logo Sign In

Knightmessenger

User Group
Members
Join date
1-Nov-2005
Last activity
23-Oct-2017
Posts
819
Web Site
http://www.youtube.com/user/Knightmessenger

Post History

Post
#324254
Topic
Giorgio Moroder's Metropolis (Released)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/324254/action/topic#324254
Time

I know this is off topic but I'm reminded of another movie from 1984 that featured music by Moroder: The Never Ending Story. Klaus Doldinger co-scored it. On the US soundtrack cd, Moroder's music was snyched up and different from the actual US version music. The remix on the soundtrack sounds terrible. The parts by Doldinger are intact and are brilliant. There is a German release cd but I believe that just has the Doldinger music. (Some music by Doldinger was replaced by Moroder in the US version) Are there any isolated tracks of Moroder's music from NES floating around. The biggest example is the Ivory Tower theme. You can hear the Doldinger music here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neXK5BEiXyw

To my knowledge, there is no version of the Moroder Ivory Tower theme as used in the US movie version out there. The one on the US cd was used in the trailer. I actually made one myself by recording the two scenes off the dvd and combining them to minimize dialog/sound effects. But there are a few parts that sound garbled and I don't have the ability to use any effects or filters.

So, again, I know it's not really related by anybody a fan of The Never Ending Story or know more about how the movie was scored?

Post
#319564
Topic
70mm screening
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319564/action/topic#319564
Time
The thing about Star Wars is that even though the prints are not in the best shape, there are a lot of surviving elements compared with other films at the time. I believe a lot of this is because Lucas was smart enough to save original audio tapes, uncomposited shots and props. But he didn't keep any prints of the original film in good condition. Makes sense.
If there's any truth to what Lucasfilm has said, it's that they don't have any good prints readily lying around that could be easily scanned. They would have to search the archives like they are doing for the deleted scenes and maybe use a combination of prints and interpositives. It may not have been possible to have started that in May 2006 and finished with enough time for a September release.
But it CAN be done.

Any idea on the Jabba scene. Was the new CGI pasted over the old CGI?
Post
#319537
Topic
State of the Trilogy/ annual SW depression
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319537/action/topic#319537
Time
I think the 2004 dvd's sold well because dvd was a big deal to the masses. And the idea of having special features for Star Wars was cool. (I wasn't aware at the time there were plenty of existing extras on laserdisc and video, I didn't even realize what laserdisc was) I don't think Blu-ray is as significant for the average person. The average guy was blown away with dvd. Now the average person is saying "that's nice" or "huh, when was dvd not good enough?" Remember, the masses did not have laserdisc so the leap from vhs to dvd is just so huge.
-scene selection
-no rewinding
-much greater resolution and clarity than vhs
-dvd's can be played on computer drives and portable machines
-dvd's last longer than tapes, more durable too
DVD's appealed to just about everyone over vhs, hence full screen releases.
The casual fans are not going to care about upgrading from dvd to blu-ray. The die hards do. Guess which group also cares about having the original versions? Honestly, the novelty of dvd has worn off for me. I don't buy nearly as many movies on dvd, special features are no longer as important to me. You can find a lot of stuff on youtube now anyways. That site didn't even exist in '04. I've passed on upgrading to many newer dvd versions.
I think a lot of people are like that too. How else do you explain most new dvd releases that seem to be lackluster in extras? I mean a popular family film like Enchanted is just one disc with few extras.
I know about the technical difference between blu-ray HD and regular dvd. And I don't really care. I'm interested in the higher storage capacity of blu-ray, that's about it. Oh and if any movies I really care about get a vastly improved transfer (besides the usual higher resolution) or some really great bonus content (archival content like deleted scenes would probably appeal to me most).
Star Wars could fit that category. Studio Ghibli (because they're awesome) and Buffy the Vampire Slayer (less compression on fewer discs?) is another possibility.
I also think more people read internet reviews so if something is wrong with a video release, more will hear about it.

In my opinion, just releasing the latest version of the special editions on blu-ray will NOT sell as well as the 2004 set did.
(Plus think of all the complaints from people who fell in love with the '04 versions when Lucas does something even worse than Hayden. "I miss Han and Greedo shooting each other, that brotherly hug is so lame! And did they really need another musical dance number added when Luke meets the Emperor?")
Post
#319532
Topic
18% of LD owners cite Star Wars as a main reason for keeping obsolete format
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319532/action/topic#319532
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

Again before the advent of better hi def audio aka in HD-DVD and Blu Ray which can contain uncompressed PCM. dvd could only one up laserdisc in terms of picture quality while laserdisc always had a more robust audio performance.

