RU.08

Sweet, did you have it scanned at 4K?

Some issues:

1336 - bright blob on letters e and b in "Rebellion"
7766 - blob to left of Han’s head.
7786 - dark blob on left of frame.
7792 - dirt to left of Han’s head.

I’ve seen several 35mm prints projected in the last couple of years Mav, as I live closeby to a cinema that screens them quite regularly. The most recent 35mm print I saw was Thunderdome and it didn’t look grainy at all for the most part (some comp shots did). It is my understanding, and I could be wrong, that most film grain is in the camera negative because it has to be fast-exposure film - i.e. shot at 24fps or faster if you want slow motion. Later generations of film, including prints, used longer exposures and more sensitive dyes with finer grain fidelity.

I am genuinely surprised there is such a difference between Star Wars and Empire

poita said:

That is a 38 layer comp vs a three layer comp, plus the empire scene is considerably darker. If you want to compare like with like, look at a well lit interior shot from both films. IB prints have almost no grain, whereas the Kodak stock is considerably grainier.

38 layers? Why?

Sure, as you and I agree SW is much less grainy.

“Like with Like”:

SW
ESB

“Leia with Leia”:

SW
ESB

My question is, is this really how it looked in 1980 or has 36+ years of age on the film stock accentuated the grain?

Right, but my understanding is that most grain is in the camera negative because it had to be shot at 24fps (or up to 120fps for slow motion), whereas later generations were duped using more sensitive film?

Like with like:

Star Wars
Empire Strikes Back

For the benefit of the forum, I understand poita’s Empire scans were done using state of the art equipment that introduces virtually no “scanner noise”. The “blue-yellow” grain in particular is far higher than is visible on Star Wars. I’m curious as to whether it really represents how the Kodak stock looked in 1980 or whether the grain has accentuated itself over time?

But Star Wars has way less grain than that! Did they use a particularly grainy film in the camera negative?

It’s looking very grainy, especially when compared to IB tech scans of Star Wars. I guess it could be in large part due to the blue-cast? Did the print really have that much grain in it when projected in 1980?

Guys we can’t distribute the scan that someone else did and doesn’t want distributed. The 16mm scan is excellent and I would suggest viewing that until we can get our hands on a 35mm print and arrange our own scan.

Very tragic, and I imagine it would have been quite traumatising for the firefighters who performed CPR as well. I can’t imagine. 😦

If you happen to be reading my thread, here is a small gift to you - some unrelated trailers I had scanned (including the X-Men teaser!) Hopefully I can get some more later on, enjoy.

https://vimeo.com/valeyard

Regarding the young man struck by lightning, I found this news story, that is pretty sad!

yotsuya said:

You might want to contact Gigabyte. It probably just requires the same RAID controller. They might have some for instances like this.

Yep, that’s the best place to start. Find out from Gigabyte what your options are. There are a few Gigabyte X99-UD4 motherboards on eBay as well.

Swift S. Lawliet said:

But this bootleg is still interesting, even if it’s unnecessary to this project, since it had 640kbps Dolby Digital audio on a standard DVD.

Something many people though was impossible, most people thought than 448 was the maximum, guess they were wrong.

The DVD specification limits AC-3 tracks to 448kbps. You can go beyond that bitrate with DTS, PCM, or MPEG-2 audio. If your disc has a 640kbps AC-3 track all it means is that it isn’t within DVD specifications, it’s certainly possible (and quite easy) to create such a disc.

Yeah I was gonna say there’s only so much a surge protector can do. Hopefully all the Hard Drives are OK.

I’m very sorry to hear about the damage.

Looks like power’s back on for most residents of the town (according to Mudgee Guardian), but there are 1,716 households still without power.

Blue_Harvest said:

Of course that would be very nice to see (for those are not used to manipulate 35mm reels), unless this take you too much time to do.

