Im casting doubt on them doing 4K re-renders. At best it will be 4K recompositing for shots that are simple composites. I doubt they will be re-rendering any complex CGI.
I saw ESB and ROTJ recently in cinemas, 2011 master, still a good watch. ROTJ looked like garbage during the early Endor scenes.
Star Wars comming up soon, out of order due to covid cancelling its earlier screening.
I think its fair to say that a home release closely matching a release 35mm print is the exception rather than the norm.
Keep in mind there is fill in artefacts on both the left and right eye of the 3D version. You may want to look for a HDTV version which is 16:9 but without artefacts. There is a HDTV which is an earlier Telecine which matches the DVD version and a 2012 HDTV which has the bluray scan (and color grade).
Have you considered a double TFM process.
Split the video into two TFM streams, one for upper fields, one for lower fields and then combine them to make a 59.94P stream. Any remaining combed frames will be taken care of by the TFM process.
It’s what i use in my simpsons project to deal with cadence breaks and 60i effects.
It was this logo btw
Well I saw this yesterday. An interesting experience. I had never seen the original cut.
It was the roughest print I had ever seen, red as hell, so scratched and dirty it makes 4K77 grindhouse look pristine.
Came with the Buck Rogers trailer at the top and a rather modern looking warner logo rather than a WB shield.
Got a good laugh when the officer fell of his bike and the number of active officers changed by one.
Very confusing movie, the directors cut makes a lot more sense, although I hate the CGI changes in it.
Off the top of my head, look for the extra few seconds of SEN interacting with the kids towards the end of the movie.
Scene ended at the point where he references the huge bottle of economics he had to take. Don’t think there were any extra seconds, will have to review the LD.
I guess we could compromise on this by releasing a GOUT synced version and a theatrically synced version. There wouldn’t be many synced subtitles or audio for the theatrically synced version but at least it would be available for those who want it
No, the endless fragmentation of public releases really does a disservice to the community.
Personally I’m in favour of GOUT sync. Frames on reel changes are extended to allow for changeover, they don’t NEED to all be accounted for. But if we choose to make a new sync, commit, don’t look back.
Here’s the current status of the color grading:
It’s looking really great so far!! My only note would be the pinkish blocky artifacting that seems to be present quite a bit. Maybe it’s just a limitation with the source? It doesn’t appear to be too major, but for pixel-peepers like myself it’s still noticeable.
Most likely the jpg compression used for these uploads
act on instinct said:
Seeing teal artifacts in the whites.
Those are not teal artifacts. The walls of Tantive IV are a bluish green with creme colored panels. There is some artifacting in some of the shots, which will be fixed, but the walls are not supposed to be white.
Is there any evidence that the walls are supposed to appear as teal on screen. I would imagine the walls were painted teal so they would appear cool white under the tungsten set lighting.
I get to see a 35mm print of this soon, will take notes, anything I should look out for.
Dek Rollins said:
Anyway, I’m talking about stuff like this: http://www.framecompare.com/screenshotcomparison/999MJNNU
Ok I’d love an explanation on these changes, they don’t make a lick of sense to me.
trillary dump said:
This post from the lddb is very relevant here and in general
That is interesting about old home video releases having their colors altered to make up for inaccurate TV sets. Would you still trust the 35mm scan that has been done over the LD in this case? I do know that a lot of people were saying that it is way to oversaturated and blown out (maybe it was unique to that specific print)
I wouldn’t trust the LD at all. It’s clear from the 35mm that the theatrical presentation bears no resemblance to the early home releases.
I’m trusting Bill Pope that the UHD is how it was supposed to look.
I think its clear that the 35mm theatrical presentation had so much extra processing in it that made it basically unusable for the home release.
This post from the lddb is very relevant here and in general
It’s so funny how all people are complaining about “history revision” yet have no experience whatsoever in this business. I’m a film restorer and colorist. Here’s a little thing for you all to consider before you start yelling how inaccurate modern releases are:
During the 80s and 90s, most TV manufacturers (especially Sony with their Trinitron sets) had such terrible accuracy out of the box with major blue push. We do see this kind of torch mode today of course, but back then there was really not as much interest for consumers to calibrate their displays and as the movie studios have always been interested in making money, most films that appeared on home video and Laserdisc were to a certain point color timed to compensate for these inaccurate sets (hence red push was very common on masters in this era of time). This meant that pretty much every DVD you’ll find by MGM released prior to 2005 or such will have an overly reddish tone and all share the exact same characteristic. Only problem however is that most of these films had much more sophisticated color timings than what we saw on VHS and DVD yet people still take this for granted.
