ImperialFighter

continued....

....so although the 'scaling' issues may have to slide, I reckon things would have tied better together if we could at least have seen the brief hint of an 'opposing leg-joint' coming in-and-out-and-in-again added during the approximate 5 seconds of 'prop' footage where Luke swipes upwards with his lightsaber....since the shot seems to show the AT-AT 'lurching forward' in motion slightly, and has matching sound effects already in place....

You'd really need to study the onscreen motion of this to see what I mean, but hopefully this gives a better explanation of how I think the existing footage could be tweaked -

....so in this first 'close-up' shot of the full-sized 'prop' when Luke's cable attaches, we would still continue to see a single 'leg-joint'....

....although when we immediately cut to the shot below showing Luke rising underneath ('Revisited' version - http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/1153/image1q.jpg), we can see that the AT-AT's 'leg-joints' are actually quite close to each other on the miniature....

....and when we then immediately cut back to the full-sized 'prop' shot below (which lasts approximately 5 seconds), it seems to have a slight 'lurching' movement that would allow for the subtle addition of a hint of an 'opposing leg-joint' coming into the LEFT of the frame a couple of times....without it having to overlap Luke's body in any way, or get in the way of his lightsaber swipe either -

....at the very start of the shot below, the frame doesn't move at this point....

....and still doesn't move at this point as Luke begins to twist around....

....but at this point in the shot below (when Luke has nearly twisted fully around), the frame begins to move slightly to the RIGHT (while the LEFT-hand side of the frame seems to go upwards too), and so an 'opposing leg-joint' could now start to enter the LEFT of the frame by the same amount (as shown by the direction of the arrow)....indicating the AT-AT 'lurching forward' again....

....the frame continues to move slightly more to the RIGHT at this point in the shot below, and the 'opposing leg-joint' would also continue to enter the frame slightly more too (as shown by the direction of the arrow)....

....the frame still continues to move slightly more to the RIGHT at this point in the shot below (as Luke starts to activate his lightsaber), and the 'opposing leg-joint' would also still continue to enter the frame slightly more too (as shown by the direction of the arrow)....

....the frame has now stopped moving to the RIGHT at this point in the shot below (during the lightsaber activating), and so the 'opposing leg-joint' would come no further into the shot either (as shown by the direction of the arrow)....  The full hint of the added 'opposing leg-joint' would now be at the same position as in the shot above....as if to indicate a very momentary 'pause' in it's 'movement' ....

....but now the frame starts to slightly move back towards the LEFT at this point in the shot below (as Luke begins to swipe upwards), so the 'opposing leg-joint' would also start to slightly move back towards the LEFT by the same amount (as shown by the direction of the arrow)....

....the frame continues to slightly move back towards the LEFT at this point in the shot below, so the 'opposing leg-joint' would also continue to slightly move back towards the LEFT by the same amount (as shown by the direction of the arrow)....

....the frame continues to slightly move back towards the LEFT at this point in the shot below, so the 'opposing leg-joint' would also continue to slightly move back towards the LEFT edge of the frame by the same amount....and would now disappear offscreen again....before Luke then goes on to fully swipe upwards and eventually deactivate his lightsaber....

....after Luke's lightsaber has deactivated, and he has twisted around from us, the frame begins to move slightly to the RIGHT again at this point in the shot below....and so we would also see the 'opposing leg-joint' again begin to enter the LEFT of the frame by the same amount as before....as if to indicate the start of another 'lurch forward'....

....before we immediately cut to the 'close-up' shot below, which shows Luke throwing a grenade inside just before he drops down....

I have no idea if any of this is possible or not....or if you've already done something or other with it.  But see what you think if not.

vaderios said:

I made this mockup for an other reason showing how can be the shot with the other leg things

I know in motion cant be done... The shot doesnt help/support these enhancements

Adywan, as vaderios said a while back, the 'moving' shots involving the underneath of the AT-AT are unlikely to end up similar to his mock-up in your edit....which is a pity, as his version is a little closer to how the full-sized 'prop' should have looked to match the miniature's detail and proportions better in the first place....

But I realise that this could end up as one of those inconsistencies that pretty much has to remain as it stands, since this seems a tricky one to fix using the existing footage.

