Easterhay said:
I'm not really into stalkers, thanks; I get enough of them in the real world, let alone in cyberspace.
Wait, so people actually stalk you?
Easterhay said:
Mod-in-waiting alert.
I said his standards were shallow, not the man himself. If you're going to step up to the plate, Bingowings, at least be well prepared.
What's a mod-in-waiting alert?
danny_boy said:
AntcuFaalb said:
I guess I just don't understand how/why you think that one published report is the same as:
Peer reviewed International studies conducted in theaters across the globe concluded that the average release print has roughly 500-800 lines per picture height.
Across the globe? WTF? The table you provided clearly shows data from four cities, all on the same continent.
Please explain to me how the source you provided is:
1. Peer reviewed
2. International (conducted in theaters across the globe!)
3. Conclusive, at all
Sorry--I confused that study with this one:
http://www.cst.fr/IMG/pdf/35mm_resolution_english.pdf
Which was conducted in a couple of US and Canadian cities---aswell as Milan and Paris
And they reached the same conclusion:
The highest resolution that the assessors could still discern in the sharpest part of the screen(not neccassirily it's center) in the most performing movie theater was about 875 Lines/PH
This is a much better source. I will read this closely.
danny_boy said:
AntcuFaalb said:
I see you forgot to include the following:
It should be noted that this data is widely discredited by the film community – the numbers that resulted from looking at test patterns did not measure up to the resolution that is widely believed to exist on film. On the other hand, none of the discrediting parties has published any test results that show better performance. Politics cloud the science.
Ummmm----this proves my point!
On the other hand, none of the discrediting parties has published any test results that show better performance. Politics cloud the science.
So a lack of further research "proves" your point? I must have learned the scientific method incorrectly, then.
SS4DarthPayne said:
1) The above is correct, right? Victory Celebration was not in the original? (Just want to double check).
Correct. Yub Nub is the original ending sequence of ROTJ.
-Yub Nub Fan
Edit: Please tell me that you enjoy Lapti Nek!
You_Too said:
I'd wait and see what negative1's team will bring us first. (And Disney if they're smart and want to make some money on us OT-fans!)
Though of course it's your decision since this was your idea. A nice idea.
I haven't compared ESB and ROTJ from the TB version with the GOUT though, but I can tell you that ROTJ has less resolution intact than the GOUT. It's blurred, horizontally or vertically, I don't remember.
This would only be for SW and TESB.
GOUT ROTJ is great!
You_Too said:
AntcuFaalb said:
Do we know the names of the people responsible for this amateur work?
I'd be interested to see what they have to say for themselves.
"The 2004 SE (it has never been marketed as a Special Edition, though there really is no other label to describe it) had its color correction guided and supervised by George Lucas himself. Screening the film at Skywalker Ranch, Lucas went through the film with members from ILM, who would be color-timing the digitized film themselves at Lucas' approval."
Source: http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/savingstarwars.html
Wow, GL must be blind, then.
So, You_Too, do you think this project would be worthwhile?
TV's Frink may have been scared away by this pat man 2 post: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Harmys-STAR-WARS-Despecialized-Edition-HD-REMASTERED-is-now-released/post/601009/#TopicPost601009
You_Too said:
AntcuFaalb said:
bkev said:
I'm of the opinion that it's not "if" as much as it is "when" on this one. However, I do have my reservations as to whether or not they'll treat it with respect. We could end up with an OUT release that has the same mangled colors as the SE.
True, but then we (OTcom) can fix them!
Also an idea we shouldn't give them!
Nah, joking. I'm 99.9% sure that if they release the originals, they won't look nearly as bad as the 2004/2011 SE. Those were based on the 97 SE and recolored in a horribly amateur-ish way. If they scan some original prints or negatives (or use whatever hi-def scan is on their servers) I'm sure it will look more natural like the originals should.
Do we know the names of the people responsible for this amateur work?