The one time dvd tried to come close was in the superbit dvd era when they were releasing dts tracks in full bitrate.

The very early preference of laserdisc over dvd was in dvd's early days when mpeg2 artifacting was very bad on a lot of improperly mastered releases. Indeed most of the releases were simply the same d1 or d2 masters used for laserdisc mastering and were single layer.

It gets even stranger when you consider that some Laserdiscs have the proper screen ratio for the movies they have while the dvd's do not, and some Laserdiscs have incorrect ratios and the dvd releases corrected that.

I know of certain cases in the release of James Bond vs DVD for instance where this occured.

Sometimes even letterboxing titles cropped the image on certain titles on laserdisc loosing parts of the top or bottom or even side frames.

As for what Hi Vision was i believe it was a japan mastering system considered to be an early form of HD, it was a widescreen tv set i believe as well.

Its ironic that there is an ad on youtube where george lucas advertises it for the japanese.

I not sure but i guess some who owned the muse players in japan like the X-0 or X-9 must have also owned a hi vision set at one point.

The biggest difference between the 1997 and 2004 special edition restorations is that the 1997 was mostly done by hand and mechanical processes as well as photo chemical not done all on a computer like Lowry.

YCM laboratories did the image restoration, YCM of course being a reference to the yellow, cyan, and magenta seperation masters used in film.

As to why their restorations turned vaders saber pink is beyond my limited understanding.

Lowry Just Scanned the supplied altered film nagative into their computers at 4k resolution, they did not do any of the new color correction or timing that was done by ILM and supervised by LUCAS.

How the picture looked before it was tampered with to make the colors try to match the digital coloring of the prequels we will probably never know.


After my first post here, I got to see some X0 screencaps (I think) from the special collection when I found a post of Zion that linked to his imageshack. Even with the X0, the special collection looks fuzzy and washed out. The film to video master transfer technology probably wasn't as sharp in 1986.
What was a D1 master anyway? What is different than the HD masters used today? The D1 master for the Definitive Collection still seems pretty detailed other than the smearing and letterbox format. I cannot stop thinking about how much of a bad idea the DVNR was. Considering how washed out and bad of shape the prints were, the THX color correction was pretty good. Was the smearing mentioned or noticed when the laserdiscs first came out? I had heard reviews about the set were very good. We would be in such better shape without the DVNR because modern computers could erase scratches so much better. Would the X0 team even need the special collection were it not for the smearing? I'm sure a lack of DVNR would have made any video restoration like the X0 and others much easier.
And it's again a classic example of dumbing down a video release for the average ignorant customer. Just because more people would notice scratches than an interpolated picture at normal speed doesn't mean it's a good idea to throw away detail. I guess the people making the transfer didn't think it would be noticed the majority of the time on the average laserdisc player. I had heard about it but never really noticed it on my bootleg dvd's. Though I did wonder why some scenes looked less sharp and had bad compression. The clarity of the unaltered dvd's made the DVNR so much more obvious.

As for overcompressed dvd's that didn't look as good as laserdisc, did any Buffy the Vampire Slayer episodes get released on laserdisc? I have the first four seasons. 1 & 2 look bad. 3 looks much better but I see the same DVNR ghosting and smearing. 4 looks pretty good but there are still some times when I could spot DVNR at nomal speed.

Why didn't dvd's ever use PCM stereo? I mean, the bootleg dvd's do. But sorry, once digital compression improved enough, laserdisc (other than with an X0) could never be as sharp as dvd. The Gout is a good example because it uses the same master but the latest dvd mastering.