However, there is a little bit of 'camera movement' during this scene that I previously brought up, which I always thought could be used to improve things a little....but since it proved to be too confusing to describe properly at the time without a sequence of screenshots, I've now asked doubleofive for some mock-ups to help get across the 'motion' I was meaning, in a more effective way this time.  (many thanks once again doubleofive)

This will need to be covered over 2 posts, and I'll recap on some of the mis-matches for the sake of everyone -

Firstly, here's how the detailing ended up looking on the suspiciously-small, single 'leg-joint' prop....

....which is very different to the how the 'leg-joint' detailing on the miniatures looked....

....and although a little blurry, this arrowed shot below (when the Speeders first pass the leading AT-AT) shows that the vertical/horizontal detailing on an AT-AT's 'overhanging side flap' should be centred on it....unlike how the full-sized 'prop turned out, where it is wrongly off-centred....  Also, when this particular shot is 'paused' at just the right moment (just as the last Speeder goes off-screen), the detail on the rounded ends of the 'leg-joints' can be more clearly seen, and are confirmed to be nothing like how the 'prop' details ended up....

....and reveals that the 'prop' should instead have more closely matched the onscreen miniature's 'leg-joint' details and proportions seen in these 'Master Replica' examples below -

(Here are links to many other good 'Master Replicas' AT-AT views too, by the way - http://www.rebelscum.com/mratat.asp and http://www.rebelscum.com/mratatv1.asp and http://www.rebelscum.com/mratatv2.asp) 

continues in the next post....

karcreat said:

 Heheh...ok, I'm gonna go 'off topic' for a sec here too, I miised this interview, but I gotta ask...did Jon bring up 'Howard The Duck' at any point? He just SOOO seems like he would....;)

If he really wanted to put GL on the spot, then he'd have been better off asking when he was gonna pony up for a decent GOUT release....

By the way, did GL mention anything of actual interest such as when a Blu-ray or 3D 'conversion' of his best-known property was forthcoming?  Or was this truly just a waste of air-time at this point?

adywan said:

Well May 2010 is out of the question for a release date now. it's looking more like an end of the year release date now. Just so much left to do and so much left to build

I wondered if May was going to be realistically achievable, considering the amount of things you're hoping to build for this latest instalment, so this is very understandable, and not unexpected.

The kind of quality that you're aiming for takes time (and funds), but it's so fantastic that you want to actually re-build all the various elements you've mentioned previously....as this goes far beyond what I could have hoped for, and emphasised just how much of a 'special edition' this particular 'Revisited' chapter is really going to be, eventually.

By the way vaderios, your latest mock-up showing a somewhat similar effect to that ROTS monitor, looked very effective.  :)

Jaitea said:

 ImperialFighter said: .........quite a lot, and probably spot on, but maybe nobody would notice..... dont know if it would be worth-while changing 

 

Happy New Year to all.

If all goes to plan, we'll have something to really look forward to this year, and it's gonna be very interesting to finally see everything that Adywan ends up choosing (or being able) to enhance for his latest edit.

I've certainly been amazed by the amount of subtle and not-so-subtle inconsistencies spotted by others so far that I never noticed before....some of which may have to remain in 'ESB:Revisted'.  However, it's going to be a real treat to see so many of them being fixed now, no matter how small, just as it was with 'Star Wars:Revisited' too.

Okay, before things get out of hand with the 'drams' here, since doubleofive got these (scarily blue!) SE DVD shots for me sooner than I expected, I thought I'd finish off these comments to squeeze on here before year's end.  Many thanks for these once again doubleofive.  :)

Adywan, there was loads of neat stuff on your 'Luke's rescue' clip that was previewed a couple of weeks ago, such as the likes of the Falcon further back in the hangar....the hangar door only moving once to close....Ben's force aura....the burn effect on the Taun-Taun's belly....and the fabulous re-colouring -  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJD6fUC7VxY&feature=related

However, I was especially pleased about how the 2 re-'flipped' shots turned out, so I wanted to show a couple of other 'reversed' shots (among other things) to do with this portion of the movie your clip just happens to cover, that I don't recall being brought up fully before....

