Print variations in '77 Star Wars — Page 2

So weird! o.O

TServo2049 said:

Russ and I have been corresponding about the 1991 PAL widescreen VHS, and I've viewed some video clips of it. It does seem to be transferred to PAL from NTSC, and it has the exact same "shrinking ratio" problem as the U.S. SWE LD - and I mean "exact", I can see the black bars get bigger at the reel changes, and the before/after difference seems *identical*. HOWEVER...it doesn't have the weird blobs or the splice glue marks from the JSC/SWE!

Same shrunken ratio, no glue marks. What is going on here? Is it a different film source that happens to have the same variations as the JSC/SWE one (no Tantive burn marks, cloudy X-wing takeoff composite), but none of the weird blobs or glue marks? Is it the same source but with something like Filmguard applied?

Yeah, I've seen those clips from Russ myself now. And it's really, really weird. The only thing I can think of is that the source was cleaned up in a last attempt to make this old master presentable. It had been in use for 10 years at that point, with new fancy packaging in order to sell basically the same thing over and over again. When they finally dug up that first generation source as the base for new video releases, we really had a winner on our hands. Star Wars have been treated like shit on video right from the beginning.

TServo2049 said:

If it was a new transfer, why was it sourced from NTSC instead of being native PAL? If was an existing transfer, why was it never used on any NTSC release? In either case, why does it have the shrinking ratio problem? I thought that was due to a problem covering up the JSC's Japanese subtitles and repositioning the up-shifted image to the center. If this is a different master, it means that the same framing mistake was repeated.

Why do two different video masters have the same issue, and why do the film sources look identical except for the presence or lack of certain damage?

What is this, I don't even...

I don't believe the "shrinking ratio" is a problem caused by covering up Japanese subs. I strongly suspect this was intentionally done in order to covering up damage on the master. The SC and SWE uses the same film elements yes, but they are different telecines, the same with the sequels.

You can actually see some small amount of shrinking in the SC telecine as well, see the first wipe in the film to Tatooine for example, the bottom border gets a little larger as it progress. Another thing to watch unrelated to this is the last shootout scene right before Vader makes his entrance on the blockade runner, it actually looks like they spliced in a different source for that short sequence.

msycamore said:

You can actually see some small amount of shrinking in the SC telecine as well, see the first wipe in the film to Tatooine for example, the bottom border gets a little larger as it progress. Another thing to watch unrelated to this is the last shootout scene right before Vader makes his entrance on the blockade runner, it actually looks like they spliced in a different source for that short sequence.

Maybe the X-wings are subtitles! Or rather subpictures
which aren't on the 1000ft reels, but were overlayed when the two 1000ft reels were copied onto a 2000ft roll ?

Darth Mallwalker said:

If I understood you correctly, that's also a 1000-foot reel change (12676)
just like the other shrinks (70632 & 128032) are 1000-ft changeovers.

 

No, this minor shrink actually occurs in the middle of the actual wipe to Tatooine. The bottom border creeps up during the wipe. Not the same thing as the SWE issue though.

msycamore said:

Darth Mallwalker said:

If I understood you correctly, that's also a 1000-foot reel change (12676)
just like the other shrinks (70632 & 128032) are 1000-ft changeovers.

 

No, this minor shrink actually occurs in the middle of the actual wipe to Tatooine. The bottom border creeps up during the wipe. Not the same thing as the SWE issue though.

I remember noticing this when trying to determine how to best crop the JSC. It's odd that it isn't instant, but instead continues to creep up until it stops.

Which composite is seen on the CED?

-1 released it a few years back.

Okay so we'll forget about that wipe to Tatooine.
Instead of three, just consider two instances of shrinkage (70632 & 128032).

I've presumed the shrinkage happened at the telecine stage.
Imagine the telecine operator finishing a reel at 5:00PM then going home.
Next morning he starts the next reel. He hasn't turned any knobs or changed the machine settings from the night before; nevertheless, the machine hasn't reached operating temperature yet, so the framing ends up slightly different.
I've imagined a scenario like that ... but he would've been using 1000ft reels in that case.

Now let's throw that idea out the window.
Let's imagine the shrinkage was introduced earlier, whenever the 1k chunks were printed onto 2k reels.
Then the 2k reel suffered the blob damage later in its life.

