Was Star War re-colour timed for the 1981 re-release.

was just watching the 1981 re-release trailer from my 2004 DVD set and only just realized that the colour timing  is very similar (if not identical) to the colour timing  on the 1982 VHS/laserdisc.

here is the trailer on youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqgcXRMseJI

I have the 1982 VHS and V2000 video tapes but not the laserdisc.

Unfortunately I cannot take screen caps at the moment.

So was Star Wars re-colour timed for that 81 re-release?

Apologies if this has been discussed before.

(I actually saw SW with ESB back to back in 81' but I was only 6 and paying attention to the colour of the prints was not a top priority!....and even if I did there is no way I would remember .)

Seems incredibly unlikely, and IMO easily explained by fast-fading film stock.

Certainly Technicolor showings were not retimed--they just took the existing Technicolor reels and spliced in the new crawl/flyover using the cheaper filmstock.

CatBus said:

Seems incredibly unlikely, and IMO easily explained by fast-fading film stock.

Certainly Technicolor showings were not retimed--they just took the existing Technicolor reels and spliced in the new crawl/flyover using the cheaper filmstock.

 Yes the  fast fading film stock hypothesis would explain the difference.

But what about Artoo in the canyon?

I was under the impression(please correct me if I am wrong) that the 1977 prints had a dusk look for that scene.

In the 82' VHS it looks like daytime.

In subsequent releases on home video (at least from the mid 90's onwards)  it looks like dusk again.

Would colour fading(from 1977 to 1981) explain the dusk to dawn look.

Or

In 1981--- to meet the demand for prints in some areas they created new interpositives/internegatives to produce release prints  that used the original negative's  colour palette without(or very little)  any alteration- as opposed to 1977 where the original negatives were colour stamped differently  to produce more vibrant release prints. 

The release(not the teaser) trailer from 1977(also on the 2004 bonus DVD) is quite  vibrant.

It may explain why that Artoo shot in particular looks like a daytime scene in the 1982 VHS(and I assume the 1981 35mm release print)

csd79 said:

Given the stories how they chopped off the original crawl from '77 prints, and then re-released them with the new crawl, I would say 'no'.

Sure

Although I think it could also have been a mixture :

Of recalling (already faded) 1977 35mm delux prints and chopping off the original opening and inserting the new Episode IV crawl and sending those back out into circulation for the 1981 re-release

And

Creating new 4th generation 35mm prints(delux) but without altering the colour of the (maybe already faded) original negative.

hence the reason why that 1981 trailer and the subsequent 1982 VHS release has that bleached out look.

Dunno just guessing! 

Obi-wan's lightsaber effect was clearly unfinished in the trailer, so I doubt that the trailer actually used the elements from the re-release, probably just took bits from earlier trailers.

NeverarGreat said:

Obi-wan's lightsaber effect was clearly unfinished in the trailer, so I doubt that the trailer actually used the elements from the re-release, probably just took bits from earlier trailers.

Yes that is correct although the 81' trailer looks more bleached out than the earlier ones but in doing so look very similar to the 82'VHS.

Will  try and get screen caps.

danny_boy said:

But what about Artoo in the canyon?

I was under the impression(please correct me if I am wrong) that the 1977 prints had a dusk look for that scene.

In the 82' VHS it looks like daytime.

In subsequent releases on home video (at least from the mid 90's onwards)  it looks like dusk again.

Regarding R2 and the canyon, I really don't know.  It's quite likely this scene was shot bright and then filtered dark somewhere along the line.  If the early VHS tapes went back to a pre-filter source (and the trailer presumably also used something fairly far upstream to get unfinished lightsaber effects), then they'd have gotten the bright shot.  I'm not sure there's any way to tell if the bright shot ever made it into a new batch of theatrical prints--I personally strongly doubt it, but I suppose we can only know for sure by checking those very pink prints still in existence for signs of its previous color.

EDIT: And even if all that did happen, I'd call it a production mistake or accident rather than intentional re-timing, unless I could find evidence someone actually wanted the change.

danny_boy said:

CatBus said:

Seems incredibly unlikely, and IMO easily explained by fast-fading film stock.

Certainly Technicolor showings were not retimed--they just took the existing Technicolor reels and spliced in the new crawl/flyover using the cheaper filmstock.

 Yes the  fast fading film stock hypothesis would explain the difference.

But what about Artoo in the canyon?

I was under the impression(please correct me if I am wrong) that the 1977 prints had a dusk look for that scene.

In the 82' VHS it looks like daytime.

In subsequent releases on home video (at least from the mid 90's onwards)  it looks like dusk again.

Would colour fading(from 1977 to 1981) explain the dusk to dawn look.

Or

In 1981--- to meet the demand for prints in some areas they created new interpositives/internegatives to produce release prints  that used the original negative's  colour palette without(or very little)  any alteration- as opposed to 1977 where the original negatives were colour stamped differently  to produce more vibrant release prints. 

The release(not the teaser) trailer from 1977(also on the 2004 bonus DVD) is quite  vibrant.

It may explain why that Artoo shot in particular looks like a daytime scene in the 1982 VHS(and I assume the 1981 35mm release print)

It's a typical case of a scene shot day for night that was misrepresented on video, seen all the time during the early years of home video. The transitional shot from sandcrawler - stormtroopers - sandcrawler was another example messed up sometimes.

If for some reason those shots were timed differently (brighter) at some point, I guess it would have been the "'77 opening day prints" which contained a few subtle differences compared to the later revised ones.