- Time
- Post link
http://www.starwarz.com/tbone/editorials/original_original_trilogy_dvds.htm
http://www.starwarz.com/tbone/editorials/original_original_trilogy_dvds.htm
Dr. M
ORIGINAL STAR WARS TRILOGY OUT 09/2006 BY LUCASFILM — Page 10
http://www.starwarz.com/tbone/editorials/original_original_trilogy_dvds.htm
- Time
- Post link
In a really nice editorial rant on thedigitalbits.com today, they repeated something I had heard before: "creating the new 1997 Special Edition versions of the films... [GL] cut the original negatives. So the original negatives of the theatrical versions no longer exist."
I remember when the '97 edition was coming I saw a cool hype-documentary. They explained that they went back to all of the original composite elements that GL was smart enough to preserve. After cleaning the elements, all of the fx shots were recomposited digitally to remove artifacts, transparencies, etc that resulted from the original dated analog methods.
Now I'm no film genius, but doesn't that mean they had to build a new master negative for the S.E.? They couldn't go back to the master negative, recut it, and use a computer to print new CG characters onto the film. They had to use the original ELEMENTS and recreate the scenes from scratch re-layering ships and stuff onto background plates. Someone had to cut by cut re-edit this movie and make a new master negative.
So which is it? Why would you re-cut the master negative if it's not even involved in the process? For that matter, if all of the original elements are now clean and ready to be digitally recomposited, why can't they use them and rebuilt the OOT again (digitally) without the "upgrades"?
Maybe I'm stupid, but it sounds like they didn't get their stories straight. Can someone help me understand this?
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Doctor M
I need help understanding something. Maybe I'm stupid. I don't really have a firm grip on negatives, and interpositives, etc.
In a really nice editorial rant on thedigitalbits.com today, they repeated something I had heard before: "creating the new 1997 Special Edition versions of the films... [GL] cut the original negatives. So the original negatives of the theatrical versions no longer exist."
I remember when the '97 edition was coming I saw a cool hype-documentary. They explained that they went back to all of the original composite elements that GL was smart enough to preserve. After cleaning the elements, all of the fx shots were recomposited digitally to remove artifacts, transparencies, etc that resulted from the original dated analog methods.
Now I'm no film genius, but doesn't that mean they had to build a new master negative for the S.E.? They couldn't go back to the master negative, recut it, and use a computer to print new CG characters onto the film. They had to use the original ELEMENTS and recreate the scenes from scratch re-layering ships and stuff onto background plates. Someone had to cut by cut re-edit this movie and make a new master negative.
So which is it? Why would you re-cut the master negative if it's not even involved in the process? For that matter, if all of the original elements are now clean and ready to be digitally recomposited, why can't they use them and rebuilt the OOT again (digitally) without the "upgrades"?
Maybe I'm stupid, but it sounds like they didn't get their stories straight. Can someone help me understand this?
I need help understanding something. Maybe I'm stupid. I don't really have a firm grip on negatives, and interpositives, etc.
In a really nice editorial rant on thedigitalbits.com today, they repeated something I had heard before: "creating the new 1997 Special Edition versions of the films... [GL] cut the original negatives. So the original negatives of the theatrical versions no longer exist."
I remember when the '97 edition was coming I saw a cool hype-documentary. They explained that they went back to all of the original composite elements that GL was smart enough to preserve. After cleaning the elements, all of the fx shots were recomposited digitally to remove artifacts, transparencies, etc that resulted from the original dated analog methods.
Now I'm no film genius, but doesn't that mean they had to build a new master negative for the S.E.? They couldn't go back to the master negative, recut it, and use a computer to print new CG characters onto the film. They had to use the original ELEMENTS and recreate the scenes from scratch re-layering ships and stuff onto background plates. Someone had to cut by cut re-edit this movie and make a new master negative.
So which is it? Why would you re-cut the master negative if it's not even involved in the process? For that matter, if all of the original elements are now clean and ready to be digitally recomposited, why can't they use them and rebuilt the OOT again (digitally) without the "upgrades"?
Maybe I'm stupid, but it sounds like they didn't get their stories straight. Can someone help me understand this?
Bingo!
