Man, I can tell you this, I never noticed those burn marks in my old VHS of STAR WARS that I have watched so much that it got worn out and yet, they were there, I know because I checked the first time someone pointed them out in this forum.
I just want to cry, when I read this shit.
I wasn't talking about STAR WARS at all, I was talking about fan edits and editors in general. And even so, I said fanediting was a bit different, but still, the editor of the film "never recruited and directed the actors,liased with the art,special effects and production crews and consulted and collaborated with the musical composer or concieved of the ideas and scenarios that are encapsulated in the scripts."
And that's what I was answering to and saying, that editing is a whole separate art from these things you mentioned before. And I do see your point about a fan editor not having the same right to re-edit a film, as its original creator - that's also why a fan editor can't release his/her creation as any kind of official release, while the original creator can.
And the rest of my post still stands.
I've already redone the shake from scratch. It's now practically frame for frame identical as in the original, I'll post a video soon.
As for the framerate, I don't understand why it should bother anyone that I work with 25fps and it sure doesn't bother me, since being from a PAL country, I have been watching films at 25fps my entire life, so if anything, films sound unnatural to me at 24fps. But more often, I just can't hear the difference, even in direct comparison.
Now, I have my reasons to work at 25fps; My GOUT DVD is PAL and the rip I have of it, which I use to time the edit is 25fps as well. Sure, I could make a new one but why? But much more importantly, I'm really really bad with even basic mathematical operations and it's just more convenient to count with 25fps - 4 seconds = 100 frames and not 95.904.
Stereo 3D consists of 2 2D images, so you should always be able to just view only the left or the right eye picture, there's no "conversion" involved.
Well, the thing is, I'm sure you can always watch a 3D film in 2D.
Well, you see, in the movie business, there's this job called "editor." And such a person takes what the director and all the others shot, very often without having anything to do with the process up to that point and cuts it into a coherent film, because that is their art. And, while of course the situation with fan editors is a bit different, I still don't see any harm with someone making their preferred cut of a movie, since they're only editing a copy of the film and it has no bearing whatsoever on the version preferred by the original creator. It's like if I bought a printed replica of a famous painting, I don't see why I couldn't make a photocopy of it and paint a few extra things on that copy before hanging it on my wall. And if my friend happens to like it, why not make a copy for him? In fact, many artists have done similar things, taking a photo or a copy of a famous piece of art and changing it, so that it became a new, different piece of art.
And it's also funny, how he says that 3D vs 2D is like colour film vs. black and white. So basically 3D conversion of 2D films is the exact same thing as colourising a B&W film?
http://savestarwars.com/lucasspeechagainstspecialedition.html
Yeah, it's kind of funny that we're having this heated debate about something that covers about 2% of two frames :-)
none said:
I stand by the decision to include the Humdinger Glitch in the Despecialized Edtion of The Star Wars. It makes a crucial link between the manipulation of our past and future memories and is there fore and forever a betterment of The Star Warses's.
LOL. Well, that's actually a nice example. I'm restoring the 1977 version of STAR WARS (which is determined by the crawl), so the humdinger glitch shouldn't be there, now, if they made a new 4K scan of the SE and I (for some sadistic reasons) decided to use it to restore the 2004 DVD version of STAR WARS in 4K, would I be restoring the humdinger glitch? Only hells yeah!
Yeah, that's not logical at all whatsoever, because this is something all prints had in common because it was on the negative - the original original, not because it was an artefact added in some copying process, like transfer to LD or DVD.
It's a bit weird that it wasn't present on some of the 80s video releases but for example in the GOUT, there are artefacts that suggest that it was simply removed by the DVDR process.
The thing is, even though it may have happened by accident, that accident is a part of the history of the film, since this particular damage was most likely on the original negative, so it's not that easy. It's like 99,9% of dirt in Puggo Grande is specific to that print but these burnmarks are something that all the prints had in common.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I definitely will restore them, I'm just trying to explain why I'm even considering it.
doubleofive said:
I am 100% for the burn mark.
I thought you might get a kick out of this ;-)
OK, so, 1) The halos are unfortunate and I'm not sure whether or not they were originally there but the sad truth is that there isn't much I can do about them.
2) The burnmarks are something I'm not quite decided about, here's the thing: That shot has been reframed in the SE, so that you see more on the right and less on the left. Now I'm pretty sure this happened due to them going back to the original negative in order to get rid of those burnmarks and in the process redoing the shake, which was done in postproduction, so when I decided to revert it back to the original, I wanted to go all the way with it. You can't really compare it to cropping, because while these burnmarks were present on the print, the cropping was done by the projectionist and the print itself wasn't cropped. It's similar to the ripped frame in that tie explosion, sure, I could easily fix it but it was always there, it's even in the 97SE trailer.
3) The jaggies shouln't be there in the final version, don't know how they got there...
Yeah, it's a whole matte painting, which was completely changed in the SE, not just the soldiers in the foreground but also the walls, the window and about half of the soldiers in the room.
I am now encoding WP3 reel one. Here's a little promo from it :-)
https://rapidshare.com/files/3593965985/WP3_reel_one_promo.mp4
The GOUT never came out here nor were the CZ subs included on any foreign release, so only those of the most hardcore fans, who were willing to order from abroad and don't mind the lack of CZ support have the original versions on DVD here.
Thanks :-) Actually, those would be quite easy to fix but I'm not going to, since it's always been that way.
They can't be from the GOUT, because the GOUT never came out here. I would have offered you Czech subs myself but I don't have any that I trust to be correct.
Thanks for the kind words, Bantha_Tracker and welcome to the forum!
OK, guys, here's the last piece of the WP2. It's a bit rough around the edges, so that's why I need you to find where. Again, try to keep the colour comments to a minimum, since the colour correction is very much preliminary. I want to know if I forgot to undo some changes and stuff like that.
Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:
and also his refusal to release the OOT - including library of congress.
Now THAT matters. Although, the fact that he hasn't sent ninjas to the Czech republic to take out Harmy tells me that there is still good in him.
Um, thanks a lot for that notion... ;-)
Actual concern for film preservation and cultural heritage shouldn't be mixed with asshats singing "George Lucas Raped My Childhood."um... you're joking about that last part right? is this true? there is actually a song called this?
Sadly, there is. I'm sure you can find it on YouTube. Funny thing is, it's not a bad tune, the lyrics are mildly amusing and the musicianship is pretty good. But it has done a good deal of damage as folks such as at OT.com tend to get unfairly associated with it.
Sorry, but I love that song and have to start singing it every time I read the phrase (which is very often on this site and 99% of the time it's someone complaining about it.) Hell, I'm singing it right now! It's a catchy tune!
If not, you can always DL the MKV and re-encode it to whatever works for you.
Sorry, guys, I fell asleep yesterday and forgot to start encoding the WP, so I'll do it over-night today, because I need the computer during the day.
It's still gonna be a while. I'm gonna encode the last part of WP2 overnight today. Knowing that I'll have to go through it all over again when I get the reference frames for these reels, I only did a very rough job on the first colour pass.
As I'll be getting all the references and finishing the colour correction, I'm gonna release WP3 divided by reels. So far I only got reference frames for reel 1 and the colours on that are pretty much finished now, so WP3R1 (workprint 3 reel 1) one will follow soon after WP2.3 :-) But it will still take a while to finish the last colour pass and get feedback from WP3.
You guys will be happy to hear that this is where I'm currently at in the editing process :-)
Funny you should say that, because the colours in my reference frames do have a slight green tint (and it shouldn't be faded at all because it's from a Technicolor dye print).