DrDre

I wish I could be a little more optimistic, but after more than 10 years since the release of the GOUT, and 5 years of Disney ownership, we’re seemingly still in exactly the same place we were in 2006.

Any optimism I had, left when celebration ended without the slightest hint of an OOT release. At this point I will just assume it’s not going to happen, and let myself be pleasantly surprised if it does happen, rather than assume it will happen, and be disappointed for the umpteeth time.

Fool me once, shame on…, shame on you,…if you fool me can’t get fooled again…

I only wish that were true. The 2015 releases of the saga box set contained nothing new, yet it still was a huge hit.

If the history of releases teaches us anything, it’s that people will buy anything with the words “special collectors edition”, or “remastered” on it, or just a cool new cover.

nickyd47 said:

If George felt compelled to release the GOUT to stifle low quality bootlegs, then I wonder how he would feel about Despecialized and the 35mm fan preservations.

To stiffle the buying and selling of low quality bootlegs. I don’t think they really care, if a few fans share fan preservations among each other. However, when large numbers of copies are being sold on the black market, then they will take notice.

rodneyfaile said:

DrDre said: The OOT bootleg market is non-existent.

That’s definitely not true.

Really? Type either Despecialized or Silver Screen Edition in Ebay, and you will find only two or three sellers attempting to sell Despecialized, and none trying to sell the Silver Screen Edition. If nobody is buying and or selling, there is no market (market = an actual or nominal place where forces of demand and supply operate, and where buyers and sellers interact).

There are bootlegs, which are shared through torrent sites, but that is another matter. Before the release of the OOT on DVD, there were literally dozens of sellers on Ebay (mostly from Asia, where pirating laws are lenient or absent) mostly attempting to sell bootleg copies of the OOT in varying quality.

Z6PO said:

Remember when the unaltered were released on DVD, George Lucas wasn’t against the release, he was against spending any money on it. It is not his money anymore.

The reason the GOUT DVD’s were released, can be attributed mainly to the growing market of OOT bootlegs in the early 2000s, based on the old laserdiscs. By releasing a subpar release based on the latest laserdisc master, he could stiffle the bootleg market, but still have the canon version be the superior release in terms of quality. You just have to look at Ebay to see, that this strategy was successful. The OOT bootleg market is non-existent. A few fans preserving prints, and sharing them isn’t going to concern Disney. If OOT bootlegs start eating into their home video earnings, that’s a concern for them.

So, I believe Lucas is very much against the release of the OOT, especially if the theatrical releases could potentially compete with his canon versions. I also don’t believe Lucasfilm or Disney will release the OOT against the wishes of the artist who created them. My guess is, that a 4K mastered release of the SE is on the horizon, which is the reason the Disney people are culling through archive material, in order to supplement their release with unreleased bonus material, such as the footage shown at celebration.

danny_boy said:

Fang Zei said:

danny_boy said:

Fang Zei said:

danny_boy said:

Fang Zei said:

danny_boy said:

Fang Zei said:

danny_boy said:

Fang Zei said:

danny_boy said:

Fang Zei said:

danny_boy said:

Fang Zei said:

doubleofive said:

My friend who is a projectionist talked to the projectionist at Celebration for us:

https://twitter.com/mumbles3k/status/853102458909978624

Spoke to the projectionist at #SWCO and confirmed that these are the same 2K DCPs used for the OT Blu-rays. No 4K (except for Rogue One).

I seriously question just how confidently the Orlando projectionist can actually state which master the dcp is derived from.

Again, let’s not forget Tack’s report on one of the roadshow screenings last summer. I’d be more interested in how the image actually looks in terms of color, contrast, grain, et cetera.

Also, the 2004 masters (the same ones used for the blu-ray) weren’t even done at full 2k resolution. They’re 1920x1080 hd. The Lowry guys were very specific about that during a press conference for the dvd way back in '04.

Anyway, I wonder if we can find out from an attendee in Orlando how the picture actually looks. Of course it would have to be someone who actually knows all the color timing quirks of the '04 master like we do, and I doubt there are many fans there who do.

Empire and Jedi are tonight.

I think the 2004 master was derived from the conventional 2048x1536 resolution scanning parameters (for scanning O-negs) in the early 2000s .This would also conform to the geometrical proportions of a 35mm anamorphic negative frame of film.

