Harmy

Yep, that's right and it's gonna be fixed.

No, no joke. I even used the same process as before, it's not a recreation using a font, it is comprised of the original elements.

It's just 720p of course, so when blown up to 4K, like Mike's picture is, it looks horrible but that's the way it looks at 720p. Now, the jaggies as it progresses further back are unfortunately still there, even when I tried rendering it at 4K, so I don't know what to do about those. But then, they're there a little even on the official SE crawl...

@Moth4: Um, which day is Boxing day again? ;-) We don't have any such thing. We also get our presents on xmas eve after dinner :-P

mrbenja0618 said:

I see what you're saying Angel, but my opinion is if Ady can make this shot more like how the human eye would react rather than a camera, the better it is.

I must say that I don't think making stuff look like it would to a human eye as opposed to how it would show through a camera is a good idea. Your brain knows that you're watching a movie and even if you're not consciously aware of the way camera lenses behave, having seen many movies, your brain just knows and it can spot things like that as looking fake within the realm of watching a film. So I'm with Angel on this one.

If I can make it in time, I have a new Christmas surprise planned for every night for the next four days, culminating with the next part of the workprint on Christmas eve :-)

Scanlines?

Cool, thanks, Mike :-) That's quite likely what's happening in the first picture in my post and that's why the font seems thinner :-)

And guys... Merry Christmas:

Really? In your opinion, this:

looks better than this?

Well, then I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree ;-)

They're both 35mm scans btw, so they're undoubtedly legitimate. Though the first one may actually be from ESB.

Well, that's what I meant. Although I'm pretty sure the newest MPC can open it as a disc. And the newest Power DVD should be able to play it as disc too.

Yeah, it build eye strength because it strains the eyes. It's like exercise - when you work out, your muscles get stronger but after the exercise they hurt.

AVCHD is playable as is on any computer.

That doesn't work far as well, the image gets optically smaller when you do that. And also it strains the eyes quite a bit.

Yep.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7zVpDA_93k

You just have to set it to mirror view. I figured that out sometime ago. You sure wouldn't want to watch a whole movie like that but it works pretty well for previews like this.

Yeah, that's a shitty conversion. I watched it using a mirror and there were only a few shots that even looked 3D and even those were mostly cardboard cutout-like. Now the question is whether it is real, it could well be a fan 3D conversion of the 2D trailer.

EDIT: Here's the same trailer with English sound:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkyYTjtnkfc&feature=related

Vaclav Havel passed away today. It's a sad moment for my nation, so I just thought I'd mention it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16236393

I actually prefer the puppet Yoda in EpI. One of the reasons I'm considering doing TPM Despecialized.

Unfortunately the best preservations currently in the making are not collaborative efforts of members here, for obvious reasons - they have the potential to be so good that the copyright hammer might fall on them if they were made too public.

Well, the 93 LD master was transferred directly from 1st generation positive film, so this could all be marketing jibber-jabber where in fact the pictures could well have been taken from the same digital LD master files that the GOUT comes from.

@Eric: Sure, I'd like to see some other scans. Although again, mostly just out of curiosity.

Oh, btw, did you guys check out the video linked under Czech Republic in my sig? If not, you really should, it's pretty awesome and also surprising accurate :-)

Oh, that's alright, I never really expected them to be of much use, I was mainly just curious, which is one of the reasons I didn't want you to go to the trouble of mailing them to me.

Here's the same pic from the new render:

Yeah, I said it was a preliminary render. And that Ben's cloak thing's because all the other shots of Ben are from You_Too's render of the BD, so the blacks are a lot less crushed and that darker shot was from the HDTV. I already fixed that, along with some errors plaguing the Ronto butt shot. But I'll keep those fixed shots for the next WP.

Well, I just chose the worst examples, some of Troy's scan look better than that but my point was that if some look like that, how can we be sure that those that look good are actually correct colours. If they have metallic gloss, you probably can't really scan them properly. Prints like that fade just as much, if not more than film, so they could be faded as well. I guess if they're stored properly, they could be quite acurate to what they looked like when they came out. But again, there's no guarantee that their colours were correct then.

Well, I think it's pretty self explanatory.

If the scans of those cards that Troy just sent me are any indication of what they actually look like, they can definitely not be used as a colour reference.

Short of putting that shot in from the GOUT, I don't think I can.