logo Sign In

Mielr

User Group
Members
Join date
15-Jun-2006
Last activity
27-Dec-2024
Posts
2,805

Post History

Post
#248469
Topic
What's Original '77 and What's Not?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/248469/action/topic#248469
Time
Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen


Whether you buy that or not, it's on the film print in '77, and it's never been on any home release that I know of. This contributes to an unauthentic feeling in that part of the film ... not to mention that folks with 16:9 screens often can't see the subtitles at all.

In the age of 16:9 screens and larger screens becoming commonplace, I think the convention of removing subtitles from the film image and re-entering them in a different, usually much larger, font in the black-bar area should abandoned.
I think the original theatrical sub-titles would be hard to read, which is why they've never made it to home video.

Also, any DVD player with a zoom function should place the sub-titles above the black bars.


Post
#248250
Topic
What's Original '77 and What's Not?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/248250/action/topic#248250
Time
I have the laserdiscs, but I bought the DVDs. I think the DVDs look much better than the laserdiscs, but if you're not a huge Star Wars fan and you don't watch the movies often, then you may want to stick with the LDs (until the day your laserdisc player breaks, that is, and somebody wants $300 to fix it, then you may want to get the DVDs which are going 'out-of-print' on 12/31)
Post
#248239
Topic
Info: Best OUT materials at Lucasfilm?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/248239/action/topic#248239
Time
Originally posted by: THX
For whatever reason, Robert Harris rejected the dye-transfer print as a restoration source.


Just found this on nightofdarkshadows.net (this is why you can't use a dye-tranfer print as a restoration source):

"While Technicolor prints do not telecine well (the density of the dyes block light and you end up with muddy blacks and poor contrasts), its helpful as it can be used as a reference in the film-to-tape transfer color timing session." Darren Gross
Post
#247875
Topic
OUT: PAL or NTSC?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247875/action/topic#247875
Time
I find the 4% PAL speed-up to be very noticeable, especially with films I've seen hundreds of times in NTSC (like the OOT), I not only notice the changes to the music, but the voices sound higher as well.

I guess if you're used to the PAL version of a film, or you're not familiar with a particular film (or it's music soundtrack), the 4% speed-up won't matter as much.
Post
#247373
Topic
Info: Best OUT materials at Lucasfilm?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247373/action/topic#247373
Time
Originally posted by: Vigo
After a very short restauration session:

http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/5425/rebelcel2nxb6.jpg

If the image would have been better (no jpeg compression, higher resolution), the results would have been better. Han has a Pink shirt, because the RED layer lacks a lot of detail due to jpeg compression.

I just rebalanced the RED, GREEN and BLUE layer by hand. No further changes were made, i did not retouch the image. I know that film works in the CMYK domain, but the heavy JPEG compression worked against that.

@Mielr : if you have better scans or more pictures, BRING EM ON!

Vigo, you did a better job than I did:
http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c229/queen1970/rebelceremony.jpg
I don't have any good software on my computer, though.
I have a few other scenes from Star Wars that I'll try to scan in later.

That Widescreen Museum is cool, isn't it?

Post
#247151
Topic
Info: Best OUT materials at Lucasfilm?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247151/action/topic#247151
Time
Originally posted by: zombie84



4) A 4K DI of the Technicolour seperation masters. These I am not sure if they are Lucas' personal collection or in the LFL Archives--perhaps they are the same thing. Scanning each of the seperation masters and then making a Digital Intermediate of them would IMO represent the best possible version of the OOT, practically at IP resolution since they are struck directly from the IP (or IN?), with pretty much perfect colour fidelity and practically no dupe grain. They would undoubtedly be free of any kind of scratches since as far as i know they have never even been used.

That would depend on whether or not the separation masters were done correctly. Unfortunately, some separation masters were made, but not tested (like the ones made for Spartacus, for example) and when the time comes to do a restoration- it is discovered that the separations are unusable.

Also, if preservation/separation masters were made for ESB and Jedi, they would have been made from Eastmancolor/Kodak prints (since Technicolor prints of those films weren't circulated), so the quality of the separations would be affected by the quality of whichever Kodak prints were used (for instance- if the Kodak prints were starting to show any sign of fading, that would be reflected in their separations).

But, I would think that if the fading was just minimal, it could be corrected digitally.

Post
#247077
Topic
First Impressions of the OOT ...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247077/action/topic#247077
Time
Originally posted by: lord3vil
Originally posted by: Mielr
This is an example of film that has 'gone pink':
http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c229/queen1970/rebelcel2.jpg

Interesting. And this is something that doesn't happen to technicolor prints?

Correct. Technicolor dye-tranfer prints use dye rather than unstable chemicals.
This is a cel from a dye-tranfer print of Robin Hood from 1937:
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/oldcolor/technicolor-robinhood2.jpg
The technicolor process is explained on this site, if you're interested:click
Post
#247056
Topic
The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247056/action/topic#247056
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
So your mind is open to the possibility that you will never change your mind?

What are you talking about? Change my mind about what? I just said that art is subjective- you either like it or you don't. I never had to convince myself that the OOT are great films- I only had to see them each one time to love them. I don't need to try to convince myself to like movies I don't find entertaining, because that's impossible. I saw TPM twice, AOTC once and ROTS once. They had their chance to grab me- they blew it.
Post
#247050
Topic
The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga"
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/247050/action/topic#247050
Time
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I understand you guys have all been through this all before at length, but I am still suprised to see how many of you have such a closed mind on this matter.

It has nothing to do with having a closed mind. Art is subjective- you either enjoy it or you don't. I didn't enjoy the prequels, even though I wanted to. If you told me tomorrow that I would never be able to watch the PT again, I wouldn't care because I have no desire to ever see any of them again. But if you told me I would never be allowed to watch the OOT again, I would be devastated.

Post
#246677
Topic
First Impressions of the OOT ...
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/246677/action/topic#246677
Time
Scruffy, I think both you and zombie are on the right track. I also believe that the OOT exists in digital form due to the scanning that had to be done of all the original film elements for the SEs, and it wouldn't be all that tough to re-assemble it for a set of anamorphic DVDs (or hd-dvds, or blu-ray), and I also believe that suitable film elements also exist, despite what Lucasfilm's mouth-pieces say.

I think it will be done, eventually, but I'm not getting myself tied up in knots over it anymore. GL doesn't respect his fans the way he should and that's that. I have the new DVDs, and they will just have to suffice until the day GL changes his mind, when and if that ever happens.