Well, you know the old saying, around here:
Pfft, that’s not a contraction, it’s just evidence that Greedo’s species is more resistance to blaster shots than humans! Also it explains why Han shot first - he knew Greedo would recover quickly, but if Greedo shot him he would have died. 💀
Wait - did they keep the original 1977 subtitles for the Greedo scene, but make new subtitles that didn’t match the originals for the Jabba scene?! That’s kind of hilarious.
Ha! Nice catch. The font and placement are correct, but indeed the size of the font has been reduced in the Jabba shot. I guess it would have come out correct if they cropped/masked the scene a little more. So who knows maybe it was intended for different cropping then what ended up in the release?
Wow! Greedo really does shoot first!
I synced my rips to capablemetal’s project involving the cinema dts which I believe is probably the “GOUT” standard for the 97se. So I guess his rips are what I would sync to.
Coincidently poita sent us both the same part to review, I’ve already sent him my thoughts and I don’t want to bias your or anyone else’s responses so I’ll leave you to gaze your eyes upon the preview un-abided. 😉
It’s not syncing that I’m worried about I just want to see a straight transfer with no dropped frames that is from a 1997 version.
Yeah sorry I edited my post to clarrify, that wouldn’t be suitable as it has been “sync’ed to the Cinema DTS files”. I’m nabbing Jetrell’s Japanese rip… but ideally I’d like an unmodified US Laserdisc rip as well. I know there are some Chinese DVD rips but those aren’t suitable either as their origin is unknown, they may come from territorial telecines done after 1997 for example.
Can anyone tell me which is the best quality Laerdisc sourced rip of the 1997SE? I need one for comparative purposes, I already have the “high quality” TB release that is found on Myspleen. But that’s from a territorial broadcast and I would like a 1997 LD version for comparison. I’m looking for a “raw rip” not one that was synced to another version.
Thanks!
If anyone can help with the purchase of the print dbear is looking at please speak up now - the deadline is today. It’s in great condition and from a reputable seller.
Not at all, it’s a fantastic print and I hope some kind people may be interested!! If anyone can donate/pledge $100+ to secure a true classic (on IB Technicolor!) please send dbear a message as it is urgent, or this opportunity my pass us by.
I already have access to a much better print of Pinocchio.
I’m guessing 1985-1993, which roughly matches up with “cold storage for 25 years until present”. So basically it was approx five years of unknown storage, eight years of cold storage, another couple years of unknown storage, and then another 25 of cold storage. So maybe six or seven years of fade, depending on how it was treated during those other years… which from the looks of it, was pretty good treatment as well.
17C isn’t cold storage. So basically - 1980-85 unknown, 85-93 in archival storage, to a collector for a couple of years, and then into cold storage until it was sold.
@CatBus it’s not a reprint, it’s an original 1980 print! 😄
An IB Tech print cannot block 100% of the projector light at normal projection light levels, there are no true blacks in a cinema, so if you feel that adjusting black levels to be lower than the black levels in a cinema, then pretty much all restorations I’ve seen so far would be revisionist under that definition.
Good masking in the cinema compensates for this. The experience I have in my favourite cinemas is a world away from what I get at the “everyday cinemas”. It’s difficult to classify them, as some of the cinemas that have no screen masking and letterbox their projections are chains, and some are independent. In any case though, when the cinema is properly darkened with proper screen masking the black level being a dark grey is no longer an issue. I’m sure you agree, but I want to point that out to others here.
When it comes to colour, unless you are sitting in a cinema with the print, and doing your colour adjustments based on that, and revisiting them again by watching the print etc. then the grade is going to be revisionist, from a certain point of view.
And it really depends on the movie too. Some films are consistent with their black level and colour timing throughout, and others aren’t, and others are 95% consistent and there may be just one or two shots that are noticeably different. That’s my experience anyway.
And not only that, but some films look GREAT on 35mm, and others looked shocking. To give an example, I recently saw Batman 1989, and, The Untouchables 1987. I was absolutely stoked to see both. Batman was amazing - it looked great, and if memory serves me right what I was saying about consistency it may have had just 1 or 2 shots that looked a little off in colour timing/contrast levels. The Untouchables looked like utter shit, flickering throughout the entire movie. Yellow skin-tones. It was horrible, I never in my life want to see the film look like that again - it well deserves a better presentation than the 35mm theatrical prints afforded it. And yes, flicker is present in most films - but sometimes there’s none at all, and usually there isn’t a lot of it, and usually it’s not very obtrusive. (edit to add) and in case anyone is wondering this was in cinema with proper masking, and both films I saw in the same cinema.
Trying to get to the original theatrical presentation colours is a very tricky exercise.
I think that’s in vein. It’s not what people want, they want the film to look and feel the same, but they certainly don’t want flicker and other inconsistencies inherent in the original prints. And they certainly don’t want to see what The Untouchables prints looked like transferred to digital - you would definitely need to de-flicker the film and then do some modest colour timing to makes the presentation more palatable. It only makes sense to talk about 100% theatrical accuracy when the film’s theatrical presentation itself was 100%. Which is often the case actually, but just as often there are issues like colour timing, inconsistent black levels, flicker, and with IB prints as they are dye-transferred channel misalignment.
Yep they would have been contact prints made from the film-out negative.
I reviewed that section myself, and while it’s unbelievably grainy I saw no evidence of ghosting. 😃
One thing to remember is that Star Wars was a rush-job, with budget problems and a lot of people working in the SFX crew that had never worked on a feature film before, and in some cases, doing things never attempted before.
I don’t know if I would agree that it was “rushed”. GL made the decision to use a lot of really short special effects shots, matte paintings in particular, and made the creative decision to get a lot of mediocre quality matte paintings for short shorts where “no one will notice the bad quality” instead of ordering just a handful of really great quality matte paintings which is what every other film-maker would have done at the time. No one else would have ordered matte paintings to use for just one shot lasting up to 4 or 5 seconds. I’m sure the artists hated it, after all matte paintings are an artwork and good ones take quite a lot of time and effort to get right.
…but not your enemies. 😉
it’s probably something like host news.free-usenet.com and port 443. They’re probably not the best free provider, I suggest you do a search for a good free provider.
Isn’t that on Usenet? Which is a paid thing? I’ve heard it come up every now and again and I still don’t understand how it works
You can use a free provider like free-usenet.com, the only catch is the download rate is limited to 1Mbps so it will take a while to download.
You’ll probably have to wait until it makes its way onto public trackers, at least as far as the apparently-forever-closed-for-invites MySpleen goes.
I’m pretty sure someone will upload it to alt.binaries.starwars soon, so just keep an eye on that if you aren’t on the Spleen.
Nice to hear those updates, but they belong in this thread. 😃
He must have been auditioning for Terminator 2.
Greedo and Han!
I think it’s still on track, the main delay was the scanner malfunctioning and needing repairs as talked about in the Special Edition thread. The new ESB print isn’t going to be scanned right away. But its purchase has likely reduced poita’s spending money for a while meaning more donations will certainly help to get this done!
To poita:
To everyone else: If you’re reading this but haven’t donated - please do!! Here are the donation links:
https://paypal.me/poit
bitcoin:13QDjXjt7w7BFiQc4Q7wpRGPtYKYchnm8x
Will be interesting to see what they do with any official Blu-ray* release if Cameron ever cares to get it done instead of planning half a dozen Avatar sequels.
That’s the least of your worries… Cameron is about to defile the Terminator series with yet more sequels that will likely make Kingdom of the Crystal Skull look like a decent Indy film!