When Han first appears early on in the movie, we can clearly see here that there is no 'insignia' badge on the top-LEFT of his coat at this point, unlike later scenes....

....and his macrobinoculars are hanging beside his LEFT side, with it's strap slung over his RIGHT shoulder.  In addition, he happens to have a 'communicator' on his LEFT glove only (similar to Luke) and wears his gun holster strapped to his RIGHT side.  (note the yellow ladders beside the X-wing here, as I'll come back to this too)....

....when we see Han wearing this coat again later on (just before he jumps onto a Taun-Taun), we can see that there is still no 'insignia' badge on his coat, and that his macrobinoculars strap is still slung over his RIGHT shoulder as he sets off....

....a little later, when Luke scrambles fully out of the Wampa cave and starts running, we can see that he has now attached his lightsaber to his utility belt....

....but when we cut to him falling over a snowridge, it seems the lightsaber is missing when he gets to his feet before the end of the shot....

....we now come to the start of the 'Luke's rescue' clip that I linked to above.  This is our first view of Han since he left the Rebel Base to search for Luke.  He is still correctly wearing the macrobinocular strap over his RIGHT shoulder like when he first set off....  And his 'communicator' is still correctly on his LEFT glove too....

....a little later, just after Luke finally collapses, we cut to this shot of the stop-motion 'Han on Taun-Taun'.  I believe this to be a 'reversed' shot!  ....because we can now see the macrobinoculars are hanging at his RIGHT side instead, and the strap is slung over his LEFT shoulder now....  Now it could be argued that the miniature was wrongly dressed, or that Han took off his macrobinoculars since we saw last saw him earlier (as seen in the above shot), and put them back on differently....but things still end up wrong due to shots that follow....

....because we now immediately cut to what seems to be another 'reversed' shot too!  Although we can see that this matches the above shot because the macrobinoculars are on Han's RIGHT side, since the strap is over his LEFT shoulder....It's definately 'reversed'.   If you 'pause' this shot along with the previous earlier 'close-up' of Han holding the reigns, you can also compare the folds in Han's scarf and the snow on the Taun-Taun's visible horn to see this is the case.  This shot also now shows an 'insignia' badge (that was missing when he got on the Taun-Taun) which is on the wrong side to where it's actually meant to be, compared to shots that come after this....  I have to say that I'd love to see these 2 shots re-'flipped' rather than be a continuity flaw.  We soon get used to re-'flipped' shots, and I don't see these spoiling the look of the flow before and after.  Just my own 2 cents on this issue.

....so after Han dismounts and we immediately cut to the shot below, things are suddenly correct again, with Han's macrobinoculars on his LEFT side once more....

....and when we then immediately cut to this shot below, we can see that the macrobinocular strap is still correctly over his RIGHT shoulder, and that his gun holster is correctly strapped to his RIGHT leg, just as it was when he set off....

....just afterwards, we come to the scene below.  Remember that 2nd shot from the top, showing the X-wing prop with the 2 ladders either side of it that Han passes?  Well I believe this is the same prop....but you'll see that there is only a single, 'angled' yellow ladder on the other side of the cockpit to Leia now....

....which is fine, except when we immediately cut to the shot below, we now have another , 'vertical' yellow ladder beside Leia too....

....and here's a better look at it when we come to the shot a little later, where Leia walks away after the hangar doors are shut.  I don't know if it can be 'added', or 'erased' to be consistent in all these shots that Leia is in or not, but there it is.

....soon after, we cut from a 'circular fade' of Chewie's head in front of the now-closed hangar to this shot of Luke below which 'pans' to the left over him with his face turned to the LEFT.  This is yet another 'reversed' shot!  His gun holster has previously been on his RIGHT side, and his glove 'communicator' has been on his LEFT hand.  Also, his 'earpiece' has always previously been on his LEFT side of his head too.  They are all wrong in this shot now....  As has been noted, there is a lot more snow on his back compared to the shots that follow....but it's the fact that Luke is 'reversed' which is the bigger bugbear for me.  However, it's a problematic one to fix....

....because when we immediately cut to the shot below where everything is suddenly positioned correctly again....Luke's face is still turned to the LEFT....meaning that if the shot above was re-'flipped', it would have him facing to the RIGHT then before the cut.... 

