AntcuFaalb

I finally got the opportunity to take a look at the shoutbox shenanigans and noticed someone posting there as "pat man".

I'd like to state, for the record, that I didn't make any posts there, under any name.

Trust me, I wouldn't want to be responsible for any blowback, especially after all that has happened during the last few weeks.

darth_ender said:

Wow, you're kidding me!  How do you even know for sure it's him?  I can't see his name on the site anywhere.

http://www.fanedit.org/forums/showthread.php?10966-I-have-a-new-forum-ready-for-the-prequel-trilogy

He's trolling FE too. I'm surprised that they haven't banned him yet.

Reegar said:

I think I've seen like. . . one thread on here for prequel preservation? And that was pretty much about the Yoda puppet in TPM.

There are some, yes. Adywan's TPM reconstruction and althor1138's TPM LD preservation come to mind.

MrBrown said:

"Friends are members that are following each other."

..uhm.. everytime I follow someone it is called "stalking" not "friending". :)

lol

TV's Frink said:

ALLOL @ coltonlolz...

http://prequeltrilogy.freeforums.net/

WTF is this? How did you find it?

Is it supposed to be competition for OT.com? If so, then all I have to say is: what a joke.

JEDIT: Here we go... http://www.fanedit.org/forums/showthread.php?10966-I-have-a-new-forum-ready-for-the-prequel-trilogy

FrankT said:

Where can I get my hands on the PAL version of this fan-edit?

It's on Usenet (alt.binaries.starwars). Enjoy!

http://www.mediachance.com/dvdlab/helppro2/index.html

I need to study the hell out of this.

coltoncom said:

timdiggerm said:

I wonder if this means I can post from my workplace, where we have IE9, and only IE9...

 I wouldn't post at your work if I were you, because you might get fired.

That depends on whether or not he's an at-will employee, doesn't it?

It also depends on what kind of job he has. I know many security guards who wouldn't get in trouble for watching TV while on duty.

timdiggerm said:

I wonder if this means I can post from my workplace, where we have IE9, and only IE9...

EDIT: Yes.

I guess this means we'll see more of timdiggerm around these parts.

Excellent! :-)

Awesome! Thanks, Jay!!!

RicOlie_2 said:

Yes I will.

Oh wait...that Ric...

What is it with Ricks? –RLM

muddyknees2000 said:

It was a holiday special AND his segment was a cartoon.....you can get away with things like that in less serious mediums.

True, true.

muddyknees2000 said:

I'd almost wager that they intentionally chose not to name Fett in the film....

But then why name him in the Holiday Special?

(FWIW, I'm part of the "They should have never named him in the films" camp.)

Harmy: I'm sorry if this has been asked before, but where did the "Commentary For Visually Impaired" come from?

Also, is there one available for TESB and ROTJ?

Thanks!

Monroville said:

since he/she has the "film to digital HD" transfer equipment

he

joetunon said:

Thanks, AntcuFaalb. I LOVE that Avatar, btw! LOL!!!

Thanks!

http://www.dejadejadeja.com/10years/

This is the best Usenet (text) search I've come across. Google Groups sucks.

DominicCobb said:

I don't think J.J. has ever shot on digital? Also probably important to note that you can still pick up lens flares with a digital camera.

I heard somewhere that the really expensive digital cameras use realtime algorithms to compensate for the flares. I guess this is why I've been making some confusing posts in this thread. LOL! :-D

Fang Zei said:

AntcuFaalb said:

Laserschwert said:

bkev said:

They were pretty prevalent in Super8 and didn't detract from how much I love that film

Granted, with "Super 8" he mimicked "Close Encounters" both in style and tone, and CE was FULL of lens flares, so that was pretty spot on (no pun intended). Generally Spielberg used them a LOT in his most iconic movies, and they never bothered me a bit.

Isn't the difference that JJ had to digitally add them in for Super8 whereas CE had them because that's the way that real-film Panavision cameras worked back then?

Hmmm? It was shot in the exact same format (anamorphic panavision). I would think the flares in Super8 are all in-camera.

Anyway, to be fair, there are some subtle (and probably unintentional) lensflares in the OT. The shootout in the detention block of the Death Star comes to mind.

Oh, I thought that Super 8 was shot on digital rather than film. My mistake.

darth_ender said:

Cool :)

d4

No, no, no! Play the English opening!

frank678 said:

AntcuFaalb said:

I would, but I no longer have anything to cut Macrovision, so it'll have to wait until I have some extra cash lying around.

I sold my Leitch DPS-290 to free-up some funds for Laserdisc purchases.

O.k. then can I switch my guilt trip over to capturing the star wars Mitsubishi 1992 laserdisc if you have that? If not, I'll stop using this flimsy pretence to make requests.

I don't own the Mitsubishi pressings of the 1992/3 release of the trilogy (the "Special Widescreen Edition" or "SWE").

I do, however, own three sets of the Technidisc pressings.

(3 sets x 3 movies = 9 LD movies, 27 discs, 54 sides! Madness!)

Also, no shrinking aspect ratio problems!

I plan to get around to that after THX 1138.

Laserschwert said:

Well, it's not like Spielberg put them in frame BY ACCIDENT. Those were, of course, conscious creative decisions. (cause if he didn't want lens flares, he'd had pointed the lights somewhere else)

Good point. I see what you mean now.

Laserschwert said:

bkev said:

They were pretty prevalent in Super8 and didn't detract from how much I love that film

Granted, with "Super 8" he mimicked "Close Encounters" both in style and tone, and CE was FULL of lens flares, so that was pretty spot on (no pun intended). Generally Spielberg used them a LOT in his most iconic movies, and they never bothered me a bit.

Isn't the difference that JJ had to digitally add them in for Super8 whereas CE had them because that's the way that real-film Panavision cameras worked back then?

frank678 said:

AntcuFaalb said:

I'm sorry, everyone.

I will, of course, never again take up a sock-puppet or troll account (or anything of the sort).

I think as penance you should upload some vhsrips from all those star wars box sets you got when you got the Panasonic AG-1980. Then I may be able to forgive. 

I would, but I no longer have anything to cut Macrovision, so it'll have to wait until I have some extra cash lying around.

I sold my Leitch DPS-290 to free-up some funds for Laserdisc purchases.

doubleofive said:

I don't recall TaggartFrenzy.

I'm not proud of it, of course, but history is history, so...

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Updating-Ghostbusters-and-Back-to-the-Future/topic/14742/

Once again, my apologies to all.