negative1 said:
the main software being used is PFCLEAN,
read up on it here:
=================
https://www.thepixelfarm.co.uk/product.php?productId=PFClean
https://www.thepixelfarm.co.uk/product.php?productId=PFClean&content=Features
I've not heard of that software before, it looks fantastic. Pricey though :O
Laserschwert said:
Of course storing them as RAWs is a waste of space, as there are enough file formats with lossless compression out there, like PNG or TIF, that also support more than 8bit color per channel.
RAW files allow for much more adjustment than other formats (at least they do with my personal photos in photoshop's raw editor) because they're the files without any interpretations of levels or exposure, iso etc put on them by the camera. Can the point and shoot you guys are using shoot in RAW I'm just curious, it's not really necessary, you guys are getting great results as is.
I've never captured a motion picture of course but as for the workflow I'd imagine that you'd get better looking results batch editing in photoshop (you could create an action with all the adjustments for each scene). It might just be because I have more experience with photoshop that I think that though.
I'm sorry I keep pestering you guys with all these questions, I just think the process is so interesting! :)
negative1 said:
pittrek said:
negative1 said:
Brooks said:
negative1 said:
we'll release the raw files too, but they will be huge!
later
-1
No size is too large for something that important!
the size is Terabytes, you'll have to
supply your own hard drives. that's the plan.
later
-1
I currently own 8 external 1TB drives. Is it enough or do I need to buy more ? :-)
our estimate was 6-10T, not including the english red print,
but including ESB. basically just the raw frames, no video or
audio included. it would be better to have larger drives, because
the shipping would be a lot i would think. i'm still not sure how
this will work, until we actually get to that point. it'll be awhile
after the release though.
later
-1
I suspected they would be large and that HD's would be necessary but I didn't know they would be LARGE large! Are they photo RAW files or JPGs? And why no audio? I'm hoping someone that gets a copy of these can run a batch conversion to make smaller files for the rest of us to play around with (though I applaud you for making and distributing the full quality capture!)
It looks awesome. Of course I'm a sucker for rack mounted gear :)
negative1 said:
we'll release the raw files too, but they will be huge!
later
-1
No size is too large for something that important!
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
You might want to peruse the lengthy Blu Ray thread. Restoring a classic film means just that - restoring it to its original Academy Award winning form, no more and no less. -1's work is at the very leading edge of this effort.
Where is that thread? I tried searching for blu ray and it gets 1000+ results
:(
I hate all those fake download links on sendspace, but the video is awesome! How did you guys get that motor to time out just right? It seems like the film moves slowly through the camera part of the contraption but quickly off of the reels.
lurker77 said:
^ That article explains perfectly what I was concerned about when I heard these guys were using an off-the-shelf digital camera instead of a professional scanner.
Bayer filter chips use fancy algorithms to cheat on image resolution, leading to colour inaccuracy. It's not horrible, but it's not the real thing.
Top-of-the-line film scanners use three sensors, one for each color. No cheating, full accuracy. But they cost millions of dollars, thanks not only to the extra sensors, but elaborate film gates, precise alignment of the sensors, an elaborate prism to split the colours between the sensors, and most of all, insanely good build quality.
The next best thing that can be done is something that the article touches on - oversampling. Simply, if you use a 12 megapixel digital camera to capture a 4K image, it will turn out almost as good as a 3-chip scanner. Today's DSLRs do 12 megapixels.
EDIT: My mistake. 12 megapixels is not the same thing as 12,000 pixels per line. That would be 48 megapixels, beyond what any off-the-shelf camera can do ATM.
Millions of dollars?? What scanners are those, I'd like to read about them. That's obviously not practical, but this project will provide us with great results that will sustain us for years, and by the time house sized tv's are common maybe scanners will have advanced too and gotten cheaper. When I worked at a camera store in 2000 a one megapixel digital camera cost hundreds of dollars. You could have gotten a nikon f100 for not much more (which was much much better).
The only improvement I would suggest to their current setup is to use a slr, if only because they shoot faster and have larger apertures (and arguably better focus). And you can get 18mp slrs now for $800 or so. I got my 8mp rebel xt for $200 used and that was years ago.
You should definitely do Jedi! Of the three original films that one was altered the most egregiously (I think). Those changes are unforgivable.
lucasdroid said:
Can you post the schematics for your mad invention so others may re-create and possibly improve on the effort?
I would LOVE to see the video of the setup that negative 1 mentioned doing earlier (mostly because I'm a big nerd about that kind of thing, and it looks super neat). You might could improve on it, maybe, but without a good print to work with what would you do with it??
edit: also, a video about the setup would make a nice extra on a dvd/bluray :)
And I didn't know there were any manual focus point and shoots. Keep up the good work, we're all super psyched for it!
Thanks! I've never done anything with IVTC like omegamattman was talking about before, not sure if I'll be able to tackle that (and hopefully remove that jaggy stuff) or not.
Here's some Empire action for'ya
or on mediafire (18mb)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/z5y3b97b3llzl7t/esb_premiere.mp4
The 35mm film version sounds good. The Silver Screen edition sounds nice too (like in the trailer).
Newer DSLR's don't have manual focus??? Is that true?
red5-626 said:
?I got it now : )
Password was dun wrong.
You are only using 4 megapixels of a 8 mega pixel camera?
