Harmy

Or svetelny mec :-)

AntcuFaalb said:

Harmy said:

Looking at the I.B. Reference, I think you took the green way too far there - on the I.B. print, the wall seems to be pretty much the same shade as the BD with a bit less saturation and just a very slight green shift in the highlights. The skintone, on the other hand, seems right on the money in your picture.

Ah, the limitations of color-correcting in 8bpp... :-(

What's that got to do with anything?

Why? Because that's just the way my hands do it when I type and don't think about it and I'm not gonna go through every text I write correcting sabre to saber, especially since I'm not a native speaker and as such I speak and write what they now call global English, so the sabre spelling is completely legitimate.

Exactly. For example, look at this:

The GOUT has more shadow detail than what would have been there on a print (partly because of badly set contrast and partly because it was scanned from an IP) and it makes the matte painting painfully obvious, where it wouldn't have been so jarring on a print. And for example matte boxes being visible on video releases is actually a similar case.

Looking at the I.B. Reference, I think you took the green way too far there - on the I.B. print, the wall seems to be pretty much the same shade as the BD with a bit less saturation and just a very slight green shift in the highlights. The skintone, on the other hand, seems right on the money in your picture.

Brilliant, thank you! I was starting to fear I'd have to recreate it from scratch.

EDIT: Well, I just found the non-corrupt original .mpg file, because I kept searching my computer for the word sabre and the corrupt version would always come up and thanks to your upload I knew to search for lightsabre instead. I just thought if I looked for sabre +.mpg, anything with lightsabre would automatically come up as well - apparently not. What's even weirder is that when I searched for Luke +.mpg, it hadn't come up either but as soon as I searched for the word lightsabre, it came up instantly.

That would be great! Did you download it from youtube or did I also upload it in some better quality? If not the youtube file will serve. Thank you!

Sorry, yeah what?

@Chewtobacca: I do agree that there could be an interest value to seeing a simple reversal of the negative but it certainly wouldn't be the right way to view the film as a piece of art and it almost certainly wouldn't show the realistic colors seen on the set.

@Reegar: Because back in the days of black and white film, during the photochemical process, the time the film spent in the solution when it was being developed was what decided the contrast, so the process was time-related and then the name just stuck.

Yes, but an IP is not a simple reversal of the negative, it would already have color-timing applied to it, so what is on an IP of a film timed in the early 80s when projected with a neutral bulb would be wrong, because the IP was timed with a warmer bulb in mind, so if the person who did the color-timing wanted something to be white, they would have timed it so that it was white with a warm bulb, so with a colder bulb, it would look blueish.

What I was trying to say was, that you wouldn't get the colors that are on the IP, but only the colors that appear to be on it when you shine a "neutral" light through it.

Not really, if a print was projected with a "neutral" bulb, then one would see more or less what is on an IP when projected with a "neutral" bulb.

I'm not sure if my request didn't get lost between the last two posts, so I'll repeat it:

Does anyone still have my old video about despecializing Luke's lightsabre on the Falcon? My file seems to be corrupted.

Also, can I find any volunteers for helping me make foreign subtitles for my making of docs when they're done?

Well, what is neutral light? Daylight? If it's a set, it's probably being lit by artificial light, so the real colors on the set would have also depended on the way the set was lit. And I'm not even talking about filters on the lens. I understand what you're saying of course, I'm just saying it's not as simple as that.

CatBus said:

EDIT: This does bring up a film purity question, though. If the films from this era were all projected with a heavily biased light source, which is the accurate color?  Is the film in the can or the film on the screen definitive?  I think a fairly strong case could be made that WOWOW may represent the colors of the film "in the can", which nobody actually saw until much later, while the Blu-ray represents the colors of the film "on the screen" which only looked that way due to the very yellow bulbs in common use at the time.  IMO neither colors would be "wrong" or "not original", although only the yellowish ones could be fairly called "theatrical".

This is quite easy actually, the original colors are those the director and the DP would have seen when viewing the dailies and doing the color-timing and since  they would have used the same warm bulb, which was the standard back then, it is quite clear they would have seen the warmer colors.

From a slightly philosophical point of view, there are no fixed colors on a film print - the colors will always depend on what kind of light you'll shine through the film, just like real-life colors are different depending on the lighting conditions and possibly also the beholder.

So the only thing you can use as a guide as to what the colors on the film "actually are" is what was the standard color of the light that was being shined through it when the people responsible for deciding the look of the film were viewing it at the time.

OK, a question - does anyone still have my old video about despecializing Luke's lightsabre on the Falcon? My file seems to be corrupted.

Well, actually, I never saw this as a problem in the SW BD or even the DVD for the most part don't really suffer from blown out highlights - if anything, the highlights are usually too muted - it is logical that you'll get blown out highlights in a flash frame and it's the way it should be - there may be more highlight detail on the O-Neg but there definitely wouldn't be on a print.

Now ESB is a different story unfortunately - there they somehow managed to severely blow out the highlight and crush the blacks at the same time in some scenes (you just have to look at the lightsaber duel to see that this is definitely not the case with the whole transfer) but in SW, I think it's not really an issue.

Well, it wasn't hard, I only needed the first 12 seconds - the top one was the only one where Tatooine appears on the correct cue, so it had to be '77, the bottom one had the same starfield as the top one, but Tatooine appeared on the wrong cue, so it had to be '97 and the middle one also had the wrong cue and you said they were all different versions, so it had to be '81 (I would have recognized the '81 by the starfield as well, if it was visible).

Isn't it a little sad, that in higher quality I could quite likely have recognized which is which just by a still image of the starfields before the pandown starts? :-D

Well, the top is definitely '77. The middle one is '81 and the bottom one is '97 (I didn't know you guys had a '97SE print. Would be interesting to see some of the '97SE specific shots).

chyron8472 said:

*sigh.* Well, I have an iPad 1. I hate the damn thing, as well I hate iTunes, but if it will help you guys to break the DRM on what you feel to be the superior version of the Making of Star Wars ebook, then I will buy it and try to break it for you. Too bad we aren't using the Kindle version, because I could fix that in nothing flat.

I'm a fan of your attitude, sir! :) Except for the derailing... ;-)

Nice.

They could have easily put this on the BD - ever hear of the Maximum Movie Mode? And even if they couldn't do that, I doubt that the iTunes download is bigger than 5GB, so it could easily be included on a bonus disc along with a lot of other bonus material in exactly the same quality as the iTunes one.

deepanddark20 said:

Honestly, the fact that pleasant friendly people like Harmy are members of this forum is the thing that keeps me sticking around.

Hey, I'm not pleasant and friendly! Everybody knows I'm a dick. Screw you and your stupid demands!

I kid of course :-) BTW. I just sent you a PM answering your Despecialized requests.

I'm ok seeing the film a couple of days later, so I won't be standing in any lines. And anyway, that never happens in my country, we hate standing in lines :D

And I couldn't care less if it's released in May or December, I just think, that having the movie lie finished in a vault for half a year, just because of some stupid tradition would be totally moronic.

OK, don't you guys think it's time to move the discussion to that thread? Or at least DeEd ROTJ, since that is the only one I need the HQ footage for. It's not that I don't appreciate the effort, I really really do, since I really want to use that 720p video for Jedi v2.0 but it just doesn't make any sense to be discussing it in this thread.