 to fix the "shrinking ratio" issue, from the same picture element that would be utilized for the Definitive Collection (seen on the '92 widescreen VHS set and the '93 Technidisc pressings of the Special Widescreen Edition LD).

One of the reasons that the "digitally remastered" THX releases in '93-'95 looked so impressive back then is because we had been watching old 1" analog transfers for over a decade.

As for PAL, right now I think there was one pan-and-scan transfer done in '82, and a widescreen one done some time in the late 80s (which appeared on the pre-THX French and German widescreen LDs). There needs to be more research done on the PAL transfers; that's why I keep suggesting preservations of pre-THX PAL laserdiscs, widescreen and fullscreen.

Author
Time

For those interested in the minutiae of these things one unique aspect of the Pan/Scan telecine is the extra 'headroom'. Although I have screwed up the aspect ratio on my PAL 1982 transfer you should still be able to see the extra visual information there at the top of the screen. In these examples, the skyline is visible in the sandpeople shot and chewies head is not cropped in the elevator (as compared to the widescreen framing). This is a corruption of GL's original compositions, of course, but it does give you a little sneak peek beyond the official frame.

http://i45.tinypic.com/2la6m8n.jpg

http://i49.tinypic.com/346ut0p.jpg

http://i46.tinypic.com/2a62tr6.jpg

Even between the tape transfers of the exact same telecines there seems to be slight variations. I compared my 1982 PAL UK tape (made in USA) to Russs15's 1982 PAL UK tape (made in Japan) and found very minute differences at the edges of the left and right of the frame here and there (though only the odd line or so). Russs15 also spotted that my tape had a different fox intro title card. (http://youtu.be/-HJyFadDs3M) Small differences but it does add to the imperfect charm of this format (or not if you hate it!)

Author
Time

I read somewhere many of Fox's widescreen LD transfers might have been too tight with regards to headroom, so what we're supposed to see or not see is murky at best.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

I read somewhere many of Fox's widescreen LD transfers might have been too tight with regards to headroom, so what we're supposed to see or not see is murky at best.

 

True I'm going by the Blu Ray as the new standard for whats intended. I remember reading too that the 70mm prints had a different aspect ratio and show slightly more top and bottom information. But I would guess as Lucas was composing in camera with his marked off widescreen frame he would have used things like the skyline to balance his shots against. It seems (to me) like he would not have intended for the tiny strip of sky to show for example in this frame and change the 'closed in' feeling of the lanscape. This is just my subjective guess.

 

http://i50.tinypic.com/1grxip.jpg

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

You can check out some 70mm frames here:

http://www.jedi1.net/

 

Yep just comparing the trash compactor still against the blu-ray and 1982 pan and scan, the 70mm has the most top and bottom information, then pan and scan, then blu-ray. This is fractional stuff- for example you get an extra button on a control panel in a scene or whatever, but it comes down to how balanced the frame feels, which is pretty minute subjective stuff unless you want absolute compositional accuracy!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

frank678 said:

Even between the tape transfers of the exact same telecines there seems to be slight variations. I compared my 1982 PAL UK tape (made in USA) to Russs15's 1982 PAL UK tape (made in Japan) and found very minute differences at the edges of the left and right of the frame here and there (though only the odd line or so). Russs15 also spotted that my tape had a different fox intro title card. (http://youtu.be/-HJyFadDs3M) Small differences but it does add to the imperfect charm of this format (or not if you hate it!)

My tape intro is here as a comparison.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFfG8YF8PFY

It is hard to imagine that this is supposed to be from the same release.....

4 - 5 - 3 - 1 - 6 - 2

Discuss…

Author
Time

For a 29 year old source, that is very clear and crisp.

4 - 5 - 3 - 1 - 6 - 2

Discuss…

Author
Time

russs15 said:

For a 29 year old source, that is very clear and crisp.

 

Yep, the uncompressed capture is more detailed as well, but unfortunately it works out at about 1GB for 1 minute. I'd love to get a preservation done of this with highest settings without the need for compression but its just too impractical a file size in one hit for my computer. It makes more sense to just stick the tape in the vcr.

http://i47.tinypic.com/345oawz.jpg

Author
Time

frank678 said:

Yep, the uncompressed capture is more detailed as well, but unfortunately it works out at about 1GB for 1 minute. I'd love to get a preservation done of this with highest settings without the need for compression but its just too impractical a file size in one hit for my computer. It makes more sense to just stick the tape in the vcr.

