No spleen invites available, but if you’re looking for Star Wars projects, see Snoop’s comment above.
I was hoping you would speak about the sources you used, and how you created the project, but your previous response said it was too long to mention.
Well done for getting this project over the finishing line and released, because a lot of projects are announced but fail to materialize for one reason or another.
No problem, I can appreciate wanting the highest quality version of a film, without any storage limitations.
I would say that given the source material used for these projects, you probably wouldn’t see any major differences with a larger data rate, and if anything that might start to cause playback issues when streaming the files from a NAS to a TV / Streaming Device. This is what happened when some other projects targeted a UHD-BD style data rate of 100Mbps.
Hallihallo Laserschwert, great work, thank you very much for that 😃). One more question, maybe there will be something with more data rate, i.e. a version around 80 or 90GB for e.g. Doublelayer BR or as a file for playback.
A dual layered Blu-ray is a BD50 as mentioned in the OP, which is about 45-ish GB.
Non one does 100GB home discs like the studio because of very low compatibility between the recordable discs and set top players.
Also scope titles have a lot of black pixels making up the letterbox bars, so the number of active pixels means very high bitrates are not as needed as 1.78:1 films.
I wouldn’t imagine there are any quality issues, but of course let the OP know if you find anything.
So what resolution are the mp4 files?
So what is the source for this? You mentiom film prints, but the final file is a very small mp4 file.
Could you explain more about your workflow and the technical process?
How does this project compare to the other scans of 35mm Special Edition prints that already exist?
Can you please post some screenshots?
I think Frater may have been saying the Dutch subtitles used ‘O’, and like English, modern Dutch also uses ‘Oh’.
That was how I interpreted his comment.
So it appears the HTTPS version of the URL gets redirected but the HTTP URL still works. Weird.
Yes, the site got hacked recently and corrupted by malware due to an exploit in WordPress…I always disliked WordPress for websites, and this doesn’t help my feelings about it.
The site is broken as well I believe in that all links from the first page give a 404. Except the link to the old (non-WordPress) Holiday Special site, that works fine still!
I will try to get it all fixed. It’s sort of halfway fixed now, but there is still work to be done to get the whole thing working again.
—SKot
That sucks, I’m sorry to hear that. There really are some scummy people who’ll just target anything or anyone.
Best of luck getting things back online again.
Just reviewing a load of open tabs and https://www.starwarsholidayspecial.com/ appears to be gone now?
Hitting the url redirects to: https://www.adstide.com/
Archive.org has a wayback snapshot from 19th May 2024: https://web.archive.org/web/20240519110721/https://www.starwarsholidayspecial.com/about/
Did anyone archive an offline copy of the site while it was up? I believe this is much harder to do with Wayback Machine copies, as it alters the base html.
I hope SKot is ok.
About 20 hours now but thanks for moderating requests made for someone else.
My pleasure. I know some people have unrealistic expectations as to how quickly creators respond to requests, so I feel the least I can do is mention that it can be days or even (shudder) weeks before they have a chance to respond.
I’m sure the project owner will respond when they can, and apologise for keeping you waiting.
Thank you for your continued patience and understanding.
As Paul Atreides would say, “Live Long and Prosper”.
Anyone still have the files? I think the author left. No answers toy PM’s
You waited about 4 hours before coming to that conclusion?
If you click on the user’s name, his profile states he last visited yesterday.
Have some Patience.
I had completely forgotten about this, but I too donated back in 2018.
I haven’t seen schorman in a while either, hope he’s ok.
He’s more active over on TSWT Forums these days anyway.
I hope poita is alright too, hasn’t posted in 5 years.
Good Point!
I hope Poita is OK as well, He’s mentioned some health scares a few times.
So, with 41 hours left on the campaign, this project has been funded!
Sean Astin tweeted support for the Project: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lifeaftermovies/life-after-the-goonies/posts/4145759
Corey Feldman has also lent his support: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lifeaftermovies/life-after-the-goonies/posts/4145931
Adam F Goldberg has joined the team as a Producer: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lifeaftermovies/life-after-the-goonies/posts/4146880
Looking forward to sitting down and watching this one some point next year.
Shame that there’s no official comment on what happened to this print after this;
The film was shipped to a gentleman in LA with connections to Poita. I have not heard from Poita himself for quite a while (I hope all is well). At this point, I wish I could offer more information, but that’s all I can say at the moment.
I kicked in some cash for this back in the day and I know a lot of other people did. Would be nice to get some closure.
I had completely forgotten about this, but I too donated back in 2018.
I haven’t seen schorman in a while either, hope he’s ok.
Can’t seem to get the sound working on V1.4 of 4K77
Can you provide more information as to how you are playing the file? Where did you download the file from?
Hi, I’m a new member. I hear that 4K80 was completed. Does anybody have a download link to a 1080p no DNR version of 4K80?
All the information is in the post directly above yours.
Just a heads up, there are 10 days left to back this project.
If you don’t feel comfortable backing a future project, the three titles that have been completed and released:
Life After Flash
Life After Navigator
Life After Neverending Story
Are all available to purchase on the official website:
The BD25 discs have menus, and more audio tracks, in particular audio commentaries.
I’m not sure the size of the AVCHD files, it may be the same video quality.
Did you post this on that forum? Maybe someone will jump on to seed it for you?