Here’s the sample poita posted showing the sountrack on reel 1 of the uk print:
https://mega.nz/#!uUVw1ZhA!z0ochw4-zQ4bMUeyCHPJGaJJvzwkiGVMR9Uruecg0VQ

Yes that’s right, it was censored in Germany on the original release. I guess that proves that Poita’s print really is in German! For anyone interested, here’s a short clip showing the censored cut from the 1984 German CBS Fox VHS: https://mega.nz/#!PxJGQBBI!dhpfWgr2GE_73jj5KY7OOe2AUK6DpMVNaKYk_Scr3ZA

Harmy said:

The best way, I found to make an MKV from a BD with multiple crawl, or seemless branching in general (tested with the official BDs, not this but I’d assume it would be the same) is to import not the m2ts files into the muxing program, but the playlist file corresponding to the version you want.

That’s true, but Makemkv does a better job at joining multiple M2TS files than mkvtoolnix in my experience. Mkvtoolnix gives some error frames at joined points sometimes for some reason (I’m pretty sure it did this on one of my Alien discs, so now I only use MakeMKV to convert .MPLS to .MKV).

Hagdorm said:

RU.08’s suggestion seems to be spot on though. The file is a little smaller, but I couldn’t detect any difference in quality between screenshots, even zoomed in.

That’d be because it’s exactly the same file, but in a different container. The extra size on the BD is mostly just the other crawl, the extras on the disc, and the menus.

Hagdorm said:

Yeah, but I want an MKV as well, lol (I really don’t know why, I just kinda do).

Well I know why I want it, so I can stream it from my PC to my TV. Much more convenient than using a Bluray player that might skip, pause, and do all sorts of nonsense while playing!

Hagdorm said:

Oops. I’d prefer to make an MKV without reencoding, but i’m not sure how.

Just use MakeMKV.

Try Williarob, he’s working on a 4K version.

MrGeekBoi420 said:

Hello there, new poster to this board and thread. I only just heard a few days ago about the Negative1 35mm scan. This seems like a much better alternative than the Harmy Despecialized version.

It’s not perfect, but it is my go-to version for the moment as I prefer it to Harmy’s Despecialized. But that’s not to say I think one is better than the other!

Deloreanhunter12 said:

This is a bit of an unrelated question, but it is pertained to BD-Rebuilder. Is it possible with the program to replace the main video, but keep the menus and everything else in tact?

Yes, if you’re careful. Put the .x24 file in the same folder as the working files, and create a .CMD (batch file) to rename it to the main one and remove the main file. If 00000.mpls is the main file it’d look something like this:

del VID_00000.AVS.264
ren replacementfile.264 VID_00000.AVS.264

Run BD rebuilder, wait for the main movie to extract, then run the CMD file you made. You must do it immediately after it has demuxed and before it has a chance to begin remuxing the file.

We can’t use this version for projects, we can only use it “personally”. Anyway, we could do our own 4K scan sometime and the quality would be much better than the version we’re talking about here. We just have to wait for a print to be available… or find one!

BadCane said:

I’m kind of ashamed right now. I’m a 23 year old and been a fan for some 15-17 years by now and only TODAY I discovered this. I thought they were renamed back in 1997-1999, when the whole Prequel thing came to life.

HA! Don’t feel bad, I’m still learning stuff all the time. Also, the 1997 SE was a film restoration - no matter how bizarre that might sound! Lucas made changes I think partially because he had the opportunity to do so while the restoration was done.

I’m pretty sure you know who it’s from. I’m happy to send it to you if you’re interested. The 16mm scan that’s on Myspleen was done by an OT.com member (that’s probably as much as I should say)! I actually didn’t realise I already had it, I’ve already found ways to “correct” some of the problem frames in avisynth too! 😄

That was swift! I thought that would happen, so I nabbed it quickly. Then I realised I already had it - I have the untrimmed version (same encode, but the mkv has trimmed off the lead-in right at the start of the film, 180 frame total). It’s a decent transfer, but it’d be great if we could do our own 35mm scan sometime.