I honestly think that the 2004 article which stated that Star Wars was scanned at 1920 X 1080 was an editorial mistake.
You would be cropping out segments of the actual frame if you did scan at this resolution as well as introducing geometric distortions when optically(or digitally) stretching the frame back out to 2:35.

As far I am aware(correct me if i am wrong) the 2004 DVD/2011 Blu Ray features all the picture information(in terms of content-not resolution) when digitally re-scaled to the 2:35 aspect ratio(within the 16:9 HD frame).
This would indicate that it was indeed scanned at 2048 X 1536.

Yes, but I wasn’t talking about the scanning resolution. I was talking about the resolution of the final master Lowry delivered. The 1920x1080 number doesn’t come from an article, it came straight from the mouth of one of the Lowry guys at the press conference for the dvd back in '04. I had an audio recording of it sitting on my old computer I’ve since gotten rid of. Hamill, Kershner, and Jim Ward (President of Lucasfilm at that time) were also in attendence. There was a part where someone asks the Lowry guys if the new master is 2k and one of them responds “no, 1920x1080 HD,” which probably meant that the actual picture was 1920x817 because of the scope AR, with the black bars filling out the rest.

Maybe you are not remembering that Press exchange correctly.

An 8K,4k or 2k scan of a film negative(or 1st generation Interpositive) has to be re-scaled to 1920 X 1080 for the master of ANY Blu ray title.

In the case of the DVD from 2004, the 1920 x 1080 master(derived from the 2K scan)became the basis for that release.
And this would have been the case for any Standard Def DVD title from the early 2000s(or even now).
Many did not even get this luxury.
A lot of DVD transfers were generated from telecines of 35mm theatrical film prints(be they flat or anamorphic)…the same process used for Laserdisc,Selecta Vision, VHS,Beta and V2000 home video releases of the early 1980s.

The James Bond films(some of them) and Star Wars were among the first set of flicks to get the benefit of 1080p masters(that would subsequently be down rezzed to 480p) for DVD.

Which finally brings us back around to my original point, which was that the resolution Lowry finished their restoration at was 1920x1080 HD and not 2048x1080. Jim Ward called it a “digital negative” back in 2004, which might have been considered true at that time given the limits of digital projection technology in the cinema. But even then, I’m pretty sure they were already finishing new movies at actual 2k res (Oh Brother Where Art Thou, Lord of the Rings, etc) and even starting to finish some movies in 4k (Spider-Man 2, released in 2004, was the first 4k DI).

The DCP for Star Wars that would be projected in a commercial cinema must be either 2048 X 1080 or 2048 X 1536 as stipulated by the SMPTE.

I think there has a been a lot of confusion that has been disseminated(unintentionally or otherwise) over the years from forums such as these and elsewhere.

For commercial projection they would use the DCP(2048 X 1080).
For Home Video they would use the 1920 X 1080 master which is no different to any other hi-def(or standard def)title on the market.

According to the video engineer who goes by the name of Vidiot(from the Steve Hoffman forum) Star Wars was scanned at 2K using a Spirit 2k scanner. It was also color corrected at this resolution.
Those 2k Files were also manipulated by Lowry for the re-scale for home video(DVD & Blu Ray).
But the DCP had to be 2048 X 1080.

In 2007, for the 30th anniversary, they used a Christie Digital Micromirror Device™ 2K 3-chip DMD DLP Cinema™
(2048 x 1080 pixels) to project all 6 films.
AOTC and ROTS DCPs would be upscaled to 2K.
The OT would use the DCPs which were already at their native 2k resolution for front projection.

Maybe the Lowry guy was only talking about the hd master for dvd and eventual hdtv/blu-ray, but he definitely specified 1920x1080. I suppose it’s possible they finished their cleanup at actual 2k first and then made an hd video master from there, but that’s not what I remember Lowry guy saying.

Lucasfilm’s color-correction would have happened first, so that doesn’t really tell us anything about what exact res Lowry was working at.

Even if the dcp’s being used for these screenings are 2k, they still wouldn’t truly be 2k if they’re being upscaled from a 1920 source. As Wazzles pointed out, even AOTC and RotS had their cgi and color-timing done at 2k.