Is -1 following this thread? I wonder if he could provide uncropped images of these four frames.
If we could see those frames uncropped with sprocket holes and all, do you think their exposed areas would align?

Sending a PM to -1...

AntcuFaalb said:

Which composite is seen on the CED?

The "cloudy". Listed as NTSC home video release in the first post.

'82 CED / LD / HBO broadcast - time compressed

'82 Betamax / VHS (also '85 Standard Play LD)

^ two different pan & scan transfers but same filmsource we're now discussing.

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/HBO-Star-Wars-preservations/post/543307/#TopicPost543307

davisdvd.com said:

What You Didn't Know: Despite popular belief, this was not the only transfer made of Star Wars. At some point, a second fullscreen video transfer was created from a 16mm flat print source. Since an anamorphic (2.35:1) 35mm print had been reduced down to a flat (1.33:1) 16mm print, this 16mm source featured different pan & scan decisions made during the print reduction. One main difference in this transfer was that Luke's macrobinocular POV shot of the Banthas was squeezed to actually show the Tusken Raider walking to the side of the frame. This video transfer was only shown on HBO and was never offered for sale or rent [ Special Thanks to David C. Fein ]

When I now read that ^ info again, doesn't the '82 UK ITV broadcast fit that description? Don't know how it handled that binocular shot though. Need to ask Russ... 

Darth Mallwalker said:

Okay so we'll forget about that wipe to Tatooine.
Instead of three, just consider two instances of shrinkage (70632 & 128032).

I've presumed the shrinkage happened at the telecine stage.
Imagine the telecine operator finishing a reel at 5:00PM then going home.
Next morning he starts the next reel. He hasn't turned any knobs or changed the machine settings from the night before; nevertheless, the machine hasn't reached operating temperature yet, so the framing ends up slightly different.
I've imagined a scenario like that ... but he would've been using 1000ft reels in that case.

Now let's throw that idea out the window.
Let's imagine the shrinkage was introduced earlier, whenever the 1k chunks were printed onto 2k reels.
Then the 2k reel suffered the blob damage later in its life.

Is -1 following this thread? I wonder if he could provide uncropped images of these four frames.
If we could see those frames uncropped with sprocket holes and all, do you think their exposed areas would align?

The following is from davisdvd.com...

The letterboxed Japanese transfer was used to create this edition and since the picture on that had been shifted up, some slight re-adjustment was necessary to equalize the letterbox bands and place the 2.35 frame closer to the center. How this was done was through a "controlled video scroll" (like adjusting the vertical hold on an older TV set) to move the picture to the approximate center of the screen. The top of the frame, now vacant of the original picture, was matted over with a black letterbox band. Now here's the kicker: since this was all done by eye, at some point during this correction process the top letterbox band began over-matting onto the top edge of the picture. This essentially changed the aspect ratio of the film midway! To check for yourselves, grab this laserdisc and chapter to the cantina sequence. Go up to your screen and mark where the top letterbox band meets the top of the picture frame. At the point Greedo gets shot, the top black band will creep down lower than its original position. And to make matters worse, this happens a second time somewhere during the course of the film. So by the point the rebels are preparing to attack the Death Star, the film's aspect ratio has changed from 2.35:1 to 2.55:1. This "Incredible Shrinking Ratio" was later corrected in 1992 and issued on both VHS and laserdisc. See below for that  [ Very Special Thanks to David C. Fein ]

msycamore said:

AntcuFaalb said:

Which composite is seen on the CED?

The "cloudy". Listed as NTSC home video release in the first post.

'82 CED / LD / HBO broadcast - time compressed

'82 Betamax / VHS

^ two different pan & scan transfers but same filmsource we're now discussing.

 

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/HBO-Star-Wars-preservations/post/543307/#TopicPost543307

davisdvd.com said:

What You Didn't Know: Despite popular belief, this was not the only transfer made of Star Wars. At some point, a second fullscreen video transfer was created from a 16mm flat print source. Since an anamorphic (2.35:1) 35mm print had been reduced down to a flat (1.33:1) 16mm print, this 16mm source featured different pan & scan decisions made during the print reduction. One main difference in this transfer was that Luke's macrobinocular POV shot of the Banthas was squeezed to actually show the Tusken Raider walking to the side of the frame. This video transfer was only shown on HBO and was never offered for sale or rent [ Special Thanks to David C. Fein ]

When I know reading that ^ info again, doesn't the '82 UK ITV broadcast fit that description? Don't know how it handled that binocular shot though. Need to ask Russ... 