When you mention proper screen ratios, are you talking about matted films like The Shining? Or is this something else? The new Bond dvd's did feature some screwups but remember, those were also done by Lowry. Lowry has also screwed up some classic Disney. Lady and the Tramp is too shiny digital. The bonus showed a clip from the unrestored full screen version and I was like whoa, film grain and texture! I was really dissapointed with the newest Peter Pan platinum dvd. The picture looked so washed out and murky. I've seen screencaps of the first laserdisc and that looks most accurate in terms of color. Lowry's had a lot of screwups so I don't know how they don't have any responsibility for the Star Wars debacle. Surely they could have fixed some of the blatent color errors like the sabers if anyone was awake.
One of the reasons Empire of Dreams is so good is because most of the clips are from a '97 print anamorphic. The crossing sabers in front of the Emperor is shown early on and they actually have white cores.
Post
#319493
Topic
70mm screening
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/319493/action/topic#319493
Time
It was mentioned on the official Star Wars site back in 1997 that before any alterations could be made, they had to make a restored unaltered print first. I can't imagine why you would then cut up that reel instead of make a duplicate first. Lucas didn't know exactly what he would change. There was an article about how redoing one of the Death Star battle shots would make other ones look dated. So they would redo more. And there are the shots that used original footage with CG added. Lucas might have thought in another 20 years he may want to redo some of the CGI so that be easier if he was sure to save an unaltered print.
Like when Jabba was redone in ANH in '04, did they go back to a print with just Mulholland in it and make a new Jabba or just paste it over the '97 one? Some of the CU frames of Han Solo that were cut out in the Greedo scene to make way for the overhead shot were reinserted back in for the dvd. The words "Yes" and "I" were put back to "bet you have."
(The '97 Greedo scene can be found on the deleted scenes video of the Episode I dvd if you want to check)

So don't tell me Lucas can't restore footage that was removed in '97, he already did. I just wish there was an easier way to show or explain this.
Post
#318597
Topic
70mm screening
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318597/action/topic#318597
Time
I know that any company that could do a proper scan likely wouldn't touch a Star Wars print because of copyright infringment. However, in the US, there is an exception to legally back up a copy of something if the current copyright holder does not have the material, or is otherwise unable to. It would still be illegal to publicaly screen such a video but then again, so were the dvd's made from the laserdiscs.
I'm just wondering if recording one of those prints off a screen with a decent video camera might get something at least better than the Gout.
1. There would be no THX smearing.
2. Depending on which lens was used on the projector, the film could be left vertically squeezed so an animorphic recording would be possible. (although 70mm is not anamorphic)

Seriously, wouldn't even my Hi8 camera yield more resolution than a D1 letterboxed master tape if the film was squeezed to fit a 4:3 frame?

My only other crazy idea would be to check with film preservation organizations in Rhode Island. A friend of mine (we live in the midwest) told me his grandfather owned a theatre there and has all the prints for all kinds of films willed to some museum or similar organization.
Post
#318590
Topic
18% of LD owners cite Star Wars as a main reason for keeping obsolete format
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/318590/action/topic#318590
Time
skyjedi2005 said:

the 2004 cut being the only one never released on laserdisc.

the real gem and beauty of my collection is the studio ghibli gai ippai boxset.

it may be on laserdisc but it still features Hi Vision remasters, nausicaa of the valley of the wind has the best laserdisc transfer i have ever seen, limited by the fact that it is letterboxed and interlaced.


I don't think the 2004 version not being on laserdisc is any loss. That has gotta be the worst version of the films despite the fact that it's the only anamorphic transfer.
The version that looks interesting to me now is the Special Edition. It had a film restoration that actually featured a competant color timer. I think a 97 box set went for only $10 on eBay. Does that sound right, the version that's not on dvd still goes for less than the Definitive which somebody mentioned he recently got for $40?

How do the unaltered dvd's compare to the Special Collection or 97 Special Edition laserdiscs?

Do you have any more info on the Studio Ghibli lasers? Man, I'd love to see a picture of those. Don't some of them have older dubs that the Disney dvd's do not? How good was a Hi Vision transfer, are there any pictures around that compare it?
Post
#317714
Topic
Software to capture uncompressed analog video
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317714/action/topic#317714
Time
I'm once again looking for a program that will let me capture uncompressed s-video and composite to my PDI card. I tried virtualdub but shifted the frame up and cropped off the top. I tried Dscaler which seemed pretty cool but then clicking on something on the options menu (the far left tab) froze the program. It's possible that also caused my primary hard drive to go bad. When Dscaler was reinstalled on my replacement hard drive, the program was still frozen as if nothing had changed.

So, any other suggestions to capture uncompressed. I would additionally like to use a lossless codec such as huffyuv to save space. And I edit on Vegas 4.0.