I'd be interested to see what they have to say for themselves.
I guess I just don't understand how/why you think that one published report is the same as:
Peer reviewed International studies conducted in theaters across the globe concluded that the average release print has roughly 500-800 lines per picture height.
Across the globe? WTF? The table you provided clearly shows data from four cities, all on the same continent.
Please explain to me how the source you provided is:
1. Peer reviewed
2. International (conducted in theaters across the globe!)
3. Conclusive, at all
I see you forgot to include the following:
It should be noted that this data is widely discredited by the film community – the numbers that resulted from looking at test patterns did not measure up to the resolution that is widely believed to exist on film. On the other hand, none of the discrediting parties has published any test results that show better performance. Politics cloud the science.
I'd like to get my hands on a working PAL LD Player. I live in the US (Columbia, MD) and would prefer picking it up to having it shipped.
SilverWook said:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Star-Wars-Collection-Toys-Lightsabers-35-mm-Revenge-Of-The-Jedi-Movie-Trailer-/261139906417?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2&hash=item3ccd26bf71
I haven't done much collecting in a long time, but I think this stuff is a tad overpriced. ;)
LOL! That listing is absurd.
TServo2049: I'm interested in these French and German pre-THX LBX LDs. Do you have access to them?
danny_boy: Where did you find the following?
Peer reviewed International studies conducted in theaters across the globe concluded that the average release print has roughly 500-800 lines per picture height.
This seems very wrong to me, so please provide the necessary citation(s) if you're claiming that it's correct.
g-force said:
AF, just sent you a PM on what I can do (if anything) to help. I agree with you about the jaggies, but the TB has even worse DVNR problems than the GOUT.
I know it's been degrained to hell, but does it actually have smearing resulting from temporal DVNR?
bkev said:
I'm of the opinion that it's not "if" as much as it is "when" on this one. However, I do have my reservations as to whether or not they'll treat it with respect. We could end up with an OUT release that has the same mangled colors as the SE.
True, but then we (OTcom) can fix them!
It's amazing to me that people actually believe moviegoers used to watch films at just-better-than-Laserdisc-quality.
Are these the same people claiming that GOUT is the best possible preservation of the OOT due to "70's film limitations"?
danny_boy said:
Peer reviewed International studies conducted in theaters across the globe concluded that the average release print has roughly 500-800 lines per picture height.
Citation needed!
Well, the collaboration thing will probably never work out.
However, I almost have IP reel #1 done of the GOUT + 97SE (TB) mix using all original (unaltered) shots, including wipes. Basically, I'm using GOUT to replace any shots not marked as V0 or V8 in this spreadsheet.
GOUT and 97SE (TB) are similar enough in quality for this to work. The benefit, of course, is that 97SE (TB) doesn't have the problems that GOUT has, such as DVNR-smear and "jaggies".
I really need a partner. Help?
CP3S: Should we post the petition on Social Media sites (Twitter, Google+, etc.)?
THIS IS NOW AT A MYSPLEEN NEAR YOU!
I'm sorry that this took so long.
It's also available on Usenet (a.b.starwars) thanks to none.
Enjoy! Also, don't forget to seed.
msycamore said:
zombie84 said:
My question is...HOW DO YOU PEOPLE NOTICE A SINGLE FRAME MISSING?
Good find though. Another useless bit of trivia I can now add to my knowledge of Star Wars, along with the stunning revelation in the OT Purist thread that there were, in fact, not one but three Prune Face people in ROTJ.
He he, this is geeky alright, sorry if I have now sort of ruined the scene for some. This one I noticed way back in the 80's when watching the film endlessly on video, 1 frame missing may sound like something that is impossible to spot without studying the scene but the reason I noticed it being the motion in the scene where it happens, the rebels running and the snow that is falling in the background, it always stood out to me...
You're not ruining anything.
Please keep this information coming. It's very valuable (to me, at least).
pat man: You are, unfortunately, fired.