logo Sign In

BobaJett

User Group
Members
Join date
26-Jan-2016
Last activity
24-May-2024
Posts
214

Post History

Post
#909111
Topic
General Star Wars <strong>Random Thoughts</strong> Thread
Time

When public safety and pop culture cross paths. Saw this the day before TFA released. It was on the overhead signs throughout the state.
[URL=http://s208.photobucket.com/user/Daffypuck/media/sign_zpshidnlyll.jpg.html][IMG]http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb255/Daffypuck/sign_zpshidnlyll.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

Damnit! Ive tried four different ways to insert the phot on the post. What type of code does this forum support to show photo in post without clicking?

Post
#909108
Topic
Info: Finding Original Trilogy DVDs - for any of the original theatrical versions
Time

Haarspalter said:

Over-saturated colors in the GOUT? Are you confusing the GOUT with the 2004 DVDs? Because the colors of the GOUT are rather badly faded than over-saturated.

Ok, after looking at it, Ill have to agree with you, to a point. Its similar to the BD in that it is slightly oversaturated, but a washed out saturation. The blue in R2 is still that bright, metallic overly blue in the GOUT. Its not as bad as the 2011 BD, but still there. Wheras the TN1 version is the more true to the original darker navy blue. (remember, Im color blind, so Im doing my best to convey what I see.) Also, the GOUT has bad “aliasing.” I guess thats what you call that. Another thing is the AR. When I did a screen grab of the GOUT and then tried to crop the image, it was less than 2.35/2.39:1 AR. R2’s head is not quite round like the correct AR in the BD. Why is that?

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/162334

Post
#908794
Topic
team negative1 - star wars 1977 - 35mm theatrical version (Released)
Time

Smithers said:

BobaJett said:

I ran across this today on eBay. ROTJ 35mm print
http://www.ebay.com/itm/35mm-Feature-STAR-WARS-EPISODE-VI-RETURN-OF-THE-JEDI-1983-Gorgeous-LPP-SCOPE-/172104429447?hash=item2812392f87:g😒BwAAOSwDuJWw657

That looks REALLY good! Is it SE though?
I don’t think so. I think it’s an 83’ reel.

Post
#908632
Topic
Info: Finding Original Trilogy DVDs - for any of the original theatrical versions
Time

Haarspalter said:

Over-saturated colors in the GOUT? Are you confusing the GOUT with the 2004 DVDs? Because the colors of the GOUT are rather badly faded than over-saturated.

I’m color blind, so maybe I need a second opinion. I’ll post a screen grab or two for comparison after work tonight. Let me know what I might be confusing with over saturation.

Post
#908385
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

ZkinandBonez said:

I actually preferred the look of the OT as a kid, but then again I had a mother who showed me a lot of old films so there was never a contemporary “norm” for me, just a bunch of movies that looked different.

Exactly my point!! I know all of us would be pleasantly surprised and happy, but I wonder if the very thing we hope for would be received well by the casual fan.

Post
#908374
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

I wonder, If either of the next two episodes were able to convey the look, the feel and flow of the OT moives, would the general SW audience be turned off or care less and welcome it? Ive had young first time viewers of the entire saga ask me why the PT looks modern and the OT looks old and outdated. They liked all of them, but tended to lean a bit towards the more contemporary looking PT films. Granted, we’re talking about a 12 and 10 yr old. So they might change that opinion as they get older.

Post
#908357
Topic
Complete list, if possible, of release dates by city in 1977
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Lol, I was wondering what the point of this thread was, but the first reply answered that question for me.

WHy are you such an ass dude? Every post Ive made on this forum youve had nothing but something negative to say or been condescending towards. I thought this was a forum where we could discuss opinions and ideas without ridicule. I dont mind harmless sarcasm or ribbing, but damn dude, it seems you troll the forums just to belittle peoples posts. My question is a reasonable question that pertains to the history of this movie. C’mon, ease up a bit.

Post
#908300
Topic
Complete list, if possible, of release dates by city in 1977
Time

For many years, I never realized that SW was released on a very limited number of screens on May 25th. I saw it on opening day, presumably the 25th, but later realized that was not the case. I have seen a list of the cities it was released on the 25th and a few subsequent dates. But never a complete list. Im just wondering what was the actual date I saw it on back in 77’. I suppose I could go to the public library and get old newspapers on micro film and loook for the entertainment section to see the showtimes and dates, but Id rather see if its available onine first. Im not 100% sure, but if my 7 yr old memory serves correctly, it was on a Wednesday night for me. But I could be wrong.

Post
#906951
Topic
General Star Wars <strong>Random Thoughts</strong> Thread
Time

With that said, what does the novel say? Not paraphrasing, but exactly? The reason I ask, is for some odd reason, I found the dialogue between Han and Leia a bit ambiguous. Ealrier in the movie, Han only says that a young boy betrayed Luke. He doesnt specify by name. Perhaps he was emabarrassed because it was Ben, IDK. But the dialogue between Han and Leia sounds as if Leia is arguing that she wanted to send Ben to Luke, but then shows regret in her next sentence for sending him elsewhere, or away. If he did indeed go to train with Luke, how would Snoke had access to have seduced Ben?
Thats why Im asking specifically what the novel says. I dont think Ben ever trained with Luke. I think he was sent away somewhere else by Han and Leia and was seduced by Snoke. Im probably wrong and reading too much into it.

Post
#906932
Topic
Screenshot Comparison question
Time

Im pretty new to fanedits and preservation projects and was comparing this screenshot to show to friends and family. Being colorblind, its sometimes difficult for me to discern minor color nuances and differences. Im curious as to what causes this “aspect” anomaly in the screenshot below. The TN1 shot is 1 pixel less on one axis, but I wouldnt think that would have anything to do with. Hopefully my conversion to burn to BD didnt affect my quality either. Any thoughts?

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/161531/picture:0