One other thing, what would you suggest for a lightscribe dual layer +&- dvd burner? Should I get the one in stores or buy online?
Post
#317309
Topic
Did PDI Deluxe come with installation cd?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317309/action/topic#317309
Time
It wasn't just installing stuff, my computer wouldn't turn on after crashing and I didn't know what was wrong. Turns out my primary hard drive was going bad. Besides, once a friend who knows more about computers than I do (he built my video editing one) tried to install a hard drive on another computer and it crashed within a week.

But anyways, now the problem is that my DV capture box seems unable to recognize a firewire signal from my Canon ZR70 miniDV camera. It never really worked before but I rarely use miniDV so I didn't bother with it. It has always recognized composite and s-video. I figured it needed some drivers or installation but the guy at the store did get it to work once. But doing the same steps the next day would just make it turn off.
It is a Pyro A/V converter from ADS Technologies. I got it in late 2003. There's a analog/digital push button on it. Whenever I press play to turn on capture preview in Vegas, it goes to red indicating analog. But even with only a firewire cable hooked up, pushing it again will turn off preview instead of switching to the digital signal.
The guy at the store seems to think the capture box is not working properly.
Post
#317166
Topic
Did PDI Deluxe come with installation cd?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317166/action/topic#317166
Time
Okay, last year my computer was refurbished with the PDI card installed. The store that did it has since gone out of business. Now, recently my primary hard drive with the operating system is going bad. Most data was recovered but any programs need to be reinstalled on the replacement drive. The man at the store says he needs the CD for the PDI card so he can install the drivers. I don't remember such a cd and I don't know what to do.

UPDATE: Actually, it turns out my email to one of the former store employees worked. And he said those drivers should be available for download on their website which is pixelmagic.com.

Oh well. But if anyone has any other tips, I'd appreciate them.
Post
#317164
Topic
Info: When does fullscreen show more than widescreen?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/317164/action/topic#317164
Time
When I upscaled the picture to a bigger size, I figured it might have been from Reloaded. As for episodes II and III, they were shot in 16 x 9, however just about all the raw footage is blue screen and completed in 2.35:1. So the full screen dvd's should still be pan & scan, just like the any other Star Wars movie.
The digital cameras didn't turn out so great for II and III, I think they're going to look even worse as HD home video keeps improving. Not only did they use digital but didn't they also lost resolution by cropping from 16 x9? It doesn't appear to matter with super 35 shot on film. But with digital, that detail loss might be important.
TV shows is something that's also confusing me. Like Smallville is matted. So is West Wing after season 1. But why would a show back in 2001 or so been shown in widescreen. With only standard definition available at the time, it would have to be broadcast letterbox even on a widesceen tv. Right?

I really wish there was more of a movement to have open matte versions also available on new video releases. With blu-ray disc capacity, why can't we get both?
I remember reading an old interview on the digital bits I think with Robert Harris and the interviewer said something like "I think people are finally starting to see the point of widescreen and maybe we could also get full frame versions for open matte movies." Harris seemed to agree.

One other question, is The Godfather open matte? I'm hearing about the film restoration but wondering if the new dvd will actually show the entire frame that they spent so much money to clean.
Post
#316648
Topic
stupid question about the OOT DVD's
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316648/action/topic#316648
Time
Fang Zei said:

Several weeks ago I talked to someone who said they would not be buying the 9/12 release because the OOT was not in fullscreen!

I mean, why didn't they bother with the fullscreen OOT? Weren't there also fullscreen laserdisk masters, or was the 1993 telecine just that much better than the others but only done in letterbox?


There is a fullscreen THX video master, it was used for the '95 vhs release. And previous fullscreen telecine's also made it to laserdisc. But what die hard fan who cares about seeing the originals would want a pan & scan version. One guy here did transfer the THX tapes later but right from the start back in '04 after the dvd's came out, I could tell it was a given that any bootlegs had to be widescreen if it was to be considered respectable. All the sites with screencaps of the changes used widescreen tapes. Then someone pointed out the special collection which was one of the first widescreen releases.
Post
#316645
Topic
Why is the GOUT not anamorphic?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316645/action/topic#316645
Time
Arnie.d said:


Interlace is different from telecine.

The GOUT master was probably oversharpened (which probably created the jaggies) to look better when played as a Laserdisc. And to mask the jaggies for the dvd release they probably applied a vblur.