....so Han finds him and dismounts, and we see that his macrobinoculars strap is still correctly over his RIGHT shoulder, as he goes over to help....

....although I'm convinced that his gloves are now BROWN instead of GREY during the 'close-up' where he asks Luke to give him a sign that he's okay!  Although it's hard to tell amongst all the blueness, they certainly seem a little different in this brief shot, but revert to GREY again afterwards.  Things look much better in the re-coloured 'clip' though, and it's no biggie compared to 'reversed' shots of course.

....and when Han drags Luke towards the Taun-Taun, the macrobinoculars are still correctly hanging by his LEFT side....

....but things went wrong again by the time we then cut to the shot below....but which has now been re-'flipped' correctly.  And this now correct-way-round confirms that the 'insignia' badge should be on the top-LEFT side of the coat all along, in the shots it appears in....  Personally, I'd rather see this 'erased' from all the shots for continuity's sake if possible, as I imagine 'adding' it in the various early scenes is impractical.

....and we immediately cut to yet another 'reversed' shot that has now thankfully been re-'flipped'....

....and when we then immediately cut to the shot below, Han's gun holster is still on his RIGHT side indicating all's correctly in place with him at this point....

....and correct when we cut here too, as the top-LEFT coat 'insignia' badge and LEFT glove 'communicator' are in the right place....

....and things still look correct in the the later shot where Han waves to the Snowspeeder that finds them.

That's your lot for now.

Happy hangovers everyone!

Ha, you just beat me to posting that image Ganamae.  :)

Wishing everyone here a very happy New Year for 2010.

The conditions are very 'Hoth'-like here in the Highlands at present.  Slange!

Monroville said:

Also, is it me or is the entrance here much smaller than the one the Falcon escapes from?

You know, here's an idea... as someone suggested a while back, there could be multiple entrances.  I suggest putting the larger opening the Falcon escapes from BEHIND the Falcon in some of the scenes, indicating that this opening is a smaller one for the Taun-Taun patrol, as well as give the larger ships a larger opening to leave out of

at scene 2:08 you can see how wide the doors/opening is; should it be much bigger/wider?  maybe if at the least the area on the left is pushed off and the center point of the doors closing is put much further to the left side of the screen (which would be enough to account for a larger opening that would allow the Falcon a way out).  Or the door behind Chewie could be pushed to the right... anything to make the doors/ cave entrance big enough for the Falcon escape scene.

There's certainly two different entrances/exits mentioned....since we hear the Deck Officer tell Han "It's possible he came through the south entrance" and also "Sir, Commander Skywalker hasn't come in the south entrance". 

Then later, at the start of Leia's orders to the pilots she says "All troop carriers will assemble at the north entrance"

This could account for the differring look of the entrance exteriors in the movie, but I'm unsure about which is which, and what one the Falcon exits from. 

Are there any east and west entrances to the base too, or not, I wonder?

Monroville said:

vaderios said:

see this:

And tell me

I would imagine it would be dark (as it is stated that nightfall is approaching) but that you may not be able to see too much detail, as there would be a lot of wind and snowstorm type activity outside.  I would also say that the Han outside shots need to be darkened (or at least how in some 80's films the upper half would be darkened - something to indicate that it is nearing nightfall).

Haven't had a chance to catch up here since 12th Dec. (apart from dropping by briefly with a Christmas day greeting), but things are less hectic now.  Hope all went well for everyone over the festivities.  Anyway, I just wanted to say that the 'Luke's rescue' preview clip released on the 16th was a pleasant surprise! Some terrific work once again Adywan.

As far as your mock-up above vaderios, the rest of the exterior scenes that are shown just after that entrance shot, such as the one below, aren't at that very darkened stage yet. 

Although Han told the Deck Officer "....It's getting dark out there" shortly before he went looking for Luke, it's unclear just how long it will take before any dark 'nightfall' occurs on Hoth.  But going by the shots that came afterwards, it doesn't seem to have fully arrived yet.  Ady's final colouring looks suitably atmospheric in his clip though....

