Dek Rollins

^^^Even so, from a pilots stand point, being off on the far side of a ship that large would make it difficult to learn how to maneuver it. This reminds me of a shot that I’ve always thought was weird in ROTJ. When the TIEs head towards the Falcon and you get that Falcon’s eye view, they all fly directly around the cockpit instead of the center of the ship.

^Eww

What series?

^^I didn’t really have anything specific in mind, just thought the idea should be brought up. I guess some shots that I’d like to see would be:

• First shot (after fade is finished)
• A shot of the jawas hiding in the cave
• A shot of R2 with electricity around him
• Wide shot before R2 is sucked up by the tube
• A shot inside the sandcrawler

Just what came to my mind, and thanks for showing these samples.

The exterior design of the TIE fighter in TFA is the same as it is in the OT. Therefor, since you apparently did not need proof for the OT TIE not accommodating, you have no reason to need proof for the TFA TIE not accommodating. The proof lies in what we’ve already been discussing through the last page.

The diagonal split definitely helps, but you still can’t see the whole thing on both sides, so I think that either doing it with one on top one on bottom, or posting some screenshot comparisons would be cool.

I’m hopeful too. I also wish I was in a position to do my own color corrections.

EDIT: Though I understand that the laserdisc is the best source, and it’s going to be great, I think that the look of your second correction would be pretty much perfect (besides the bar scene).

^Quit being immature.

Lord Haseo said:

Dek Rollins said:

The point is that TIE fighters were already designed almost 40 years ago, and now they are adding a function that it wasn’t designed to hold.

The Wright Brothers first Airplane were only designed for 2 people. What’s your point? Upgrading technology is a thing we do in real life so why is upgrading something not feasible in the Star Wars universe?

I wasn’t talking about the two seats, I was talking about the turret, the accommodation of which was not present in the original design, nor was in the new design. In the case you mentioned, those upgrades came along with accommodations to the original so that it can work. They didn’t just glue a chair to the back of the two seated plane, they changed the size and shape of the cabin along with the other dimensions to allow for more seats.

Any news on this. This is gonna be great if it’s finished, and I am very greatful to you, Dr Dre, and everyone else involved, because Raiders is my favorite adventure film, and I’ve longed for the chance to watch it with proper colors.

Thanks for the clarification, and I saw that you were going to correct some of the magenta. I hadn’t seen anything saying what you were going for, so I was just curious.

This isn’t about poor designs in the OT, that’s why I said the speeders aren’t the same thing. I definitely realize the many problems the OT had, hence mentioning the Falcon. The point is that TIE fighters were already designed almost 40 years ago, and now they are adding a function that it wasn’t designed to hold.

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

There IS a bathroom reference: Jar Jar stepped in doo doo.

What if they had included a Jabba bathroom reference?

That’s referencing excretion, not bathrooms. 😃

TV’s Frink said:

Dek Rollins said:

And I’ve always disliked the Millennium Falcon’s design, mainly the cockpit placement making no sense.

And that’s my point (along with both side’s vehicles on Hoth). You forfeit your right to bitch about these TFA “problems” unless you acknowledge the same in the OT.

That’s not really the same thing. That’s a rear gun, and there should be a separate gunner for that. That’s how it was designed, albeit being a little weird. TIE fighters weren’t designed to hold a rotating turret, they were designed to fire two front facing rapid-fire canons. This is the problem, not that two seated TIEs are bad, but adding a function to a ship that wasn’t designed for it is just stupid. The speeders were designed with the both sides thing, TIE fighters were originally not designed for a rotating turret. And I did acknowledge that.

He did use the term correctly, Frink. I’ve come to have the same feelings about TFA fanboys as I do the PT fanboys. Just stick to the topic, and since a whole lot of you here liked everything TFA through at you, what are you even doing in this thread.

What specific look are you correcting for. When you make the letter-boxes black again all the black levels in the shot are going to look really blue.

^No, he’s entirely correct about the uselessness of a rotating turret on a TIE fighter, because the wings are in the way and it would be way easier to shoot yourself down in one of those than in The Last Crusade. Could you imagine Finn saying that:
“Poe, I’m sorry… they got us.”

