CatBus

BigP said:

I have tried moving the file from my pc to my 2TB hard drive but it keeps saying the file is too big. How can this be when the file is only approx. 8gb? How do I get it to play on my ps3???   :(

Some filesystems (i.e. FAT, used frequently for external media for compatibility purposes), have a maximum filesize they can accept.  Try reformatting the drive to anything other than FAT.

EDIT: yes, but that would probably break compatibility with the PS3.  Just burn it to DVD and be done with it.

I admit up-front that this is just a roundabout way of asking "are we there yet"?

h_h, do you have a rough changelog of what's going into the V2 audio for each of the movies?  i.e. "removed SE alien sounds from cantina scene", "slight rotj timing change for pal-based projects", etc.

That's OK.  I found a decent price on the NTSC GOUT disc so I'm covered.  Yes, it's French even though it's labeled as Spanish.

Harmy said:

If you're talking about the fade in/out with a blur thing, all evidence seems to point toward no such thing ever being there in SW, so I'll probably take it out. I just thought it looked pretty cool. I've seen countless subtitled films theatrically and I remember this effect being there but as it seems it wasn't there in this case, and since we're getting closer and closer to the actual theatrical subs, I think I'll take it out.

I don't see how a fade-in would even be possible using the hand-compositing methods used for Star Wars.  The thing that causes subtitle shake also prevents the fade-in from being possible.

Anyone know where I can get the Spanish dub from the NTSC ESB GOUT disc?  It turns out Lee Thorogood's Technicolor DVD doesn't have this after all?  Just ESB is missing.

Just wanted to add that I drooled on myself.  That is all.

I was 7 when Empire came out, and while it was certainly a cool movie I liked a lot, it had a lot of stuff that was hard for a kid to process.  Down ending, moral ambiguity, not to mention the sexual tension.  Star Wars and Jedi were much more satisfying for kids--the bad guys got beaten and there was a big KABOOM to prove it.

I liked Star Wars better until I had time to grow up and have a better understanding of Empire.  Empire is certainly the least kid-friendly of the movies, and when a large chunk of your fans are kids, that means it's not going to be as popular at first.  But there's no doubt in my mind it's the best of the movies.

danny_boy said:

(so it was always easier to be impressed when watching such a presentation).

That's the jump I don't make.  Yes, theatre sound (even normal stereo theatre sound) sounded better than mono television.  But that was EXPECTED, and it wasn't new.  Back in '77, when people wanted to watch a movie, they saw it in the theatre, there wasn't even a thought that it would sound like a television unless you went to a drive-in.  Now, things are different and people watch movies primarily on their TVs.  It's only recently that there's been any expectation of parity between TV and movies, visually or sonically or anything.

But the 70mm Star Wars mix stood out because it was clearly better than even the normal stereo theatre sound.  It sounded like people's hi-fi systems.  Sure that was impressive, but here's the thing--people's hi-fi systems back in '77 sounded just as good if not better than people's hi-fi systems today.  So we're essentially measuring against the same yardstick as they did back then, and people today (like me) are still impressed by it, when comparing it to current sound standards.  Maybe we should frame it a different way--what is it about the 1977 70mm track that doesn't impress YOU?  What are you comparing it against?

Because really if we're all measuring it against different standards, that can easily explain why one person finds it to be impressive and another doesn't.  Let's compare it against the Blu Ray mix for example.  Can we all agree it's impressive compared to that?

Read the first post in the thread for download info.  Maybe download Star Wars last just in case 2.0 comes out before you need it.

I liked that appropriate credit was given to James Earl Jones.

Nothing else.

Harmy said:

Yeah, in this clip, there's a lot of detail loss due to compression, which I hope to avoid in the final encode. I actually plan to release a DVD9 AVCHD and then also a 15 or so GB mkv. I was even thinking about a BD25 release but since I don't have a BD burner, I don't think I'll do that.

And I'm glad you like the colours, You_Too :-)

An MKV sounds great.  Those of us who want a BD25 can demux/remux it ourselves.

Don't panic. I think things have progressed a bit behind the scenes such that we're talking about a delay here and not a complete roadblock anymore.  I'd like Harmy to confirm this of course.

danny_boy said:

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

danny_boy said:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=XuxVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=zEANAAAAIBAJ&pg=6767,2774626&dq=70mm+6+track+star+wars&hl=en

Nice article.  Although I'm not sure how it bolsters your point.

"better sound in the movies is a must now that the public is hifi conscious and yes indeed---we'd like to here it on TV aswell"

The Robesonian 11/24/1977

I wonder if they were just thinking more movies needed to sound as good as Star Wars, given the date.

Have you tried burning the disc?

