logo Sign In

THX

User Group
Members
Join date
21-Apr-2005
Last activity
11-Dec-2006
Posts
1,263

Post History

Post
#231052
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/231052/action/topic#231052
Time
Originally posted by: Tomland Flash
I still don't understand this - can the available space on a disc always be dedicated to improving the video, or is there a point where it literally makes no difference due to some magic number being reached that I wouldn't know about?
There is such a point: when the length of the movie multiplied by the maximum bitrate allowed by the DVD format produces a figure below the size of the media. However, even when you reach that point, your video is still compressed. On whether it is noticeable or not, opinion is divided.

Grinder, which LD players did you use?
Post
#231034
Topic
The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/231034/action/topic#231034
Time
Yeah, I tried flip-flopping them with no match either.

Thanks to JennyS1138 for posting this article by Steve Daly, which sheds some light on the subject:
originally posted by: JennyS1138, quoting Steve Daly
To be fair, the perfectionism isn’t all coming from Lucas. Fox “has actually pushed us as hard as we’ve pushed them,” says producer Rick McCallum, who’s overseeing the logistics of both the reissue work and the new movies. The suits in LA insisted, for instance, that the incredible opening shot of that humongous ship passing overhead in Star Wars be put back together again from its originial pieces, the better to remove some fine bits of dirt and grain from the scene. “I’ve never argued with a studio about them spending more money than we have. They’ve been unbelievable supportive.”
So we now know it was recomposited, as we suspected.
Post
#230940
Topic
The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230940/action/topic#230940
Time
Thanks for that pretty exhaustive analysis, zombie. I think you are mostly right, but this is how I see it:

1) 1977: original text and starfield, also used on Empire of Dreams and 2006 DVD;
2) 1981: new text and starfield, (probably) also used on all pre-SE home video versions;
3) 1997: 1981 text digitally composited onto 1977 starfield, also used on 2004 DVD.

I think the '06 DVD crawl is the original. I also think that although the PT crawls are generated, the SE crawls used existing optical elements. I think SE-OOT is a little harsh. But if there is an issue with the theatrical authenticity of the '06 DVD, it is with the mix and color correction, both of which date from 1993.
Post
#230742
Topic
The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230742/action/topic#230742
Time
D'oh! Um, yeah - I did see those. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I think the ANH print will match the pre-SE LDs. As I said, I have a vague memory that the starfield changed for the ANH re-release. And I don't think it would've been remade only for the early home versions.

Zion, could you resize one of those film scans to match the video examples?
Post
#230712
Topic
The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230712/action/topic#230712
Time
Okay, so the SE starfield matches the EOD, trailer & '04 DVD, but is different from the SC & DC starfield.

This means the crawl was redone for the SE, as I speculated earlier (since we have two different starfields with the same "ANH" crawl).

Which makes me think the EOD & trailer crawls are original and the starfield was changed (for "ANH") and changed back (for the SE).

It's still possible (however unlikely) that the EOD & trailer crawls is a remake based on a starfield that was new to the SE, and that the original theatrical starfield is either the same as the "ANH" one or different from both.

Confused? You won't be...
Post
#230697
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES) (* unfinished project *)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230697/action/topic#230697
Time
Apologies in advance to Zion, MeBeJedi et al...
Originally posted by: boris
the 4th track was not unique like the other 3, so really it was left, centre, right, surround (which was a combination of the other 3) ???
Originally posted by: boris
When shown in theatres in 1977 SW did not have surround sound equal to 5.1, it wouldn't even be equal to decent 4.1 tracks ???Originally posted by: boris
- and that's the 6-channel soundmix, the other two - well one was mono and the other was simply stereo.
???Originally posted by: boris
My feeling is if you expect to get a full 5.1 mix out of star wars, you should buy the special edition dvd, a 5.1 mix is one of the things they changed and prepared for the special edition.
My feeling is you should not buy the Special Edition DVD under any circumstances (except as a way to get the OUT discs between Sept & Dec 2006).

blitter, welcome; there are several decent audio threads under this topic if you're interested.

Zion, have you considered the '85 mix, which is also available in PCM, IIRC?
Post
#230682
Topic
Info: DC & Faces - Original audio sources (lots of information)
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230682/action/topic#230682
Time
belbucus, thanks for getting back to this, and for bringing useful new information. That Mike Minkler interview certainly does seem to contradict Dave Schnuelle's description. My support for the 4-track master was based on the fact that I don't like the idea of the inauthentic '93 mix or the limiting present in the 35mm print master (despite theatrical authenticity), nor did it seem sensible to have a boom track created in the way Schnuelle describes for the 6-track mix (if he was right, you could more or less recreate this effect at home from the 4-track master anyway). However, from what Minkler says and from your own observations, it looks as if the best option might be 4.1 derived exclusively from the 6-track master. I said above that this would be the most authentic 4.1 mix and it now seems as if it might also be the "best" mix.

Do you have any information regarding the origins of the Laserdisc mixes prior to 1993?
Post
#230457
Topic
The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230457/action/topic#230457
Time
Thanks, Zion.

Bizarre. The DVD, EOD & trailer starfields all look alike (with varying degrees of star visibility). The DC LD one is clearly different, as Zion says. Okay, so the trailer seems to match EOD (but with more star visibility and truer color) - good news, as EOD is generally considered to be from an original film source (does anyone know this for sure?). It's easy to see why the starfield might change for the ANH edition, but baffling that it would change back for the DVD, while keeping the same text.

I can think of two possible explanations:

a) the DVD & EOD crawls are both 2004 recreations and the trailer crawl is taken from the EOD one;

b) the EOD (and trailer) crawl/starfield are the originals, both were changed for the ANH edition, (from which the DC LD was taken), then it was re-composited for the SE from the ANH crawl and original starfield elements.
Post
#230448
Topic
The "original crawl" on the new DVD is NOT the original crawl! Screenshot inside!
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/230448/action/topic#230448
Time
The pre-ANH crawl should be taken from a film source, if it's to be included. From what I can see, it looks like the trailer crawl could be from the same source as the EOD crawl. I wouldn't trust a web trailer for color information, but it looks closer to the original color than the EOD clip, for what it's worth.