Sign In

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
20-Sep-2006
Last activity
24-Jun-2019
Posts
3,143
Web Site
http://www.hardbat.com/puggo

Post History

Post
#251531
Topic
The Puggo Edition - webpage and screenshots
Time
Unleashing... The Puggo Edition.

What is it? Well, Boba Feta was kind enough to loan me his 4-volume super-8 movie shorts of SW and ESB (yep, the films themselves), so that I could take a crack at tele-cinny-ing (heh) them myself. Well, I've finished capturing the SW frames, and both films' sound. I still have a lot of work to do - synching the sound, and capturing ESB. But I do have some screen shots so y'all can see how it's going.

Like Boba warned on his webpage - it ain't the X0, it ain't even the GOUT, the OOT, the GOOT, the HOOT, gol durn it ain't even a crappy old VHS copy. But it is a different and cool-in-its-own-way slice of original Star Wars footage. There are even a couple of minor tidbits you won't find on any of the other OOTs ... I won't spoil the surprises in store for the future - stay tuned!

I've created a webpage for the project, and also for the unveiling of - PUGGO HIMSELF - he's Jar Jar's Yoda, as you know:

www.hardbat.com/puggo/home.html

Enjoy, let me know what you think. I promise a steady stream of half-baked, barely-worth-mentioning updates, as well as more screen shots, video clips, and technical descriptions of how I am achieving this monumental dip in quality. Ah well, I do think it will be fun for other die-hard SW fans to see both Boba's Super-8 Project and the Puggo Edition of the same films.

Scott
(with thanks to Boba Feta)
Post
#250042
Topic
Favorite Star Wars Movie
Time
Naturally, this isn't exactly an objective audience... after all, this is originaltrilogy.com. Which movies do we suppose people here are going to prefer? If this were prequel.com, the results would likely be reversed.

Now, that said, sure ESB is a good movie with lots of elements. But I don't think it is the classic that Star Wars is. You don't have to be a Star Wars fan to appreciate it as a great movie. Simple classic plot, great characters, believeable settings where the aliens are real folks doing average grunt work, incredible pacing - slow where it should be slow, and most of all ESB suffers the absence of Obi-Wan. Billy Dee Williams just can't make up for the loss of Alec Guiness and Peter Cushing.
Post
#249113
Topic
my memory isn't that bad, is it?
Time
Originally posted by: Sluggo
Bob Wilkins late night "creature features" show? If it had this "lost" shot, then it'd be awesome to see.

http://www.subcin.com/wilkins.html

Bob Wilkins was a mainstay for geeky guys like me on Friday and Saturday nights. I think his show ran for something like 10 years or more. His show was all about B horror/scifi movies, and showed an incredible mix of great unknowns as well as shlocky stuff. I remember when he announced that there was going to be this fantastic film coming out, with special effects like we'd never seen. And he showed clips that he'd gotten from somewhere. This was months before the summer of 77, although I can't say exactly how long before.
Post
#249036
Topic
my memory isn't that bad, is it?
Time
I too thought that I remembered Luke missing with the hook the first time. However, in retrospect, I now believe that I saw this in a sneak preview which was shown many months earlier on the Bob Wilkins late night "creature features" show. I'm certain that the preview shown included the grappling hook scene, so it's reasonable to assume, given all I've read, that THAT is where I saw it, not during the actual viewing of the movie. Of course, I have no proof of that.
Post
#248583
Topic
Will those who hate the SE OT and bought the OOT DVD's..
Time
I'm not throwing it away, even though I don't like it. Why? Because I believe that in 50 years, after GL is long gone, it is the SE that is going to become rare. Sort of like the "new coke-a-cola". Real archivists are going to go back and preserve the original, and it will be funky groups like this that will preserve the various SE's. Wishful thinking? Irrelevant because I probably won't be around to see it. But I'm convinced that's how it will play out in the LONG run.
Post
#248243
Topic
Secret of Santa Vittoria
Time
Anyone ever hear of a preservation of "Secret of Santa Vittoria"? To my knowledge, it was never released on DVD, despite gaining academy award nominations and being one of my all-time favorite movies!

For those of you who might not be familiar with the movie, it stars Anthony Quinn and revolves around a small Italian hill town, where the residents will stop at nothing to save their wine from being taken by the occupying Nazi's near the end of WW2.
Post
#247844
Topic
Your first reaction to Hayden is ROTJ
Time
This question tugs at me on many levels. First, it is wrong that someone would take a classic work of art and change it 20 years later. That's why I resent the SE... it represents an artistically repulsive act. Second, I don't think that the prequels are very good movies, so modifying the OT to make it fit better with the prequels is - backwards! It's like repainting your Porsche to make it match the color of your Ford Gremlin. He ought to go back and redo the prequels so they flow better with the OT (and so they're less silly, but that's another issue).

Frankly, I think the whole problem started when he decided to make Vader be Luke's father. Too coincidental, and too complicated. From that point on, the only way to make sense of everything is to make changes. And in the process, the original Star Wars ends up being changed into a movie that just isn't as good as it was originally.