And 4 megapixels is more than 10:80P?
Did not no that dose that mean that my 6.0 mega pixel Nikon is better than 35mm film?
?
I'm guessing that if they do the full 8mp it would add up to too large a file (24 pics per sec for 2 hours!) and possibly the camera wouldn't be able to save the files to the memory card fast enough to keep up with the pulley system.
4mp is still a large photo on a tv, it should be more than adequate for 1080. And no a 6 mp camera is not better resolution than 35mm film, but 6mp is higher than HD tv and 35mm is significantly better than HD tv (when shot properly). I think I read somewhere that quality slide film is the equivalent of 50mp or more.
Maybe not state of the art but very very clever I think! I'm really glad to hear that you guys are capturing at 4mp, that leaves room for future releases when/if HD becomes obsolete. And if that 8mp camera is a rebel XT, I've got one of those, it may be inexpensive but it's a good camera :)
I'm really intrigued by the glimpses of the projector. I haven't read all the pages of this thread yet, do you discuss your set up? Is that a DSLR hooked up to the front of the projector??
Yikes! I feel bad for your poor computer, working so hard! :)
frank678 said:
does the motion in this new clip seem a tad jerky? for example in the first clip when han moves his arm down from the wall it seems much more of a fluid movement. I dont really trust my perception this could be imagination
It's not your imagination,now that I'm looking for it I see that too. I think the original premiere video I did looks significantly better. I'll keep playing with fixing the widescreen but I don't think I'm going to bother with the pulldown anymore.
Here is a version that I did the aftereffects pulldown removal on, also resized to widescreen and ran the same premiere effects. Though larger, I don't think it looks as good as the original version. What do you think?
Here it is on mediafire (20mb)
I don't know, as to what source these tapes were telecined from I have no idea??
Jetrell Fo said:
I'm wondering what the Widescreen S.E. trilogy VHS tapes might look like after being finessed by you this way.........hmmmmmmmmmmm.....
:)
Nicely done Brooks...the video preview is pleasant and easy to watch.
I wish I had the tapes to see! I have the other thx widescreen tapes of course (a box set), and I have the standard 80's pan and scans (though those were played a lot, might not look as good as the box set which has never been played).
If you're interested I can post the effects I put onto the footage. They're all standard premiere effects except for the neat video. Should be easy to recreate.
I appreciate all the kind and encouraging words everybody! This is a fun thing to do! :) Once I figure out how to resize this thing to widescreen I'll post another sample
frank678 said:
What stops me from fully liking this version of the film anymore is I've learnt the Death Star had subtle tints of 'space blue' that faded away ending up leaving it to look too monotone - grey model on grey model
but back in 1978...
I agree Frank, I wish the color on the tapes were more vibrant like the actual film. I'm not sure how I could fix that without giving everything a blue'ish tint? Also, that would be more true to the original but not to this version of the tape. I remember back in the 90's when they released a blue tie fighter for the action figures it was strange to me because I always thought of them as white or gray (after all that's what the toys were when I was a kid in the vintage days).
Moth3r said:
Brooks said:
... (Vimeo smoothes it out a bit when streaming, at least on my computer/connection, so you can't really see the interlacing which is quite prevalent)
...
After thousands of man hours and millions of dollars spent, the scientists at Brooks laboratories have tweaked the footage in Premiere to downplay the interlacing, tone down the reddish tone and sharpen things a bit. They also used neat video to remove some of the noise.
Alarm bells ringing!
The scientists at Brooks laboratories don't seem to understand certain video basics, such as the difference between interlaced video and video telecined with 3:2 pulldown.
I had an almost identical conversation with another new member just a couple of weeks ago:
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/The-SWOLT-ANHV8-Preservation-Project/post/580980/#TopicPost580980Your sample plays with no audio, however the vimeo link plays with a choppiness that suggests you have not carried out an IVTC.
I tried to remove the pulldown with aftereffects (using the interpret footage/remove pulldown option) and it looked worse (to my eyes) than what I had previously. I don't know if I'm doing it wrong?? When I say interlaced I meant the horizontal lines, jaggys I think I've seen it described in some of the threads here, what is the proper terminology for that phenomenon?
The thing I want to fix in the sample is the aspect ratio. It's a widescreen vhs converted to DV so the black bars of the widescreen are contained inside of the DV frame. I'd like to make it look more natural, without so much space on top and bottom, but when I try to do a simple resize in premiere it looks much worse, lots of detail lost with any enlargement. How do you guys compensate for that when you capture the old fashioned wide screen tapes or LDs?
these are fantastic, please keep the screenshots coming! :)
Moth3r said:
Alarm bells ringing!
The scientists at Brooks laboratories don't seem to understand certain video basics, such as the difference between interlaced video and video telecined with 3:2 pulldown.
I had an almost identical conversation with another new member just a couple of weeks ago:
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/The-SWOLT-ANHV8-Preservation-Project/post/580980/#TopicPost580980Your sample plays with no audio, however the vimeo link plays with a choppiness that suggests you have not carried out an IVTC.
Those scientists are no good, I'm firing them all as soon as I get out of class! I'll also read that other thread when I get home this evening, I'm not at all knowledgeable about ivtc, doesn't that involve changing the fps? I'll research it. Thanks for the comments guys, I'll respond to more tonight (I'm in a programming class right now, speaking of "recursive" :) )