And this becomes extremely clear when you start to have a look at the physical films in an archive. Theatrical prints, even though they never tend to have much sharpness, are usually what we go after. And they rarely have much in common with an outdated VHS, Laserdisc or DVD. Of course we can still have a look at a home video release just for the sake of it, but we know that it has been going through way too many compromises to be used as a reference.
For instance, I had the chance to check out Thief on a Swedish 35mm print from the early 80s. I kept the new grade that’s used on the Criterion and Arrow releases (Director’s Cut only), as people have complained for years for it being inaccurate. Look at this comparison: http://www.caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=3606&d2=5422&s1=33376&s2=50607&i=6&l=0
And guess what? This scene was so cold and blue, even when only going through a photochemical process, that’s it’s not even debateable. The MGM was so off you wouldn’t believe it, while the restoration by Criterion keeps it all intact.
Many people complained about the Scanners Blu-Ray by Criterion yet relatively few (in contrast) seem to even have seen it. I’ve got the BD myself and have honestly no doubt that it’s an accurate presentation of the films intended look. The entire process was also supervised by David Cronenberg himself and from my experience, both directors and cinematagraphers tend to remember the color timings and gradings that were used for their films.
As a colorist at one the oldest film archives in the world, I have no intention in changing how the films I grade are supposed to look. I can do plenty of research before I settle down with my work, but sometimes you will have to take a chance if it’s unclear just how the film was really supposed to look. Then I will have to look at other factors that play in and try to make a decision from there, but I don’t go to Blu-Ray.com or this forum to ask for suggestions. I have a very difficult time believing that someone who hangs around there or at this place, who I don’t know through my job, would be of any help when I’m facing a problem like that.
This 9 way comparison will be rendered at 4K and uploaded. Will be handy reference. Will also have frame numbers and such on the bottom.
Will see about including more sources to the randomizer.
A sneak peak of things to come https://streamable.com/334phh
I might be the only one that prefers 97 Jabba. Yeah he looks terribly outdated but he’s got personality.
Ive had a glance at this and I don’t think its going to work for me. It has all the probems of the original remaster bar the aspect ratio. The colors are too bright and too oversaturated. There are still Interlacing artefacts and line smearing artefacts. The video filtering is too overdone. And far too over processed for my taste. Particularly when it comes to fuzzy details become strongly defined details. Stuff that looks bad because of the low resolution of SD now looks bad because someone drew it bad.
My simpsons remaster will still happen, at some point, when the workflow becomes defined enough to do it all at once. But don’t expect it any time in the near future.
For now enjoy disney plus.
Yeah it pretty much stalled. I’ve had a brief look at the new remasters. They look good but they haven’t done an amazing job on the line shifting issue. Which is no surprise. I’ll take a closer look.
Just for fun i thought id mix the 2011, 2020 blurays and 4K77 1.4 and match them all to one source, the UHD. Here is a snippet.
All graded using Dr Dre’s color matching tool. Cheers
It might be a good idea to make a thread about just errors in the 4K releases. Here’s something I found today.
In almost all the shots like this during the Tie chase scene there are misaligned power windows making the space outside darker. Here is the worst
And its animated https://streamable.com/9g6zkl
Notice the shadows in on the cockpit windows, almost every shot in this setup has misaligned power windows, making space darker.
Here is another one
Some absolutely fascinating stuff shared here. I’m saving a copy in case it goes down.
Ban for this guy please
Yeah it’s been edited. The reactions are taken from a video of Avengers Infinity war when everyone dissolves.
Keep in mind these are all shot with anamorphic lenses, so things can get squished or stretched based on their position in the frame, i believe.
Also interesting to note the 2004 ESB release was complete well before the ANH and ROTJ was finished and was colored by another person entirely seperate. Might have something to do with the weirdness.