- Time
- Post link
What? No Ewoks adventures movies on this box set?
Count me out! ;)
Where were you in '77?
Star Wars coming to Blu Ray (UPDATE: August 30 2011, No! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!) — Page 132
- Time
- Post link
They're saving those for a double feature release, with seamless branching to the tv movie cuts, and Ewokese dub track. ;)
- Time
- Post link
Maybe, I don't think it had menus, I think it was just a straight up rip, but I know I've watched the special and it was on my computer.
- Time
- Post link
Anything worth checking out in terms of HQ unaltered scenes in there?
- www.facebook.com/despecialized
Despecialized Editions MUST NEVER BE BOUGHT OR SOLD!!! You can find all the info you need here
- Time
- Post link
Nope, mainly talking heads and 2004 SE clips. Interesting enough, but like a lot of these things, like EOD, it's pretty fluffy compared to what could have been possible, nothing said will be new to anyone who has discussed the films on the internet or read a few academic reviews of the films. Worth watching once though.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
SilverWook said:
zombie, do you have any idea when video editing/post production became the norm for tv documentaries, even if shot on film?
Classic Creatures seems the odd man out of all the OOT docs, as it seems to have been finished up on video. 16mm copies of the others have been spotted in the wild.
I'm too young to have been around for that, I think it was in the late 1990s for video productions and film projects followed as hardware got better and cheaper; I guess when you started using it depended on the project, the budget, and those involved. Documentaries shot on video were probably cut on a computer as soon as they moved from analog tapes to digital in the mid-late 1990s, before that you would have had to do a conversion process to get it digital and the older electronic editing suites were okay once you got used to them, they gave you the same sort of non-linear functionality. I used one a few times when I was in highschool and found it the most frustrating thing in the world, but then I saw pros use them and it was second nature to them so I guess there is just a learning curve. I will say that when I started out in 2003 and 2004, cutting film on video using an AVID was still seen as a slightly new thing that a lot of older editors had only recently grappled with--things had changed very rapidly in the previous half decade--and the first thing I ever edited was 2004 and I cut it on a good old fashioned steenbeck. Later that year the facility I cut it on was trying to sell it, I would have bought it since it was only $1000 or something but it weighed as much as a small car (no joke) and I had no room for it.
- Time
- Post link
Yep. Try pushing one on cobblestone roads and then cramming two into a tiny room.
Not fun.
VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Lucasfilm is so cheap. Even if they could not find the negative for From Star Wars to jedi, which they have not said why it is not included, they could have just scanned an immaculate 16mm LPP print from some fan or find one on the market if not in their archives.
If i am not mistaken all four documentaries from the oot era are from the same director.
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Well, the question is if scanning an old used 16mm print would yield better picture quality than 1993 LD masters. Compare Puggo Grande and GOUT - PG is great for what it is but GOUT is objectively better PQ in most aspects.
- www.facebook.com/despecialized
Despecialized Editions MUST NEVER BE BOUGHT OR SOLD!!! You can find all the info you need here
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Yeah but if it was filmed on 16mm, how much worse would a 16mm print be instead of the negative ?
And they were able to take the 16mm Jabba scene copy used in the special derived from 35mm and use it in the 1997 special edition, so it has to be possible.
Maybe not in HD but SD should be possible.
Or if Lucas is super cheap he can just use the old video master from the Japanese laserdisc, minus the subtitles if they are not a part of the master, otherwise he would have to use the unrestored vhs print video source.
Maybe i should be happy that the gout got ported over from a 1993 laserdisc master, if that did not exist i bet Lucas would have used the same one they had done for the old vhs releases in pan and scan,lol.
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
There would likely be a huge difference between a well stored 16mm o-neg and a rundown print from a flee market. And even if they found a pristine 16mm print, you loose resolution with every copy you make (and I'm sure this effect is magnified by using smaller film) and a print would be at least 4th generation (maybe more for a print for home use).
And how did you figure out the Jabba scene comes from a 16mm copy? I've read they couldn't find the original camera negatives of it but not that the source they used was 16mm and frankly I doubt they could get the quality they did from a 16mm downscale, it was probably some 35mm copy.