....and although a subtler version of Jaitea's excellent 'blizzard' mock-up would be neat in the various shots of the outside to tie-in with the other Hoth scenes at this point....if it doesn't work out, then I'd just be pleased to see the outside SE 'blueness' toned down a little to match the more subdued colour of the one in the GOUT a little more even....to better match with Ady's great re-colouration of the Hoth scenes that come just afterwards -

Loved those fur shots by the way.  'Hair straighteners' - inspired!  :)

Will you be adding a little encrusted 'ice' effect to your Wampa's fur in places eventually, like the original 1st appearance puppet has?  What did they originally use for that effect I wonder?

And great news on the monitor situation from Jacen.

Busy recently, but just checking in to wish everyone a very happy Christmas.

Hope to have some stuff of interest to show come the New Year.  :)

Nice work on those doubleofive.

I especially like how you 'sliced' the comparison images diagonally at an angle, as that really draws your eye to the problem effectively in a single image.

Awesome first post Jacen.

Maybe Adywan can look on it as a present from Santa...  :)

vaderios said:

Imp fighter I still want that flipped dagobah shot to be noted and explained in depth :)

I've not forgotten, and there's that Hoth one that I never noticed before either, until recently.  I'll be covering those when I can, as there's a bit to go into concerning both scenes that they appear in.

Okay Adywan, I explained the scenario to my mate who sells in 'Currys' and also to someone else that I know is knowledgeable in my local 'PC World' too.  I'll just post the points here for the benefit of others here that may buy expensive equipment in future - 

Both of them reckoned it seems unlikely that the 'extra 3' that was advertised at the time would have been for only 3 'months' rather than 3 'years', if you're sure that it didn't explicitly say so.  Most stores/companies normally offer 'years' of extra cover, not 'months' they said.  So that's definately a point that can be argued more yet, since it seems the promotion was ambiguous.

As far as the 'Warranty card' being missing from the packaging, it's unfortunate it wasn't included due to someone's error.  They both agreed that it's the last thing most people concern themselves to look for when they open things up, themselves included.  Ideally, it would be spotted as missing at the time, before something breaks down, but as you were told the 'receipt' covered you, it's not surprising you didn't concern yourself with that.

Both of them confirmed that a basic 'receipt' only covers anyone for 1 year, but think you should continue to argue the fact that you paid for what you believed was 3 'years' extra cover, not 3 'months'.

The other point they said they would argue if it was them, is this -  since you still have the 'receipt', they recommend that an equally valid complaint route on top of the 'warranty' thing....is to emphasise that 18 months is too short a 'shelf-life' for an expensive monitor to last anyway.  So they said that you should make a fuss over that aspect too, and complain that is wholly inadequate, and 'not fit for purpose'.

They suggest getting onto the 'Gateway' customer service, either directly or online.  They also think it might be worth contacting 'Trading Standards' again to point this out, as you may have just got someone unhelpful the first time.

(and it might be best to omit telling anyone that you've been using it every waking hour for the last 18 months....ahem)

Either way, both reckoned that they would certainly 'escalate things' with both the store and 'Gateway'.

Good luck, and I guess we'll all now know to query the sellers about the whole 'Warranty card'/'extra cover' scenario a bit more in future, at the point when we first pay for something.

I feel your pain Adywan.

Seems that no-one can necessarily trust any advertising or salesperson's word here these days.  And a lot of them don't seem to know what they're talking about half the time when it comes to the technical stuff, where electronics goods are concerned.  And whoever said the receipt was the 'guarantee' was obviously wrong in this case.

Sad that customers seem to need to be having to triple check info. they are given when it comes to 'warranty' matters these days.

It's frustrating for you in the meantime, but I've got a good mate who's a decent salesperson for our local 'Currys', and I'll check out what he reckons about this shop and 'Gateways' claims about all this.

doubleofive said:

I also emailed The Digital Bits directly.

I see they mentioned the site and gave a direct link to the petition.

Nice one.  I always liked that site.

Problem solved.  :)

I cleared my cache, but that wasn't it....

Turns out I'd totally forgotten that I'd 'ZOOMED IN' on some pages on my computer a couple of days ago....and this was what had 'cut off' the 2 buttons at the bottom of the 'Insert/edit image' box!  However, I decided to 'Maximize' the box after a while of staring mystified at it....and there were the 'INSERT' and 'CANCEL' buttons....