 

 

Well, that's pretty weird.  In AVI DV uncompressed mode which is the most common codec used for capturing analog sources, it takes about 12GB for 60 minutes.

“English, motherf***er! Do you speak it!?”

Author
Time

ilovewaterslides said:

Well, that's pretty weird. In AVI DV uncompressed mode which is the most common codec used for capturing analog sources, it takes about 12GB for 60 minutes.

Yeah I think I'll re-investigate the settings/codecs. :)

Author
Time

frank678 said:

ilovewaterslides said:

Well, that's pretty weird. In AVI DV uncompressed mode which is the most common codec used for capturing analog sources, it takes about 12GB for 60 minutes.

Yeah I think I'll re-investigate the settings/codecs. :)

What is your capture process?  You using VirtualDub?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

retartedted said:

What is your capture process? You using VirtualDub?

Nope did try VirtualDub but it kept dropping frames and I couldnt solve what the issue was. I'm using a usb capture device and the program it came with. Might use VirtualDub down the line after I've tinkered some more.

Author
Time

frank678 said:

retartedted said:

What is your capture process? You using VirtualDub?

Nope did try VirtualDub but it kept dropping frames and I couldnt solve what the issue was. I'm using a usb capture device and the program it came with. Might use VirtualDub down the line after I've tinkered some more.

Did you modify the audio-sync settings? The default ones drop lots of frames to maintain sync, IIRC.

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time

AntcuFaalb said:

frank678 said:

retartedted said:

What is your capture process? You using VirtualDub?

Nope did try VirtualDub but it kept dropping frames and I couldnt solve what the issue was. I'm using a usb capture device and the program it came with. Might use VirtualDub down the line after I've tinkered some more.

Did you modify the audio-sync settings? The default ones drop lots of frames to maintain sync, IIRC.

The audio playback is a big one too (I think it may be disabled by default though).  I have always had problems with that chomping up the CPU and causing dropped frames.  I just leave it off as it isn't quite necessary to hear the audio while I capture.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

frank678 said:

retartedted said:

What is your capture process? You using VirtualDub?

Nope did try VirtualDub but it kept dropping frames and I couldnt solve what the issue was. I'm using a usb capture device and the program it came with. Might use VirtualDub down the line after I've tinkered some more.

You answered your own question here without knowing it ..... your issue with frame drops is the USB part of your transfer process.  I had the same issue with my capture tests using VirtualDub.  For it to work properly you should use an internal capture card. 

I also use an external drive with a firewire connection.

Author
Time

Jetrell Fo said:

frank678 said:

retartedted said:

What is your capture process? You using VirtualDub?

Nope did try VirtualDub but it kept dropping frames and I couldnt solve what the issue was. I'm using a usb capture device and the program it came with. Might use VirtualDub down the line after I've tinkered some more.

You answered your own question here without knowing it ..... your issue with frame drops is the USB part of your transfer process.  I had the same issue with my capture tests using VirtualDub.  For it to work properly you should use an internal capture card. 

I also use an external drive with a firewire connection.

I've never had frame drops using a USB capture device (Hauppauge USB Live-2). Then again, I always capture without audio...

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time
 (Edited)

AntcuFaalb said:

Jetrell Fo said:

frank678 said:

retartedted said:

What is your capture process? You using VirtualDub?

Nope did try VirtualDub but it kept dropping frames and I couldnt solve what the issue was. I'm using a usb capture device and the program it came with. Might use VirtualDub down the line after I've tinkered some more.

You answered your own question here without knowing it ..... your issue with frame drops is the USB part of your transfer process.  I had the same issue with my capture tests using VirtualDub.  For it to work properly you should use an internal capture card. 

I also use an external drive with a firewire connection.

I've never had frame drops using a USB capture device (Hauppauge USB Live-2). Then again, I always capture without audio...

There are different factors.  For doing audio/video capture together, I've always lost frames using USB because of bandwidth.  USB doesn't handle that as well as some would like.  Processor, memory, HD space all need to be considered, including which external device you may want to use.  I suspect doing just video makes it easier on the capture process when using USB.  This is just MY personal experience with it.

http://www.digitalfaq.com/guides/video/capture-dropped-frames.htm

The link I've provided might prove useful for the op.  There are a myriad of different articles that might provide some helpful tips.

Cheers and good luck with your capture work.