All the image mounting utilities I tried on this choke and report an empty disc.  Burning it to DVD was the only way I was able to see the contents.

That's fine--but the lack of popular outcry demanding that the obvious rubber suit in Alien get replaced with CGI, among other things, is an indicator that re-editing old classic movies to bring them visually in-line with their sequels/prequels is a pretty minority view.  You seem to be okay being in that minority, and that's fine.  Star Wars is the odd trilogy out by getting this treatment, not the other way around.

nightstalkerpoet said:

The Wizard of Oz is self-contained. The visuals of the film only need to meet the standard of the other visuals in the film.

Star Wars is different, in that there is a twenty five year technology gap between the first one produced and the last one produced.

Are you kidding?  There were 46 years between the first Wizard of Oz movie and the last one produced (another slated for 2014), and the visual styles of the movies were markedly different.  The Wizard of Oz most definitely has a rich EU spanning decades.  And it, like every other classic film, does not need to be updated to match current filmmaking trends.

Diego said:

It works, although right out of the box it doesn't show the lenght of each line which is important, I'll mess with it later to see if it's an option or something.

After a quick look at Star Wars, it seems the subtitles are from Spain, so some parts sound a bit off to me. For example, in Mexico we call computers "computadoras" but in Spain they call them "ordenadores", the subtitles use "ordenadores" so I'll probably change that.

A curious thing about spanish is that we have two different forms of the second person in singular "You", we use "Usted" which implies more respect or that you're talking to a superior or even for a not very close relationship and "Tú" which is more friendly or among equals. It is interesting that in these subtitles Vader uses "Tú" when talking to Tarkin, but I'm pretty sure in a dubbed version I once watched Vader used "Usted" when talking to Tarkin. Leia also used "Usted" when talking to Han. So I'll have to think about what's more appropiate between different characters.

OK, if all else fails, you can ignore line length and I can check for length problems afterward.

Definitely go for Mexican variations wherever you like.  And the Usted/tu difference, whatever decision you come to is fine, just make sure it's consistent between movies if you can (i.e. don't have a relationship suddenly become more formal in a later movie).  Thanks so much!

Try this:

http://www.pure-mac.com/video.html#jubler

If that works out for you, I'll edit the first post.

I'm sure there are.  I'll take a look around and let you know.  In a pinch, SRT files are just text files, so a simple text editor would do (although it'd be a pain to do side-by-side)

No, the lack of eyebrows really is a WTF moment.  When human characters get introduced in movies, they tend to have eyebrows, even if they're big freaky old man eyebrows like Sebastian Shaw's.  Every now and then a human character may not have eyebrows, but I'm really having a hard time thinking of one, and I'm willing to bet it comes along with an explanation.

Even my sister has alopecia ariata and she's got SOME eyebrows.  The WTF would come even if I'd never seen Jedi before, trust me.

EDIT: Back on topic, though, the fatal flaw was that they were so TEDIOUS.  The only parts I remember were the parts where the tedium became so unbearable that I actually remarked on it out loud while watching the movie.  The racing scene in TPM and the big lizard scene in AOTC are pretty much all I recall due to their extended terribleness, the latter of which I actually walked out of the theatre and PRETENDED to go to the restroom just so that I could come back when it was over.

While I'd agree that the "PT-continuity" changes aren't the worst of the changes to the OT, I don't think they are "neutral" except for the PT baggage you bring along with them.

For example, I don't remember much of the PT.  I've seen all three movies, certainly, but I think I remember an annoying giant lizard in AOTC and that's about it.  I wouldn't know an element from these movies if it came up and bit me.  I'm sorry, I just don't remember them enough to hate them properly.

So when Vader's eyebrows disappeared in the OT, my thought was: where the hell are his eyebrows?, not that this was a forced-continuity decision.  All those other planets celebrating in ROTJ, who are they and why do they matter?

That's not to say these are terrible changes on the order of CGI Jabba or Mos Eisley dinosaurs, but these are the sort of changes that make me say WTF is this about while watching the movie, and that's certainly not neutral.  They do degrade the OT, even if just a little.

Something's way off.  I checked the files I downloaded from Topper Harley and they are off by less than one video frame.  Perhaps there's a Premiere or audio usage of the word frame, or maybe he meant milliseconds.

TV's Frink said:

russs15 said:

I agree it is a shame that the GOUT was never available as Fullscreen

Why?

A smaller portion of the picture in the same area might mean better resolution, potentially useful for restoration efforts.

Harmy said:

I have some time on my hands while I'm waiting for some sources.

I'm sure if he knew it was going to hold up the works, Stinky-Dinkins would have paid for rush delivery...