And I’ve always disliked the Millennium Falcon’s design, mainly the cockpit placement making no sense.

moviefreakedmind said:

Dek Rollins said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I’ve got a twinge of nostalgia for the Phantom Menace, and still get a little bit of enjoyment from watching it. I don’t have any nostalgia for Attack of the Clones, or Revenge of the Sith so I don’t think I care to ever see either of those again. Even with nostalgia aside I do believe that TPM is objectively the best of the prequels. ROTS has a high body count and is more violent, but overall it’s less watchable than TPM in my opinion since it looks very video-gamey whereas TPM looks pretty good to this day (other than some CGI).

I agree with you, but it sounds like your saying a high body count and more violence is a pro.

It isn’t necessarily a pro for me (at least not in a Star Wars film), but I think it’s a reason why a lot of fans find it more watchable than the other two prequels.

I know that, and I’ve never understood how “it’s the darkest of the three” makes it a better film.

TV’s Frink said:

I don’t care about anything beyond the movies, so it’s perfectly computishable to me.

Amen, brother!

Oh, I hovered.

EDIT: I clicked, but the page wouldn’t load. I guess it was fate.

TV’s Frink said:

Our editor uses Markdown syntax, which makes it easy for us to add formatting like italics, bold, and lists:

• https://team.com
• https://dreamteam.com
• https://icecreamthingteam.com

We all should preview this post to see the results.

For more details, see this Team demo.

Team Markdown

I wouldn’t dare click on one of those links.

swagmasta69 said:

I would like to see TN1’s new restoration screened in a theater though.
It looks so amazing.

That would be SO cool! I love their projects so much.

moviefreakedmind said:

I’ve got a twinge of nostalgia for the Phantom Menace, and still get a little bit of enjoyment from watching it. I don’t have any nostalgia for Attack of the Clones, or Revenge of the Sith so I don’t think I care to ever see either of those again. Even with nostalgia aside I do believe that TPM is objectively the best of the prequels. ROTS has a high body count and is more violent, but overall it’s less watchable than TPM in my opinion since it looks very video-gamey whereas TPM looks pretty good to this day (other than some CGI).

I agree with you, but it sounds like your saying a high body count and more violence is a pro.

swagmasta69 said:

You didn’t see ROTS in theaters?

Nope. I actually didn’t have the fortune of seeing the others in theaters either, I watched VHS and DVD. I know right, no true SW fan would dare skip out the theater showings, but also realize, as a kid, I really didn’t have much regard for a “proper” way to see a film. One of my older brothers did see them all in theaters as far as I remember, though.

swagmasta69 said:

I see what you mean, but I think it’s just a generational thing. Even knowing of the extensive CGI use in the PT, I actually find Coruscant to be more interesting and immersive than any OT location, so I guess one of the many reasons I enjoy the prequels more than a lot of this board is because the special effects used don’t mess with my suspension of disbelief.
I did grow up in the “video game generation”, after all.
I watched TPM all the time as a child and when AOTC came out on VHS I watched that a ton too.
I was raised on those and the unaltered OT VHS trilogy and I actually enjoyed the PT more as a child.
Of course, I now fully appreciate the OT, but seeing ROTS in theaters just completely blew my mind.
I’m rambling. I guess I’m saying nostalgia is strong- but I did go through a prequel hating phase (Plinkett and all that) and when I came out of that, I actually liked the prequels on what I percieve to be true, albiet flawed (though not nearly as flawed as people claim), vision.

I find the PT to be as good as the OT.

/ramble

I also grew up with the PT, and I think I probably liked it more than the 2004 SE OT then too. I have nostalgia galore from watching TPM daily and AOTC every other day. I never saw ROTS until like 2008-2009, and I was quite disappointed by it, so there’s really no nostalgia for that one. But then I got old enough to think about stuff while watching movies, and began to feel less of a connection. I didn’t even see the Plinkett reviews until this past fall, and I hated the PT way before then. Kind of weird.