Downloading the 2.0 SD disc so I can burn it to DVD5 and send it along with the other SD discs to my one year old nephew so he can grow up with the real version of Star Wars.
Thank you Harmy and thank you Chewtobacco for the conversion!
The colors look great, but the last image of Han, Leia, Luke and Chewbacca looks ... soft? The faces look "plasticy" for lack of a better word. Is this what we should expect in terms of detail, or it this just the side effect of resizing/compressing?
Well, the issue with the X0 captures is that the GOUT had already come out when they were finally released, and had become rather irrelevant since the GOUT was a digital copy of the laserdisc master tape.
This is something completely different.
However, I also feel that a very small minority will REALLY want the raw captures. In this case, it should be relatively easy to post a hard drive.
Just sayin.
The complete quote is: T'énerve pas p'tit gars, prends ta pelle et ton seau et vas jouer.
It's when Han Solo says "Watch your mouth or you're going to find yourself floating home" but in the French version translated back into English, he says "Don't get worked up little guy, take your shovel and your pail and go off and play"
- the sentence rolls off the tongue better in French, FYI...
budwhite said:
I can't believe I missed the stereo version either. Thanks a lot hh!
I sampled the new 5.1 70mm the other day it sounds great, the bass is a real joy. But what about the surrounds? Is it all mono surround because it's mostly based on the 93 2.0 mix?
Did the 70mm mix have stereo surrounds way back when? If so, wouldn't it be legitimate to borrow parts of the surrounds from one of the official 5.1 mixes?(Sorry if this been discussed before)
Silent Man said:
I'll be hosting a viewing party this weekend to spread the joy to all of my OT-loving friends who've suffered with the GOUT DVDs thus far. Faces will likely be melted :).
Man, I wish I had a surround sound system to listen to this with!
However, I think my fiancée would kill me - along with the neighbors above me.
Exactly! I feel like whoever translated this film had a lot of fun doing it. It's a bit of a shame that the translations became more "literal" for the later films.
Just two questions: 1) was the grammar mistake (pourrant/ont) fixed for the Ep4 crawl? 2) what are the differences between the different Greedo subtitles?
Sorry to be so dim about the OT in French... I grew up with the original voices, but the French dubs have always fascinated me since I first heard them in the cinema in 97.
What exactly are the differences between the "total French" and Ep4 French? Is it just a change in the crawl and end credits?
PS: this is a bit off-topic but I was just reminded of Yan Solo when, right before shooting Greedo, he says, "Pauvre cave!" - it's one of those weird moments where they completely change what he said...but it works..!
Now, here's what I'm thinking which might explain the difference in patterns throughout the years. The original effect was probably shot on film and telecinéd to videotape, and then filmed off of a tv for the original effect. When they went in to recomposite everything in 97, they skipped the filmed off a tv element and went straight for the original film. The video effect was then added using computers.
Perhaps one should check the moment when the hologram distorts when it's turned on and off and see if the distortion is exactly the same between pre and post 97. It looks like the original effect was created by simply mucking with the tv signal. If the whole tv image was recreated in 97, they would have had to recreate that with cgi.
The hologram effect is pretty simple, IMO. It's just a filmed element off of a television. The image on the television is all black except for the main hologram object (and they probably used mattes around the unused portion of the tv screen to avoid unwanted light spill), and this film fx element is simply superimposed over the main set element. No matting required since the hologram is trancelucent.
The television gives you that look of rows of pixels and the scan line "waves" - whose effect is caused by the difference in frame rates, but can be fine tuned to one's liking by adjusting the shutter on the film camera from the normal 180° to something else. I'm guessing they would have to close the shutter more.
I don't think the frame count should be TOO different. The Mono mix presented here just might need adjusted at the beginning, but that should be it.
At worse there are a couple frames added at each reel change, but even that should be relatively easy to adjust for.
Great videos! Great to see Jan Svankmajer's films being restored. His films should be required viewing by any budding film scholar.
Perhaps a 70mm print...from which to extract the 70mm mix????
EDIT: ah nm, -1 denies any 70mm print.
Rox64 said:
Hi, I just registered here to say thank you, Harmy, you were our only hope to see the theatrical, truly unaltered Star Wars, and now you're uploading a better release! You have said the old v1 release is laughably bad compared with this new release. Can you please take some screenshots of the film frames with the biggest difference in quality and reconstruction? My only problem with v1 was the GOUT shot you used on Mos Eisley right after the encounter between the heroes and four Stormtroopers, but you said you couldn't do anything better...
Sorry if this has been asked before, but how will we able to download this new release? By PM?
Huh, interesting.
Oh, and how are the commentary tracks? Are they interesting? I don't think I've ever heard them...
schorman13 said:
CatBus, I think that sync issue in Jedi is due to the fact that there are two frames missing from Jedi right before the Rebel debriefing scene on the NTSC version. It's not due to the source of the video being PAL. I do plan on syncing the Jedi tracks to the complete version, with all possible missing frames restored (NTSC is missing two frames from PAL, and PAL is missing a single frame from NTSC).
chyron8472 said:
Harmy,
on the DVD version of Star Wars:DeSpec, the whites while onboard the Blockade Runner seem rather hard and with a bit of a yellowish tint (at least in comparison to GOUT and to Adywan's Revisited)
Are you redoing overall color correction with your newer versions, or are you mostly doing tweaks? I really would love it if you made the whites softer during those scenes.
I was curious if you were going to use the new Digital 77 stereo mix instead of the former analog capture on despecialize 1.0 ?
Sorry to hear about the encoding issue. Bummer :(
Also simple in Dvd studio pro. Hmmmm
Yeah, same here in France!
On the apple tv, you can mux a 5.1 AC3 "passthrough" in the mp4 file. While the apple tv won't be able to decode it, it can output it through the optical audio output to be decoded by the stereo receiver.
Of course this is the mac m4v file which is pretty much an MP4 file except for the chapters and the 5.1 passthrough option.
Well, I think there is no one easy answer. I agree that the world is moving towards digital downloads/streaming, but this is because the convenience of this means of distribution outweighs the quality factor videophiles crave. Let's be honest, the average joe does not have a 70foot rear projection set up with a 7.1 surround sound system pumping 500 watts in each channel. Most people have a 32" 40" lcd tv with no stereo hooked up to it. For a lot of people, watching a compressed netflix stream or an itunes downloaded rental is good enough.
Now, of course, this isn't the end all be all. Some people want the highest quality available to them, and bluray offers that. Take a look over at avforums, people will go nuts if the original mono mix of some classic film is not available in uncompressed PCM, but "only" in 448kps dd.
You're right,compression does play a huge part - both are lossy compression. The xvid codec used for the majority of AVI's are usually between 700 and 1000 megabytes a movie (at least the ones from torrent sites anyway) and the MPEG 2 compression used for DVD's can be one hour, 90minutes or even 2 hours per layer (4.7 gigabytes). Most commercial DVD's never use the 2 hour/layer compression scheme as it starts to become very blocky. So as you can see, a 2 hour movie uses a LOT more space on DVDs (especially with the 8 gig dual layer discs that are ubiquitous nowadays) so the quality is much higher than some AVI file.