When work was being done on the SE in 1993 the first thing they did was restore the negative. They washed it, cleaned it up, restored it in general. This was then made into a new print. This print is what ILM then worked with for CGI additions and such for the SE--so its the same source material that we saw on screens in 1997. Meaning there is a preserved OOT 35mm print that is as good quality as was onscreen in 1997.
And yes--the obvious reaction is "WHAT THE FUCK!" The thing is just sitting there. If anyone from Lucasfilm says any different they are lying. There is a restored 35mm OOT print that is as good condition at the SE and Lucasfilm cant be bothered to spend a few grande and do an HD scan of it.
This is why the Laserdisk transfer thing is so infuriating to me.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Gregatron
Here's a good article:
http://www.starwarz.com/tbone/editorials/original_original_trilogy_dvds.htm
Here's a good article:
http://www.starwarz.com/tbone/editorials/original_original_trilogy_dvds.htm
It was right on the money. Good ol' T-bone. I love that guy.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Doctor M
Now I'm no film genius, but doesn't that mean they had to build a new master negative for the S.E.? Someone had to cut by cut re-edit this movie and make a new master negative.
Now I'm no film genius, but doesn't that mean they had to build a new master negative for the S.E.? Someone had to cut by cut re-edit this movie and make a new master negative.
Yes and no. IIRC, the original cut negative was taken apart, but only where it was necessary for the SE additions/digitally composited scenes to be added. This means that the process of creating the SE negative also destroyed the OUT negative.
I don't know of an OUT print made at this time (other than from Zombie84) but I'm pretty sure that if there was such a print, then that's what would be being used for the new DVDs. However, in the absence of that print, it would be a monumental (and extremely expensive) task to reconstruct the OUT negative from the SE one.
On the other hand, there must be some interpositives and/or 1st gen prints in existence somewhere that could be digitally scanned in HD for high quality DVD and other, future releases. This is what would happen if the project were handed over to someone like Criterion.
- Time
- Post link
Why in the world would you really do that?
If you're working with the original film elements, wouldn't you strike new negatives from the rest of the non-fx clips as well? If you didn't you'd see differences in quality from aging of the negative versus the newly added clips struck from the original elements.
If that were really really true, we have to again ask the question: Where did the Empire of Dreams OUT clips come from if they were cut out and disposed of?
And really, you don't NEED a continuous master negative for DVD. You could reuse all the '04 DVD material and just (digitally) insert the unaltered clips that had to be built and scanned by a computer before overlaying CG material.
On the other hand, there must be some interpositives and/or 1st gen prints in existence somewhere that could be digitally scanned in HD for high quality DVD and other, future releases. This is what would happen if the project were handed over to someone like Criterion.
That's exactly what theDigitalBits.com said today.
Dr. M
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Gregatron
Here's a good article:
http://www.starwarz.com/tbone/editorials/original_original_trilogy_dvds.htm
Here's a good article:
http://www.starwarz.com/tbone/editorials/original_original_trilogy_dvds.htm
After reading this and all other articles floating around I have changed my mind. I am NOT BUYING these new DVDs unless I know for sure they are done correctly. I will borrow or rent and record them. As I stated in another thread I am glad I have all these wonderful fan transfers because from the way it is looking, these will be just as good if not BETTER than the September release. I try not rant and complain here to fill up space on this WONDERFUL forum which I have grown to love, but GL is pissing me off. I know we all want the OOT but with all this new technology and money that GL no doubt has, do it right DUMB ASS or don’t do it at all. (Speaking to GL of course)
Sorry for the rant, I have calmed down now. I will just wait till September.
“Good… Bad… I’m the guy with the gun.”
- Time
- Post link
Dang it.
- Time
- Post link
"The 1993 laserdisc masters are the best source material that can be found for use on DVD after exhaustive searches of the Lucasfilm Archives
This is flatly absurd. If this were true, Lucasfilm's archivists should be ashamed of themselves. We know of few professionals tasked with the preservation of film materials that would allow such critically important film elements as the original Star Wars films to be lost, to deteriorate or be wholesale destroyed. And again, even if Lucasfilm's vaults were so woefully incomplete, we know for a fact that quality elements exist elsewhere. Given 48 hours notice, we could track them down ourselves. Surely, with its significant resources and influence, Lucasfilm could do the same. If the 1993 laserdisc masters are really the best that Lucasfilm can do, it's disturbing. If not, a statement like "We returned to the Lucasfilm Archives to search exhaustively for source material that could be presented on DVD..." seems terribly disingenuous - the corporate PR equivalent of "I'm so sorry, but the dog ate my homework."
“I love Darth Editous and I’m not ashamed to admit it.” ~ADigitalMan
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Dr. M
- Time
- Post link
Where did the Empire of Dreams OUT clips come from if they were cut out and disposed of?
It's been speculated by some over at HTF that the crawl as well as the other OOT clips were most likely taken from a video rather than a film source. - Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Doctor M
Um notice of what?
Um notice of what?
From the Digital Bits article quoted above: "[W]e know for a fact that quality elements exist elsewhere. Given 48 hours notice, we could track them down ourselves."
So give them their 48 hours notice already...
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: ShiftyEyes
Where did the Empire of Dreams OUT clips come from if they were cut out and disposed of?
It's been speculated by some over at HTF that the crawl as well as the other OOT clips were most likely taken from a video rather than a film source. I linked to a ComingSoon.net article in Jambe Davdar's "Returning to Jedi" thread. It mentions the OOT/OUT sections (ie. the crawl) and where they came from I think...
To contact me outside the forum, for trades and such my email address is my OT.com username @gmail.com
- Time
- Post link
This is Burns' comment:
"But I will say what was shocking was – and I think this speaks to the whole issue of restoration – those brief scenes that we used from the pre-Special Edition, in our mind's eye, they looked a lot better than they do when you go back and revisit them and you do see how the quality of the print and the quality of the negative really doesn't hold up the way you think it might. So you kind of understand why things have been revised and digitally restored."
Not exactly sure what he means. Is he saying the footage looks good because the original negatives look so bad? That'd be somewhat contradictory.
- Time
- Post link
Edit: fixed link.
- Time
- Post link
You know of the rebellion against the Empire?
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: THX
This post from home theater forum summarises the key issues discussed above about the state of the negatives and restoration work.
Edit: fixed link.
This post from home theater forum summarises the key issues discussed above about the state of the negatives and restoration work.
Edit: fixed link.
Insightful post.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: ShiftyEyes
klokwerk, thanks but I don't think the interview really states the source for the footage.
This is Burns' comment:
"But I will say what was shocking was – and I think this speaks to the whole issue of restoration – those brief scenes that we used from the pre-Special Edition, in our mind's eye, they looked a lot better than they do when you go back and revisit them and you do see how the quality of the print and the quality of the negative really doesn't hold up the way you think it might. So you kind of understand why things have been revised and digitally restored."
Not exactly sure what he means. Is he saying the footage looks good because the original negatives look so bad? That'd be somewhat contradictory.
Well taking into account the small part before that:
One thing you may noticed about "Empire of Dreams" is that it uses footage from the original versions of the films, not the Special Editions. Kevin discussed that. "As a historian, it was important for us, in the telling of the story, to put audiences back in that theater seat in 1977 as I was. And so we did get papal dispensation to go back and use the footage from the pre-Special Edition release.
klokwerk, thanks but I don't think the interview really states the source for the footage.
This is Burns' comment:
"But I will say what was shocking was – and I think this speaks to the whole issue of restoration – those brief scenes that we used from the pre-Special Edition, in our mind's eye, they looked a lot better than they do when you go back and revisit them and you do see how the quality of the print and the quality of the negative really doesn't hold up the way you think it might. So you kind of understand why things have been revised and digitally restored."
Not exactly sure what he means. Is he saying the footage looks good because the original negatives look so bad? That'd be somewhat contradictory.
Well taking into account the small part before that:
One thing you may noticed about "Empire of Dreams" is that it uses footage from the original versions of the films, not the Special Editions. Kevin discussed that. "As a historian, it was important for us, in the telling of the story, to put audiences back in that theater seat in 1977 as I was. And so we did get papal dispensation to go back and use the footage from the pre-Special Edition release.
It looks like the bolded text says they used a print of the original. But I agree, it doesn't really confirm anything.
To contact me outside the forum, for trades and such my email address is my OT.com username @gmail.com
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Personally I don't care if they are 'cleaned up' there are people like the X0 guys that would do that later anyway.
What I would like to see would be.
1) A transfer from a print, not the THX D2 videotape master that the 93 laserdiscs used, as the cleanup algorithm for that caused all the ghosting and loss of detail.
2) No digital 'additions'
3) A good colour transfer.
That is about it, matte removal, dirt and dust removal, PCM audio, sabre fixes, colour correction et. can all be done by the groups on here.
All we really need is a detailed untouched telecine ANAMORPHIC transfer from a print in reasonable condition.
IF we could all agree on that or something similar as being the minimum requirement, then perhaps we could send a unified request to Lucas.
What we really need is the one thing we don't have, a good quality anamorphic detailed version of the trilogy. (we have all the other stuff, the various soundtracks etc.)
We could always tack various wishlists on the end (different audio, missing footage whatever) but at least if we had one request going forwards from all the various sites perhaps we could get at least the base for what we want, and turn it into our own individual projects to make it into the hundreds of different versions that would suit each individuals tastes.
- Time
- Post link
STAR WARS:
good film transfer
No Matte lines
fix the sabers so that they are not changing colors ever few scenes
70mm audio mix
35mm audio mix
Mono mix
1985 mix
option to change the crawl
EMPIRE STRIKES BACK:
Seamless branching 35mm version or 70mm verion (or at least the 70mm version cuz that was the first version released)
good film transfer
No Matte lines
fix the sabers so that they are not changing colors ever few scenes
35mm audio mix
70mm audio mix
1985 mix
RETURN OF THE JEDI:
good film transfer
No Matte lines
fix the sabers so that they are not changing colors ever few scenes
35mm audio mix
70mm audio mix
1985 audio mix
Or at least something along the lines of that. It is a shame that LFL is too lazy to give us a good product. Maybe you can convince them to liscence it out to Criterion for a while. Maybe the XO project could pull this off *hopes*
- Time
- Post link
If we could just convince ILM to give us a straight ananmorphic film transfer, then there are plenty of people who could put the fixes in later.
If they don't do a straight film transfer, people can't take the fixes back out again.
There is no way Lucasfilm would go to the big trouble to meet that list (although I'd love it if they did) it would be far too much time and money, but a straight transfer would be relatively cheap and quick to do - it would keep the hardcore fan base happy (that want it with NO changes of any description) and give the rest of us the raw material to just do the fixes that suit each of us (which will probably be different for each person), it would be nice if the different audio mixes were available too, but we already have an excellent PCM track on the laserdiscs and I'd prefer to see a maximum video quality on these releases.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Gorram
Ahhh, now this is the problem, some people want fixes (sbres matte lines etc.) other people consider those types of fixes unacceptable and leading down the path to the SEs anyway.
If we could just convince ILM to give us a straight ananmorphic film transfer, then there are plenty of people who could put the fixes in later.
If they don't do a straight film transfer, people can't take the fixes back out again.
There is no way Lucasfilm would go to the big trouble to meet that list (although I'd love it if they did) it would be far too much time and money, but a straight transfer would be relatively cheap and quick to do - it would keep the hardcore fan base happy (that want it with NO changes of any description) and give the rest of us the raw material to just do the fixes that suit each of us (which will probably be different for each person), it would be nice if the different audio mixes were available too, but we already have an excellent PCM track on the laserdiscs and I'd prefer to see a maximum video quality on these releases.
Ahhh, now this is the problem, some people want fixes (sbres matte lines etc.) other people consider those types of fixes unacceptable and leading down the path to the SEs anyway.
If we could just convince ILM to give us a straight ananmorphic film transfer, then there are plenty of people who could put the fixes in later.
If they don't do a straight film transfer, people can't take the fixes back out again.
There is no way Lucasfilm would go to the big trouble to meet that list (although I'd love it if they did) it would be far too much time and money, but a straight transfer would be relatively cheap and quick to do - it would keep the hardcore fan base happy (that want it with NO changes of any description) and give the rest of us the raw material to just do the fixes that suit each of us (which will probably be different for each person), it would be nice if the different audio mixes were available too, but we already have an excellent PCM track on the laserdiscs and I'd prefer to see a maximum video quality on these releases.
I understand what you mean. Some poeple liek the fixesthat were never suppose to be there and some don't.