Now, that said, I watched the SE movies three times in the theatre, each. I didn't like the changes - it was all too painfully clear why the restored bits had been left on the cutting room floor by a younger and more visionary Lucas. But I went again and again because, in spite of that, it's still fun seeing Star Wars on the big screen again after all these years, and being a high school kid again.
Post
#247273
Topic
Anyone Got A Spare 1300 Bucks?
Time
I have a 16mm Workprinter-16. After reading the messages in this thread, I get the impression that such a scan might not be up to the standards people here want. With it, I can only scan at the resolution of a good DV camera (I'm using a Sony TRV-900 camcorder as the camera - you don't actually need to have tape in the camera because the image just gets sent straight to the computer). But it is telecine, frame-by-frame, and the results therefore are easy to edit. I bought it because I was spending a lot of money on 16mm scans at duplication houses... the Workprinter gets WAY better results than any of the transfers I paid to have done (mind you, I never paid for a rank transfer). I use it a lot, so if someone had a good print and if there was any interest in such a scan, I might be interested too.

It's true that it's silent. That's because it runs at 6fps. I capture the audio separately and synch it up later. It can be tedious but it's a lot less difficult than the cleaning would be. In my experience, the biggest problem with the Workprinters is grain. Whereas a rank transfer smooths out grain and scratches with the water immersion, the workprinter just shines a light on the film and the projector scans it. So although the picture is very sharp (presuming you get a good focus), the sharpness can also manifest as more grain, depending on the type of filmstock used. I've had scans turn out gorgeous, and others turn out pretty grainy.

A month ago I did a scan of a 1952 color film of a drum and bugle corps. Watching it on a friend's big screen TV, the colors leap off the screen - really amazing, it looks like it was filmed yesterday. I also have a scan of a table tennis exhibition from 1972, and it looks like an 8mm home movie. Obviously, your mileage may vary.
Post
#247264
Topic
Making our own 35mm preservation--my crazy proposal
Time
It'd be cooler to hear it was 16 mm and not 8 mm (you'd have PM by now), but it's pretty cool that you've found your way here and have joined right in!


Er, I have a 16mm Workprinter too! Anyone have a 16mm print they'd like telecined?
More to the point, would it be worth posting a new topic to bring up the possibility? I haven't been here very long, and I rather assumed that 16mm print(s) had already been transfered by fans. But if not, hey it sounds like it could be fun. I'm not sure I'd want to transfer everyone's 16mm prints, but if someone had a really good one...
Post
#247187
Topic
Making our own 35mm preservation--my crazy proposal
Time
Sure, it would work. But it is very complicated, very expensive, and very difficult to get good results. Not impossible, but not easy, either.


Well, you're probably right. Although I'm not so sure that it would be that expensive. Time-consuming, yes, and I also imagine that most owners of 35mm projectors aren't eager to have some Star Wars fanatic dismantle it.
Post
#247186
Topic
**Coming To Your Screens Summer 2007**
Time
Originally posted by: boba feta
Dude, where were you 6 weeks ago?


Sorry! I just discovered this forum. I never realized how the fan preservation efforts had expanded in the past few years. Seems my old bootlegs have been surpassed many-fold. I'd thought of trying to do a capture of my LD, but now that I've read the XO site, I can see there's no point to my doing that. Your films sound fun, and worth preserving.

Where was I in 1977? I was 17 years old. Saw Star Wars 5 times the week it came out, in 3 different theaters. I'm eternally jealous of anyone who saw it in 70mm. I remember Bob Wilkins showing sneak previews of it several months prior (that's where I think I too saw Luke miss the grappling rope once before catching it). But I digress...
Post
#247135
Topic
**Coming To Your Screens Summer 2007**
Time
I have a Super-8 telecine unit (Workprinter) that does frame-by-frame capture. I'm using it for restoring a bunch of old films owned by the international and U.S. table tennis federations (haven't yet been contacted by the intergalactic table tennis federation). I'd love a shot at these films when your tech is done. And I'd do it for free. sgordon@hardbat.com
Post
#246753
Topic
Making our own 35mm preservation--my crazy proposal
Time
This is my first post to the originaltrilogy forum. Be gentle.

I have a special interest in this thread because I do a lot of 16mm film and obsolete video restoration for various organizations. The idea of restoring a 35mm print is intriguing. It might be worth considering building your own telecine unit. Now before you say "that's nuts", consider what this guy is doing: www.moviestuff.tv. His 16mm telecine units are selling like hot cakes, and they are very simple mods to existing 16mm projectors. All he has essentially done is replace the motor with a much slower one, and added a line out to plug into the mouse port of a computer. That allows the computer to grab the camera images frame-by-frame using existing stop-motion software. In fact, you could even use the existing cinecap software he recommends. The mod to a 35mm projector can't be much harder (heck, maybe that guy could help). It would have to be MUCH cheaper than buying a telecine unit. Then you could fiddle with different cameras, camera settings, lamps/lenses, etc. to get as clean a transfer as you can. It wouldn't be a rank transfer, but it could work, no?