So there were jaggies on the '93 master and laserdiscs? By oversharpened, do you mean edge enhancement? I don't remember seeing them, not even in X0 caps. What exactly would I see? And these jaggies are different from the ones that you get with an interlaced picture?
Post
#316597
Topic
STAR WARS: EP V &quot;REVISITED EDITION&quot;<strong>ADYWAN</strong> - <strong>12GB 1080p MP4 VERSION AVAILABLE NOW</strong>
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316597/action/topic#316597
Time
One thing that has always bothered me is the teeth on the asteroid worm. Either the Falcon magically shrinks in the next shot or the teeth about to close get much bigger. The scale does not match from those shots.
Maybe keep the new wampa shots but only after Luke slices it's arm, that way we don't see the creature until Luke does.
I don't believe the compositing of the two Tie's crashing into the narrow walls from the asteroid chase was fixed.
If you keep the new shot of the Falcon flying through the Cloud City to the docking bay, is there any way to make it look less flat and uniformly sharp. (with more light or shadow) It wasn't a bad idea by Lucas but the CG is just too obvious.
If you keep the Cloud City flyby after Luke leaves Dagobah, be sure to make the music match up better to the original version. It sort of stops in the middle with the new scene.
As for Ackbar photoshopped to yell "It's a trap." In the real scene, doesn't Luke walk into the same door that Leia and Lando do? So why do they end up in different places. I don't know if this is a goof, it's just something that's always confused me.
Post
#316568
Topic
Why is the GOUT not anamorphic?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316568/action/topic#316568
Time
I don't mean the dvnr, I mean the image blur done only for the dvd release. Whatever people keep saying about why the laserdiscs have slightly more vertical detail. Wasn't it to inverse telecine? So the interlacing created from making an NTSC 29.97 fps video that on the '93 master tapes and laserdiscs, wouldn't that vary in each shot like with any interlaced video?
Post
#316506
Topic
Info: more interesting 16mm stuff on eBay
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316506/action/topic#316506
Time
I don't have a laserdisc player but at this moment, 11 hours to go for Return of the Jedi special collection. Current bid is 9.99 plus 28 shipping.
http://cgi.ebay.com/STAR-WARS-RETURN-OF-THE-JEDI-SPECIAL-COLLECTION-LD_W0QQitemZ320241222759QQihZ011QQcategoryZ381QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Since this is the best pre THX transfer and (with Jedi) released only 4 years after the movie, I got to imagine, it looks pretty good.
Post
#316504
Topic
Star Wars - The Vintage Edit (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316504/action/topic#316504
Time
Those screens look pretty amazing. However I think any correction from the 2004 colors will never look perfect because a lot of detail was lost in crushed blacks, detail that actually is on the Gout. The colors are accurate but I don't think it's possible for anyone to remove the digital shiny look that flattens everything out. It's like boosting the shadow on a digital photo that turned out too dark. Everything comes out brighter like it should be but the subtle different shades of dark grey areas are all the same. The 2004 versions just don't have the film texture and natural grain which the gout and other versions do.
It's not that I think you're doing a bad job or should stop, it looks like you have made an amazing improvement. I just wonder if LFL is actually going to do a release of the ot that is a competant transfer at all (for any version). If these projects along with the Close Encounters and Blade Runner sets don't embarass them into getting it in gear, I don't know what will.

I'm not sure if the starfield should be completely totally black as the bars. I don't know if this is true but wouldn't all the stars so far away that they aren't visible still contribute a tiny bit of light so that the black space is extremely, 99.9% to total black, dark grey.
Post
#316502
Topic
Why is the GOUT not anamorphic?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/316502/action/topic#316502
Time
I find the 2004 versions unwatchable because of the botched color. I wouldn't mind the 97 versions. The fact that the Gout actually trumps (color and contrast) over a supposedly dvd state of the art restoration should be the most embarassing. The '04 versions look bad on any display.
I've never seen any of the laserdiscs (don't have a player) but I had the anamorphic cowclops v. 2 set. (what kind of a name is cowclops, anyway?) The gout looks much better. Far less digital compression, which makes the '93 video image and all its flaws much clearer.
Could someone explain the blurring to me? Depending on the amount of motion, wouldn't the interlacing completely vary from shot to shot?