Then it dawned on me, lol.

Warbler said:

Just how effect would 3D transfer of a 2D movie look?   I can't believe it would look as good as movie shot in 3D, would it?

From what I can gather, there are 2 or 3 different companies that are busy using this new 'conversion' process on 2D movies, and that the results have been generally excellent and right up there with the latest actual 'dedicated 3D' filming.

This 'conversion' technique isn't just being used on past 2D movies, as it seems that some upcoming planned 3D features are still going to be filmed in 2D first, before being 'converted'.

Seemingly, this process can give a great deal of control as far as being able to pull various elements out into the layers of depth required.

Personally, if this means that STAR WARS (albeit not necessarily the versions I'd prefer) can be seen on the big screen again, I'm all for that.  Hopefully, the company that does the 'conversions' will do a good job of them eventually.

Here's a list of some of the many 3D-related projects that are seemingly in development at the moment -  http://marketsaw.blogspot.com/2007/04/list-of-upcoming-3d-movies.html

Warbler said:

how can he make them into 3D.   Don't movies have to be filmed that way?   If I'm not mistaken,  you film the movie with 2 cameras,  one for each eye.   That's how you get the 3D effect right?

That's just one way Warbler, but GL will be using some of the latest techniques that have been developed to turn 2D movies into 3D ones....

But this would be a better thread to catch up with the developments on that -  http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/3D-STAR-WARS-for-the-masses-anytime-soon/topic/10070

Okay, that's strange....

It was fine a couple of days ago at my end, but when I click onto the 'tree' icon now, I'm still getting the entry field options saying 'Insert/edit image' at the top, right down to the 'Horizontal space' option....but there is now no sign of the buttons that were below that in the box.

I can't remember what the button actually said that was on the very bottom-left of the box, but I know I had click on it before whatever code I'd typed into the 'Image URL' field would then show as an image in my reply box....

Any ideas on why this vital tab seems to be missing now when I click on the 'tree' icon?  Thanks.

Great to see a nice update to the look of the homepage!

I was originally hoping that Jay would go for something with a bit of colour along the lines of doublefive's proposed logo shown here -  http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Time-for-a-slight-redesign/post/370299/#TopicPost370299 ....perhaps layed out in one line across the top, and possibly with this byline layed out underneath in smaller, blue lettering as a bit of fun -  You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy....

However, it seems Jay likes the original style that was here, and the subtle, retro 'Death Star' makes for a nice simple look too.  The homepage is certainly an improvement from how it looked before, and that evocative artwork of 'Darth and Luke' looks great.

I reckon the wording for the new petition covers all the bases well, and as far as the 'width' of the pages go, it's nice to see that the option to revert back to the wider look on the forum pages is going to be given for those that wish it.  Good stuff all round.

Hi Jay, can you confirm if this is just a temporary glitch, or if you've gone ahead and done this after all?

After you touched on this yesterday, I wrote these points here in the hope that this great function would be retained, but don't know if you saw them or not -  http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/New-Forum-Layout/post/388266/#TopicPost388266

Will be very interested to hear what's happening with this, as it's a bit restricting without it at the moment.

adywan said:

i've done a bit of tweaking to the latest preview shot, so here is the final version

Adywan's new 'avatar' seems to show a new shot....just and no more....  EDIT - well it did, until he changed his avatar again....  :)

Here's a preview from nearer the start of the same shot from earlier in the year.  If you look at Adywan's 'avatar' (just click onto page 1 of this thread) you can get an idea of the cloud-car's movement.

It will be good to see (and hear) it back in this shot.

Yeah, I was meaning that as we didn't get a decent updated transfer of the OOT on an anamorphic DVD the first time around, that only a good Blu-ray of it is acceptable for any future release now.

I too would hope that if that does come about, that it will of course be included as part of a comprehensive package.

Oh man, I just clicked on the 'insert/edit image' icon to 'embed' a small something....but it seems to be 'disabled' now.

Can you confirm if this is already the case Jay?  Kinda makes my points concerning that a bit of moot point now if so....