I’m not finding the link, can someone please share?
Did you send Murdavs a PM (Private Message)? It’s the speech bubble in the top right of the page, next to your Avatar.
Fantastic News! I just saw Ivan had reposted one of your sample clips and the results look amazing. Great Work!
I thought this community may be interested in this Kickstarter for a documentary about “The Goonies”
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lifeaftermovies/life-after-the-goonies
The director has done a number of these at this point, including Life After Flash which a version of was included with the UHD Release of Flash Gordon that Arrow Video released in the US.
I think CatBus has covered all of the details on this, so I’m not going to repeat what he has said.
Yes, a 70mm blow-up will probably be of better quality than a 35mm release print, but given that 4K is already probably overkill in most cases for the quality of materials available outside the OCN, any difference will probably be very hard to see, even with an 8K TV. Don’t forget it is an optical enlargement, so while it may improve grain and detail, it is still a generation away from the source.
CatBus’ example showing 4K83 against Harmy’s Despecialised which uses the official 4K which was scanned from the OCN, shows the quality different that even the best prints (In this case a very high quality ‘Show Print’) is up against. I am by no means an expert on these things, but the difference between a 35mm Show Print and a 70mm Blow Up will still br minimal at best.
Most Hollywood films today are still only scanned at either 4K or perhaps 6.5K for super-sampling down to a 4K Master.
2001 was shot on 70mm, as was ‘My Fair Lady’ which also got an 8K restoration. It makes sense to scan native 70mm OCN at 8+K because the frame is larger (Scanning gives you a dpi resolution, so like 3D printing, to maintain a high dpi, if your input frame is larger, so must your scanning resolution). It also gives you the option to Super-sample the image down after acquisition.
The quality difference between a 4K scan of a 35mm print or 70mm blow-up vs an 8K scan of the same print will be marginal at best, and probably ‘invisible’ to the human eye by the time it’s compressed for home viewing.
An 8K DPX 16-bit File clocks in at 4.756GB/s or 16.69TB/hr so you’re looking at in the region of 33.37TB for Star Wars alone. Once you’ve done your restoration work, which will entail at least a second copy of this data (source and destination) you could generate an Apple ProRes 4444 XQ 12 bit which is only 810MB/s or 2.78TB/hr.
In comparison to 4K DPX 16bit where your data rate is only 1.19GB/s or 4.17TB/hr and the resulting ProRes is 202.50MB/s or 711.91GB/hr, I honestly don’t think the quality difference would justify the 4x increase in data required.
And what bitrate are you going to play back this footage on your 8K TV at? Encoding is inherently a lossy process if you are looking to reduce file size by a meaningful amount, and the only way to compress something like that would be to lose the ‘extra’ detail you’ve potentially captured in the first place.
Most films in the last 30-odd years have been finished as a 2K DI, and are therefore upscaled to 4K for UHD Blu-ray etc. Most studios only started seriously doing 4K DIs in the last decade, and less for Visual Effects heavy films. Marvel films in particular are 2K DIs until fairly recently, in fact ‘The Marvels’ was still a 2K DI according to IMDB.
Outside a few edge cases and Live Sport, 8K will remain something that content owners upscale to, or leave to the device to handle like CatBus suggests. Far easier and cheaper to improve the upscale quality in the final device than bloat the entire workflow for a minute portion of the market (“According to Omdia, shipments of 8K TVs only accounted for 0.15% of all TV shipments in 2021. This translated to a little more than 350,000 units globally.”)
Out of interest what ‘native’ 8K content will you be testing on your new screen?
Exactly. Print duplication (at least from the time of the OT) is analogue, so there is a generation loss each time a copy is made. Plus duplication is destructive to the source element, so a duplication is nearly always done 3+ versions away from the OCN if not more.
OCN > IP > IN > Release Print
Also less care is taken duplicating the release prints so they often have additional ‘weave’ not present in the earlier generations. It’s like photocopying a photocopy, rather than another print from the master file.
Perhaps a bit controversial, but we’re at the point of seriously diminishing returns already. Typical modern 35mm negatives are frequently thought to produce usable detail for up to 6K scans, but that’s not because they have 6K of fine detail – a la Nyquist, a 6K scan is needed to accurately capture about 3K of fine detail. So a 6K scan of a pristine, high-quality 35mm negative could produce something that’s visibly better than 1080p, but doesn’t quite push the limits of 4K. But the OT negatives are neither pristine nor particularly high quality – and most importantly, we don’t have access to any of them. Instead, what we have is projection prints, considerably worse quality than negatives, the best of which struggle to have 1080p of fine image detail, and in many ways fail to match a 720p downscale of a higher-quality source, in terms of fine image detail – the grain definitely does resolve better at 4K, but so much has been wiped away by optical duplication that you’re not getting any usable image detail along with it. So IMO 4K scans are more than adequate for what we currently have access to. An upscale from 4K to 8K wouldn’t have any less fine image detail than an 8K scan, of these sources. Should we stumble across actual well-preserved OCNs some day, I’d be happy to revisit this opinion.
So you think it would only be worth it if we found an extremely high-quality print or even a 70mm blowup.
It’s only worth it if ‘we’ found the original camera negative. 4k is almost overkill for release prints.
Scanning any sort of print at such a high resolution would probably be a massive waste of time and money, for very little to no visual gain.
