- Time
- Post link
Where do I go from here as a SW fan? — Page 9
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Fang Zei
speaking of the 1985 IP, are we to assume Lucas had that destroyed as well?
speaking of the 1985 IP, are we to assume Lucas had that destroyed as well?
I personally doubt that even half of those claims are true about source materials being destroyed. They could even dig up the original element of the 1977 crawl for the GOUT. And please, no discussion about if it´s the true crawl. Boris *sigh* and I found much proof that in fact it is (dirt).
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: zombie84
Star Wars was filmed on Panavision Platinums by a top-notch crew. Panavision Platinum's are the most rock-solidly registered cameras that you can buy--the film literally does not move.....
....And the GOUT weave is not just the slight weave created through less-than-steller camera gate registration--its very pronounced, and obviously due to factors in the equipment made to telecine it. These factors may include human error, poor print conidition and poor equipment used. Perhaps because it was from the 1985 IP the print already had lots of weave built into the print itself since it is third generation to begin with, faults which were then built upon by the actual 1993 telecine.
Star Wars was filmed on Panavision Platinums by a top-notch crew. Panavision Platinum's are the most rock-solidly registered cameras that you can buy--the film literally does not move.....
....And the GOUT weave is not just the slight weave created through less-than-steller camera gate registration--its very pronounced, and obviously due to factors in the equipment made to telecine it. These factors may include human error, poor print conidition and poor equipment used. Perhaps because it was from the 1985 IP the print already had lots of weave built into the print itself since it is third generation to begin with, faults which were then built upon by the actual 1993 telecine.
So....the camera equipment they used in 1975/76 was great, but the telecine equipment they used in 1993 was crap?
How come nobody complained about the gate weave when the DC/Faces laserdiscs came out?
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Mielr
So....the camera equipment they used in 1975/76 was great, but the telecine equipment they used in 1993 was crap?
How come nobody complained about the gate weave when the DC/Faces laserdiscs came out?
Originally posted by: zombie84
Star Wars was filmed on Panavision Platinums by a top-notch crew. Panavision Platinum's are the most rock-solidly registered cameras that you can buy--the film literally does not move.....
....And the GOUT weave is not just the slight weave created through less-than-steller camera gate registration--its very pronounced, and obviously due to factors in the equipment made to telecine it. These factors may include human error, poor print conidition and poor equipment used. Perhaps because it was from the 1985 IP the print already had lots of weave built into the print itself since it is third generation to begin with, faults which were then built upon by the actual 1993 telecine.
Star Wars was filmed on Panavision Platinums by a top-notch crew. Panavision Platinum's are the most rock-solidly registered cameras that you can buy--the film literally does not move.....
....And the GOUT weave is not just the slight weave created through less-than-steller camera gate registration--its very pronounced, and obviously due to factors in the equipment made to telecine it. These factors may include human error, poor print conidition and poor equipment used. Perhaps because it was from the 1985 IP the print already had lots of weave built into the print itself since it is third generation to begin with, faults which were then built upon by the actual 1993 telecine.
So....the camera equipment they used in 1975/76 was great, but the telecine equipment they used in 1993 was crap?
How come nobody complained about the gate weave when the DC/Faces laserdiscs came out?
In that case--and i suppose this case as well--the gate weave issue is secondary to the wretched DVNR smearing, which indeed has had numerous complaints levelled against it, which is why its not used anymore. Back in 1993, of course, the gate weave was of a level deemed acceptable and was about the norm, especially for older films where print damage adds more shakiness. Thats like saying "how come people didn't complain about the poor res in 1993?" All the flaws of the GOUT were of a level of acceptability for 1993, but in 2006 for a product of such high esteem as this its a professional embarrasment as far as I'm concerned.
Personally i would be able to put up with the level of weave if it wasn't for the overall poor resolution and DVNR--we could always try our own stabilising efforts, although the level of weave seen on the GOUT is probably at a level that would be difficult to totally elminate.
- Time
- Post link
if they sold well, they'll be released again, hopefully the way people want them... that was actually a time when you needed to buy SW DVD's...
I hope so, but what makes one think so?
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”
Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: JediRandy
I guess this goes back to the percentage of fans that care about not having the OOT. Personally I don't think it was that high... if it was, then the last release would've sold better.
Originally posted by: Vigo
You mistunderstand me. There is a difference between "attack on the fans" and "caring shit about the fans". The former one implies emotional involvement, while the latter does not. I don´t sense any emotional involvement towards the fans regarding the 2004SE and the OOT release. Only marketing.
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Why is everything an "attack on the fans"? Seriously where do people come up with this stuff? Like he's twirling his handlebar mustace as he watches people walk out of Best Buy.
Why is everything an "attack on the fans"? Seriously where do people come up with this stuff? Like he's twirling his handlebar mustace as he watches people walk out of Best Buy.
You mistunderstand me. There is a difference between "attack on the fans" and "caring shit about the fans". The former one implies emotional involvement, while the latter does not. I don´t sense any emotional involvement towards the fans regarding the 2004SE and the OOT release. Only marketing.
I guess this goes back to the percentage of fans that care about not having the OOT. Personally I don't think it was that high... if it was, then the last release would've sold better.
I thought that it did sell well. It spent some time in Amazon.com's top ten. There is a significant number of individuals who want the OOT. Not everyone in the world, certainly, but many, many people.
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”
Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death