- www.facebook.com/despecialized
Despecialized Editions MUST NEVER BE BOUGHT OR SOLD!!! You can find all the info you need here
- Time
- Post link
I thought ILM said it was a 16mm dupe they used, i cannot find the source at the moment. They used the computer to remove all the extra grain and upres the image.
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.
- Time
- Post link
Dunno, it's possible but it seems unlikely.
- www.facebook.com/despecialized
Despecialized Editions MUST NEVER BE BOUGHT OR SOLD!!! You can find all the info you need here
- Time
- Post link
It wasn't a 16mm dupe. The doc wanted the negative loaned to them to make a 16mm dupe for Star Wars to Jedi, which they then lost. LFL then discovered an IP of the negative, which is what they used.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Yeah, that sounds more likely - IP would be a slightly worse source than the o-neg, which would be consistent with what skyjedi remembers reading about them having to clean it up digitally but not 16mm.
- www.facebook.com/despecialized
Despecialized Editions MUST NEVER BE BOUGHT OR SOLD!!! You can find all the info you need here
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Ah has so you were right Harmy a copy of the negative in 35mm.
Still it is a generation removed from the oneg, but still better quality i would imagine than a release print would have.
Less generation loss than the opticals and would not be so hard a match since the new elements were done as cgi in a computer.
If they had done and finished the effect in the traditional way the extra generation might have been an obstacle.
With an old school optical printer it would have been a nightmare but the new tools in 1996-1997 made it possible.
Never mind what they could do today with the newest of the new tech to actually restore the oot and not make a special edition or recomp stuff.
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.
- Time
- Post link
skyjedi2005 said:
Never mind what they could do today with the newest of the new tech to actually restore the oot and not make a special edition or recomp stuff.
Quoted for truth :-)
- www.facebook.com/despecialized
Despecialized Editions MUST NEVER BE BOUGHT OR SOLD!!! You can find all the info you need here
- Time
- Post link
Yeah, every time some superfan says it's impossible to present the OT properly because the negative has been special editioned, all I can think is negative shmegative. The Blade Runner final cut even has shots in that are from the workprint, since they never found any better source, and that thing is however many generations removed. And yet there it is, side by side with the negative. (and the Blade Runner '82 disc, which has been our barometer for a quality blu-ray all along, isn't from the negative either.)
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Everytime some bastard utter those scary "SE"-words, I am thinking about the silly easy world of Baronlando where everythng is fine. ;) where there's a good coffy smell in the air and the only star wars is the release Baronlando supervised... he did it just as they transferred Jaws 4 - the revenge. I just happened to remind him about it and he included it just for fun.
Don't wake me up!
We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions.
Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Baronlando said:
Yeah, every time some superfan says it's impossible to present the OT properly because the negative has been special editioned, all I can think is negative shmegative. The Blade Runner final cut even has shots in that are from the workprint, since they never found any better source, and that thing is however many generations removed. And yet there it is, side by side with the negative. (and the Blade Runner '82 disc, which has been our barometer for a quality blu-ray all along, isn't from the negative either.)
If you've seen that featurette on TCM about film noir, a "lost" film was restored from the only surviving 16mm print in existence. That really blew my mind!
And Erin Gray/Col. Deering icon for the win! ;)
Where were you in '77?
- Time
- Post link
msycamore said: and the only star wars is the release Baronlando supervised... he did it just as they transferred Jaws 4 - the revenge. I just happened to remind him about it and he included it just for fun
Next I'm going to do Empire Strikes Back, hopefully LFL has enough cash for the lab to squeeze it in between these two:
- Time
- Post link
:) We should let Troma restore SW!!
We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions.
Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com
- Time
- Post link
I believe the latest blu-ray of The Evil Dead was created from a 16mm print.
You know of the rebellion against the Empire?
- Time
- Post link
I think it was a 16mm o-neg and that's a whole another beast ;-)
- www.facebook.com/despecialized
Despecialized Editions MUST NEVER BE BOUGHT OR SOLD!!! You can find all the info you need here
- Time
- Post link
And they tweaked things for the Blu-Ray, too (erasing cameras from mirrors and dudes standing by the side of the road that shouldn't have been there, and similar "fixes"), so that's not exactly a "reference release."