According to the Digital Cinema Initiative Protocol (8.2.2.7.) there are only 2 options(2048 X 1080 or 2160 X 4096) for front projection.
So the DCPs for Star Wars had to be at 2048 X 1080 as a MINIMUM requirement.
The DCI protocol specifies that 2048 X 1080 can be upscaled to 4K IF the projector is 4k capable.
There is no allusion to 1920 X 1080 upscales to 2k (which is impractical for any number of reasons).

It also makes no sense for Lowry or ILM to have scanned at 2K…down rezzed to 1080p (for a master)…to only have that upscaled again for 2k commercial projection. That would introduce digital scaling artifacts, something the DCI is firmly against.

Then my question would be:

Do you think it’s possible, if Lowry was in fact only working at 1920x1080 res, that a 2k digital cinema master could have been made from the HD master (slightly upscaled at the source) as opposed to it being upscaled on-the-fly by a 2k projector?

One would presumably yield better results than the other.

My Sony 4K projector has a native resolution of 2160 X 4096.
The UHD discs are mastered at 2160 X 3840.

I notice the artifacts when I scale from 3840 to 4096.
I achieve incremental brightness by imaging the entire breadth of the Projector’s 2160 X 4096 panel.
But the picture is marginally sharper when staying at the native resolution of 2160 X 3840.

As for Star Wars,it makes sense that the DCP is 2K(to be used for commercial projection).
For the home video market, the 1080p master(derived from the 2k scan) suffices.

I’m like 99% sure the lowry guys specified that they were working at 1920x1080, meaning the final master is stuck at that resolution and any 2k dcp would had to have been upscaled slightly (upscaled at the source as opposed to being upscaled on-the-fly by the projector). I tried searching for the audio recordings of that press conference I listened to on TFN way back when but only found a written story about it. It was called Star Wars Media Day. Google even turned up this:

http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Star-Wars-Media-Day/id/1103

Thanks for that Fangzei.

Our own OriginalTrilogy member, Zombie, made the mistake many years back,be it deliberate or otherwise, of repeating ad nauseum, that the O-Neg of Star Wars was scanned at 1080 X 1920. Of course he was only referencing that 2004 video magazine.
But the author of that article never DIRECTLY quoted any of the engineers as saying that it was scanned at that resolution. It seems like the author of that article misunderstood or misinterpreted what was relayed to him by Rick Dean and John Lowry.

A little bit more research and common sense indicates that you cannot scan a 35mm anamorphic negative(such as Star Wars) at the native resolution of 1080 X 1920. It would not be conducive to attaining all the picture content of the entire length and breadth of the image as the geometry of a 35mm anamorphic frame does not conform to the dimensions of what would be a hypothetical HD(16:9) imaging sensor.
It’s why the scanning parameters are either 2048 X 1536(2k) or 4096 X 2160(4k)

The best information we have is from Vidiot, who worked directly with Lucas:

“As a result, it was done on a Spirit 2K scanner (at Post Group/LA). We did the color correction at IL+M’s offices on
Kerner Blvd. in San Rafael, using a temporary room with a Pandora Pogle Platinum color-corrector, working with 2K files
coming from a Quantel IQ server. Five years ago, there was no way to work with 4K files in real time; now, it can be
done, but it’s a slow and expensive process.”

They did do lots and lots and lots of digital 2K restoration on the project over at Lowry Digital in Burbank, and I thought it was a nearly-pristine image once they got done with it."

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/star-wars-will-the-original-cinema-versions-ever-be-released-on-blu-ray.202658/page-3

There’s a difference between the resolution of the source scan (which was indeed 2k for scope as you said, but that’s more like 1820x1536 since the frame is 1.20:1 and not 1.33:1) and the resolution of the workflow it was actually restored at. I’m not 100% convinced that Vidiot isn’t using the terms 2k and 1080p interchangeably.

LexX’s post above suggests that not even the color correction was done at more than “high definition” resolution. That description (4:4:4 RGB) is exactly what I remember the lowry guy specifying in the audio of the press conference. He was also very specific when he said 1920x1080. The person asking him about it then said “so 2k?” and lowry guy then responded “well, no, 1920x1080 HD, but we were working at full RGB.”

Like I said, I really wish I could find the audio of this. TFN had a page with four audio files broken up by the people being interviewed (Kershner, Hamill, Jim Ward, and the lowry guys). I don’t remember now how I found it, this was of course way back in September of '04.

