logo Sign In

Red Dwarf

User Group
Members
Join date
1-Jan-2015
Last activity
21-Oct-2015
Posts
13

Post History

Post
#793955
Topic
team negative1 - star wars 1977 - 35mm theatrical version (Released)
Time

That is one reason. Another similar one is saccadic masking.

When eyes are moving, the brain discards certain images. I just quickly looked from the left to the right. I saw the window on my left and the chair to my right, however in the middle of that pan I was effectively blind.

My brain knew my eyes were moving and would have no idea what stable information, so discarded that. When the video game camera moves, my brain is not informed and so fails to discard.

Post
#793945
Topic
team negative1 - star wars 1977 - 35mm theatrical version (Released)
Time

I have to disagree with your point a little bit.

Obviously you are correct, if the human eye can only resolve 4K, then a 4K and 8k image would be indistinguishable, the eye is the bottleneck. However, in my personal experience, this isn't quite true.

I can't play video games, whenever I try I get horrible headaches. I searched around and found out that the reason for this is the camera movement in a game. In the real world when I run, a lot of the images my eyes see are shakey or blurry... However my brain filters these useless images out.

When I play a video game however, this doesn't happen. Every jump, run, camera shake, motion blur, it is all pumped from the game, into my brain without being filtered. Ten minutes later I have a headache and need to rest.

That is a situation where the bottleneck for real events is different that the bottleneck when receiving images on a screen.

Or something like Cloverfield, the camera shake caused some people to become nauseous in the cinema. However those people could probably ride a bike on a bumpy road without a problem.

I have no idea why this happens and it seems completely counterintuitive, but the brain must be handling certain things differently.

Post
#771940
Topic
team negative1 - star wars 1977 - 35mm theatrical version (Released)
Time

I'm a bit surprised that the 35mm print would have less detail than the blu. Yes the blu came from a better source, but on the other hand the 35mm print would have been projected onto a massive cinema screen without complaints.

Are there any comparison pictures showing the difference between the Blu and -1 handling fine details?

Post
#761393
Topic
team negative1 - star wars 1977 - 35mm theatrical version (Released)
Time

Out of curiosity, why do you wish people to experience Star Wars and Jedi in a restored way first?

Is it just a practical decision based on the state of the reels you have, or an artistic choice? I.e. Wars and Jedi both have very flashy, effects driven endings, Empire less so, so those two are not suitable fo a grind house release.

Post
#743949
Topic
Team Negative1 - The Empire Strikes Back 1980 - 35mm Theatrical Version (Released)
Time

Hi,

I just finished watching the grindhouse release and it was wonderful! It really took me back, I remember as a child watching a film, during the first week it was pristine, then on my second viewing a week later I noticed a few specs of dust, then on my third viewing I noticed that more had joined. This doesn't bother me, I see it more as a physical history of the life of the print. 

I do have one question though. Will the finished release be physically cleaned? I assume you will be using software to paint away the dirt, but will there be any attempt to physically get some of the dirt off the print beforehand?