Surprise. Surprise............

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/OBITUARY-Star-Wars-Fullscreen-Pan-and-Scan-versions-RIP/post/565852/#TopicPost565852

Thanks Russ! And you recently directed me to that thread. :/ The info that was provided on the old davisdvd.com site regarding the pan & scan transfers is simply wrong, I thought David C. Fein might have confused the HBO with the ITV broadcast transfer somehow.

msycamore said:

Thanks Russ! the info that was provided on the old davisdvd.com site regarding the pan & scan transfers is simply wrong, I thought David C. Fein might have confused the HBO with the ITV broadcast transfer somehow.

What do you think about the davisdvd.com info I posted?

AntcuFaalb said:

What do you think about the davisdvd.com info I posted?

Like I said earlier, I believe this isn't the case as they are two separate telecines but made from the same master.

msycamore said:

AntcuFaalb said:

What do you think about the davisdvd.com info I posted?

Like I said earlier, I believe this isn't the case as they are two separate telecines but made from the same master.

Ah, I must have missed that or forgotten...

Darth Mallwalker said:

Maybe the X-wings are subtitles! Or rather subpictures
which aren't on the 1000ft reels, but were overlayed when the two 1000ft reels were copied onto a 2000ft roll ?

That's a possibility, is 1000ft reels the standard for IP's? Also, the frequent changes in pulldown pattern throughout this telecine, is that telling us something? You almost get the sense it was cobbled together from various sources MacGyver-style.

A few examples where the shrinking ratio actually displays more than the Special Collection, a little too much as the rounded corners are visible.

SC

SWE (ISR)

SC

SWE (ISR)

Not visible with TV-overscan though.

Which SWE is it?

Pioneer, USA
Pioneer, Japan
Mitsubishi, Japan

All shrink, but there might be other differences between them for all we know.
Maybe some have blobs and some not, or some other anomaly we haven't even imagined yet...

Darth Mallwalker said:

Which SWE is it?

Pioneer, USA
Pioneer, Japan
Mitsubishi, Japan

All shrink, but there might be other differences between them for all we know.
Maybe some have blobs and some not, or some other anomaly we haven't even imagined yet...

True. I don't own any shrinking ratio SWE myself. These screenshots are from a capture Nerfherder on these boards sent me, I guess I could ask him if he knows which pressing it is.

seventiesfilmnut = Nerfherder = 7FN = same chap, right?
In that case I already know the answer.

Didn't realize he had cap'ed the video, but I do have the PCM he ripped from that disc six years ago.
Last year I ask him for the mint marks and they indicate PVI California, with the 1989 copyright on his jacket.

Darth Mallwalker said:

seventiesfilmnut = Nerfherder = 7FN = same chap, right?
In that case I already know the answer.

Didn't realize he had cap'ed the video, but I do have the PCM he ripped from that disc six years ago.
Last year I ask him for the mint marks and they indicate PVI California, with the 1989 copyright on his jacket.

If so, then why does he have so many usernames?!

Doesn't seem to be anything unusual about this SWE though as far as I know, the familiar blobs and splice glue is all present.

msycamore said:

What exactly is the '94 UK Digitally Remastered tape, I assumed this was the PAL regions first THX mastered release but no such info on the case, it says new PAL masters were used on the back of the covers. What's the story, did this transfer go through any DVNR? And is there any differences between the individual '95 tape and the one in the Executor box set?

Talking to myself... the '94 UK Digitally Remastered seems very much to be DVNR'd just like the '95 release. What's really poor is that the individual UK '95 "last time available" THX tape lack subtitles for Greedo. It seems you only got them if you bought the Executor set.

AntcuFaalb said:

If so, then why does he have so many usernames?!

May have lost the passwords over the years.

AntcuFaalb said:

Darth Mallwalker said:

seventiesfilmnut = Nerfherder = 7FN = same chap, right?

If so, then why does he have so many usernames?!

How familiar are you with ABC?