It was definitely 2k(and not 1080p) for the scan.
And Vidiot should know, because he freelanced for John Lowry on the Star Wars project.

People are confusing a 1080p master(used for the Blu ray and DVD) with a 2K scan to be subsequently used as the basis for the DCP.

Vidiot wrote:
"Yep. Once John Lowry died (right around the time he won an Oscar for the Lowry Process), they changed the sign. And all
that’s in LA as far as I know is just a sales office; all the technical workers and artists are in Mumbai.

I worked on a bunch of that stuff(Star Wars & Return Of The Jedi), and all that I saw was 2K."

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/which-star-wars-complete-saga-br-to-buy.610811/

I had never read that forum discussion. I also never knew George despises film. The more I read the comments from “Vidiot”, combined with Pablo Hidalgo’s comments, that any release is in the hands of one person, the more I fear we will never see the OOT released officially again. I don’t think they will ever be released without George’s blessing, considering how strongly he feels on the subject.

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

I would also like to add, that the TB broadcast for A New Hope is missing the end credits, which have been replaced with a laserdisc version of notably lower quality. The Reivax A New Hope was taken directly from the digital master, I believe, and features the highest quality of any of the 1997 films available. It has the original English crawl (the GKar are German), but have French subtitles during the crawl, and for Greedo’s and Jabba’s lines.

I don’t have the Reivax version and with it only being ANH, I’m not that interested. I’d prefer all three films have the same quality, even if it is slightly inferior. And there isn’t much to do about the subtitled scenes except take them from the TB version which has no subtitles. The better quality the rest of it is the more jarring switching sources would be. Still, I might have to get it just because I have become a bit obsessed with having every source I can find.

I understand, but the TB ROTJ has much worse picture quality than the other two films. So, the only one with consistent quality is GKar, which sadly is incomplete for ANH. 😦

Swazzy said:

DrDre said:

Love these colors in paticular. Tried my hand at the usual…

Blu:

Regrade:

Compare

LUT

Lookin’ good!

alextheburger said:
I’m new but thank you for the LUT

You’re welcome, both here, and for the LUT. 😉

I would also like to add, that the TB broadcast for A New Hope is missing the end credits, which have been replaced with a laserdisc version of notably lower quality. The Reivax A New Hope was taken directly from the digital master, I believe, and features the highest quality of any of the 1997 films available. It has the original English crawl (the GKar are German), but have French subtitles during the crawl, and for Greedo’s and Jabba’s lines.

I know a collector who owns one of the few Technicolor prints in existence. He recently had it cleaned, and they did a test screening using the cleaner’s setup. He sent me some photos made with his iphone, which although they appear to have been white balanced look absolutely gorgeous:

His print is missing the correct end credits. They have been replaced with the ones from TESB. He would very much like to get his hands on the original end credits, even if they come from a faded Eastman print, so if anybody has one for sale, please contact me?

I don’t think they care. The SE releases were a huge success every time they were released, despite no OOT. The new films are way more profitable than any OOT release will ever be. They don’t need the OOT. The group of older fans are dwindling. We’re going extinct.

They can sell the 2011 set again in a new shiny box, perhaps with a few new extras. The saga box set actually made more money in 2015, than the original release in 2011:

http://www.the-numbers.com/home-market/bluray-sales/2015

http://www.the-numbers.com/home-market/bluray-sales/2011

TV’s Frink said:

Wazzles said:

lurker77 said:

SwissArmyTin said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Disney is run by putzes.

Disney seems to have completely forgotten the idea and vision behind EPCOT’s Future World, and it’s a hollow shell of it’s former self. They genuinely have no clue how to properly handle anything with an ounce of good in it.

If you ask me, the degradation of EPCOT has less to do with Disney’s managing style and more to do with the forward-thinking, technocratic attitudes of the 50’s and 60’s having been replaced with left-wing attitudes like hyper environmentalism, social programs for the dumb and lazy, and political correctness at any cost.

Is this really the place for this?

Is any place really the place for it?

Yup, the Oval Office.

digitalfreaknyc said:

I love the faith in Verta, as if Disney is going to listen to him. It’s truly hilarious

The last updates on his website have been promising, although he asked not to share these updates outside of the Legacy forum. It’s been awfully quiet from his side since then. What this means is still a mystery. Could mean that he’s just busy. On the other hand I would expect him to to be frank about any failure to get things in motion, as he’s always been in the past.

Fang Zei said:

To add to what crissrudd is saying, I feel like waiting another three years has other advantages for Lucasfilm aside from just the rights issue.

Some people are only just now getting around to buying the 2011 set. I honestly feel like we weren’t going to see a major reissue with actual new content until the time came to put the movies out on the next format. We’re only a year into 4k discs being a thing, and Star Wars has taken a long while to hit each new format.

To me, this is yet another sign pointing to 2020.

Mmm, this sounds awfully familiar. Before celebration the 40th anniversary was the most logical time for a release. Now that it doesn’t seem to pan out, things are pointing to 2020.

I don’t want to pessimistic, but from what we know from Mike Verta’s interactions with Disney, info from Disney’s restoration people, and Pablo Hidalgo, releasing the OOT is not a priority. So, there certainly seem to be no plans for a release in 2020, or otherwise. It appears to simply not be on the agenda, at all.

Hopefully, Mike Verta’s pitch has happened, and has set things in motion. However, I very much doubt Disney and Lucasfilm will have their own plans. There’s a new 4K restoration for ANH for sure, conformed to the SE. So, a new 4K mastered SE release may be pending, with some additional material, such as the Tarkin footage shown at celebration, but an OOT release seems unlikely, unless Mike Verta can convince them of the merits of his restoration.

Nice! I have a set of frames from this sequence, and I believe it is a pretty close match. You really captured the warmth, that this sequence is supposed to have.

NeverarGreat said:

Loved the trailer, basically confirms that Luke is abandoning the Jedi for a balance.

I loved it too. The trailer confirms the ST is moving into a new direction, which I think is great!

Juggling different projects sadly implies things are moving more slowly than I would like, but progress is being made. It is an endeavour that will take many months though, as each shot is regraded individually.

yotsuya said:

Contrast is one hard thing to get right when scanning film. You want the darks properly dark and the lights properly bright, but if you go too far it is too much and if you don’t go far enough it gets dull. As our number of sources increases I have noticed that the theatrical prints tend to have more contrast than what we are used to in scans and telecines from the negative and interpositives (the blu-ray and GOUT). I think the garbage mattes are a good key. If you see them, the contrast isn’t high enough and the darks are not dark enough. I think this amount of contrast is pretty close. I can’t wait to see the calibrated scans to see if they are any different.

Using the color calibration slide the contrast and saturation should match the print, so I’m also curious how it will turn out. 😃

For those that are lazy or don’t have NeverarGreat’s great talent like me, here’s a LUT produced with the color matching tool to approximate his regrade.

NeverarGreat:

Regrade with LUT:

LUT:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8_LYKyZDiaja21Qc2JOZmRYNnc/view?usp=sharing

NeverarGreat said:

Here’s what I was able to come up with using the Blu-ray screencap you provided.
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/205750

This was using only a curves and a channel mixer adjustment in Photoshop. I think most of the issue is in the luminosity. The Blu-ray is very flat and dark, so I almost always need to boost the midtones and especially the highlights while leaving the shadows roughly where they are.
Another thing I’ve noticed with these Tarkin shots, and many skin tones in this film, is that they are too dark even in comparison to the rest of the dark frame. A simple way to correct this with just a channel mixer is to boost the reds and then put some of the green and blue into the red channel, thus increasing its luminosity.

You’re a genius! That looks amazing. There’s also a much better separation between Tarkin’s uniform, and the walls.

Alderaan said:

I think the updates are looking better. The technicolor prints have a known green shift, right? I can’t imagine that Lucas and Taylor would have made that artistic choice.

Anyway, I’d be really interested to hear any comments or read any articles about any of the principals discussing the subject.

Yes, most tech prints have a green shift. However, the colors look pretty natural on the print itself. It’s really difficult to reproduce by correcting the bluray. Even the photo to my eyes looks fine, and the green doesn’t look distracting as it does for the regrade:

A small improvement:

Here’s an update of the regrade, that better reflects what’s actually seen on the frame (green walls, blue lights), although the bluray gradient issues still make it look choppy for lack of a better word: