logo Sign In

YAREL_RGP

User Group
Members
Join date
2-Jul-2024
Last activity
9-Dec-2025
Posts
62

Post History

Post
#1670477
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

I think it has been discussed somewhere on here mate - though the gist was it is likely a temporary crop for this aspect of the project - or possibly cropped to focus on / examine any potential image issues for the ALI team (or for those they are uploading the images for). It is also worth noting when using any IB Tech print footage it would likely be cropped more tightly before ‘final cut’.

As it is all a WIP (Work In Progress)… many of us simply trust ALI to get this right like they’ve done pretty much everything else so far. 👍

It’s rumored there will be an IMAX release, so if that’s true, could the films be seen in complete frame format?

Post
#1670476
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

oojason said:

NEW SCREENSHOT COMPARISON - AND A NEW VIDEO CLIP - FROM EMPIRE STRIKES BACK

 

ALI…

The colors feel vivid and vibrant, not at all saturated, and the image is quite clean; it’s not the oversaturated and dirty image of the 04SE nor the washed-out look of the 19SE—it’s exactly how it should be.

Post
#1670365
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

DocLathrop said:

You know what’s going to happen in the aftermath? Now you’ll have a few fan efforts using the new restorations to improve the special editions. Basically, the complete inverse of the situation up until now lol

That’s exactly what I’ve been thinking. The special editions have always been there, in HD, with more detail than any official or unofficial release of OUT, but that doesn’t mean they looked good. The 2004 release was scanned at a lamentable, primitive 1080p, with poorly saturated colors that didn’t necessarily look vibrant, bad graduates, and with fake grain. And the 2019 Special Edition, although in 4K with more detail and a cleaner image, looks washed out, especially with the very abusive DNR that eliminated many details, with that static digital fake grain, and almost monochromatic colors. It’s curious, they’ve always been the only high-definition versions of Star Wars used to reconstruct The OUT, but now that The OUT will be restored with a perfect procedure, a large budget, color references, and utmost care, we’re going to have the originals in the highest quality, and the SE is going to be the one that comes off badly this time because of the two previous releases.

Post
#1670257
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

YAREL_RGP said:

That guy with no name said:

YAREL_RGP said:

That guy with no name said:

RM4747 said:

They also had the option of scanning the separation masters, which are pretty much pristine and don’t fade at all, but that’s more work/time/money and apparently the negatives were still salvageable.

They did scan the Separation Masters. And used them as a primary reference for color and fade correction.

They probably scanned the three separation masters in 4K since they were only interested in the color, planning to combine them later and use them as a reference for grading the OCN. But if they did that with the three masters, I think it would have been faster to scan the three separation masters in 8K, combine them, clean them up a bit, and release it. The separation masters together are a literal, identical copy of the OCN, without the extra grain, since they are black and white copies with finer grain, inked with ink. But all in all, what they are doing is incredible: restoring the original from the degraded OCN to the digital realm, this time in good condition, using miraculous techniques, effort, a large budget, and the most modern and refined techniques since the concept of a “digital master” existed for those restorations of classics. We’ve seen The Wizard of Oz, Lawrence of Arabia, and Blade Runner restored for preservation, respecting their legacy, and now it’s Star Wars’ turn.

But even still, they’re second-generation. Right?

That is to say, yes, but you don’t notice it. Being black and white films, their grain is finer than that of a 1970s color film. In fact, when YCM Labs made their corrected IP, which was used as the master for the 97SE, ultra-fine grain color films already existed. Therefore, in 2004 they wouldn’t have needed to use OCN to restore it so poorly in digital, since they had a perfect print, a literal copy of the negative without necessarily worse quality for being second generation, and with the SE additions and changes that George liked so much.

If this were true, they’d always use the seps and not risk wear on the negative.

While they’re an extremely high quality second-gen copy, they’re still going to have some degree of generational loss…

George is the same one who has insisted on using the negative whenever possible; that doesn’t change the fact that the separation masters together are a literal copy of the OCN. Ted Gagliano states: “You know the original negative will fade, so you can turn to the separation masters; it’s the record of what it’ll look like and it’ll last forever. So the negative you make off your YCMs should be just as good as the original negative.”

Post
#1670254
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

That guy with no name said:

YAREL_RGP said:

That guy with no name said:

RM4747 said:

They also had the option of scanning the separation masters, which are pretty much pristine and don’t fade at all, but that’s more work/time/money and apparently the negatives were still salvageable.

They did scan the Separation Masters. And used them as a primary reference for color and fade correction.

They probably scanned the three separation masters in 4K since they were only interested in the color, planning to combine them later and use them as a reference for grading the OCN. But if they did that with the three masters, I think it would have been faster to scan the three separation masters in 8K, combine them, clean them up a bit, and release it. The separation masters together are a literal, identical copy of the OCN, without the extra grain, since they are black and white copies with finer grain, inked with ink. But all in all, what they are doing is incredible: restoring the original from the degraded OCN to the digital realm, this time in good condition, using miraculous techniques, effort, a large budget, and the most modern and refined techniques since the concept of a “digital master” existed for those restorations of classics. We’ve seen The Wizard of Oz, Lawrence of Arabia, and Blade Runner restored for preservation, respecting their legacy, and now it’s Star Wars’ turn.

But even still, they’re second-generation. Right?

That is to say, yes, but you don’t notice it. Being black and white films, their grain is finer than that of a 1970s color film. In fact, when YCM Labs made their corrected IP, which was used as the master for the 97SE, ultra-fine grain color films already existed. Therefore, in 2004 they wouldn’t have needed to use OCN to restore it so poorly in digital, since they had a perfect print, a literal copy of the negative without necessarily worse quality for being second generation, and with the SE additions and changes that George liked so much.

Post
#1670250
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

That guy with no name said:

RM4747 said:

They also had the option of scanning the separation masters, which are pretty much pristine and don’t fade at all, but that’s more work/time/money and apparently the negatives were still salvageable.

They did scan the Separation Masters. And used them as a primary reference for color and fade correction.

They probably scanned the three separation masters in 4K since they were only interested in the color, planning to combine them later and use them as a reference for grading the OCN. But if they did that with the three masters, I think it would have been faster to scan the three separation masters in 8K, combine them, clean them up a bit, and release it. The separation masters together are a literal, identical copy of the OCN, without the extra grain, since they are black and white copies with finer grain, inked with ink. But all in all, what they are doing is incredible: restoring the original from the degraded OCN to the digital realm, this time in good condition, using miraculous techniques, effort, a large budget, and the most modern and refined techniques since the concept of a “digital master” existed for those restorations of classics. We’ve seen The Wizard of Oz, Lawrence of Arabia, and Blade Runner restored for preservation, respecting their legacy, and now it’s Star Wars’ turn.

Post
#1670083
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

Broom Kid said:

Well, it took 8,306 days (March 10 2003 - December 5 2025) but this site’s goal has been finally confirmed.

How’s that feeling, folks?

Imagine if this site was created 20 years ago for this moment, it’s crazy, this has really taken a long time, and I even feel excited even though I arrived here a year ago, but seeing the greatest trilogy of all time in the highest quality and in the cinema is an impossible dream come true

Post
#1669994
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

RM4747 said:

Clearly not, because the color grading on all previous home media releases has been way off.

First of all, if those releases look bad it’s because they didn’t use color references, not because they didn’t have
any, the 2004 release looks awful because George was out of his mind, and the 19SE looks like that because they brought in the colorist from The Mandalorian to grade the trilogy according to the saga’s new style: dark, dry, monochromatic, and cold, unfortunately, and using a base from the canceled 2012-14 3D release, from which they abused DNR, removing details in many places and making many shots look blurry. But they must have color references.

The separation masters are generally made from the raw negative, so those wouldn’t be color graded. Only the interpositive and later is color graded.

So what? Even if the separation masters come from an unaltered OCN that hasn’t undergone color grading, they’re still a better color sample than any other material. While they may not have the colors George envisioned in 1977, they still provide proof of how it looked on the OCN before degradation. And nobody’s stopping them from using these masters as a great reference for this new restoration. Even if they don’t have George’s personal Technicolor copy with the graded colors seen in theaters, the 1997 SE master also works, because this master used the private copy as a color reference. And many on this forum can attest that Star Wars has never looked like Star Wars since that premiere way back in 1997.

Post
#1669903
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

Broom Kid said:

That Patreon post just reeks of B.H’s brand of B.S. It’s pretty clear through the way he’s writing that he “found out about this” the same way everyone else did - via the initial leaks that first happened on the YouTube. Someone musta shot him those details on the low (of course they did, rule #1 of having a secret is telling someone you’re not supposed to).

Everything else in that post is… I don’t know that he’s just making stuff up whole-cloth, but he’s definitely embellishing a great deal on what happened and when it happened. I think he’s simply betting that nobody who is paying him money to talk about home video in 2025 is going to either know, or be in a position to know, that he’s fluffing himself, LOL.

But the big tell is that he seems to have no real idea what the timeline on this was, and keeps talking about it like it’s way more recent than it really was. The whole bit about him tying all this together in his mind (a regular Pepe Silvia here) upon hearing about the BFI screening is the giveaway. He seems to legit believe that screening and this restoration (which began YEARS AGO) are inexorably linked, and that the former is key to the latter.

He’s laying out a line of bull for people who value the idea of being an insider so much they’re willing to pay him a monthly fee to feel like they have a friend in the industry (he takes care to spell out how connected he is, don’t he). He doesn’t know any more than anyone that’s been keyed into this leak from the beginning. But there’s worth in convincing people he does, so he’s going to do that.

I’ll give him this, he’s done a really good job at parlaying being “the face” of DVD collecting in its heyday into an ongoing hustle all the way into the UHD era. He’s ridden the decline of physical media as well as any of his peers ever did. But if you gotta dedicate 3-4 paragraphs to reminding people that you know people, it’s doing the opposite of what you want it to do. These aren’t the days where bonus feature teasers got Hall-H panels by themselves, and it hasn’t been that for a decade.

Thank you, it’s always good to clear up doubts and expose the lies others spread to get attention. Because let’s think about it, Disney must have a very complete record of how the films looked. They have their own interpositives, some more degraded than others, which was the reason they went back to the OCN in 1994 to make the Special Edition. But some must be in good enough condition to retain the color, like a Technicolor copy straight from the OCN, such as George’s private copy. Or perhaps they don’t have to go that far; they could use the separation masters or the YCM masters and scan them as a reference file. Just because Disney allowed the BFI screening doesn’t mean they were interested in that copy. Lucasfilm will have more copies of the film in color in their vault, even if they’re generations removed from the negative, and they’ll only use the color from those copies as a reference to colorize the highest quality material, which is the OCN. But they don’t depend on collectors who own rare copies for million-dollar projects because they already have all the material that we here would sell our souls to own.

Post
#1669570
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

Most of the VFX were done in the 8-perf VistaVision format, which is higher resolution than standard 4-perf 35mm.

The notes mentioned that the VistaVision VFX shots are being scanned in 8K, all of the standard 35mm is being scanned in 6K.

In this case, it’s a restoration with consistent and meticulous quality; the 35mm is perfect for 6K, and the larger VistaVision is ideal for 8K.

Post
#1669225
Topic
STAR WARS: EP IV 2004 <strong>REVISITED</strong> ADYWAN *<em>1080p HD VERSION NOW IN PRODUCTION</em>
Time

adywan said:

I have tried posting this numerous times now and everywhere i’ve uploaded it, it has instantly been blocked. My only option was to upload it to google drive. I don’t know how long this will last due to the bandwidth restrictions , but it was my only option. You can view the preview or download the clip to see it in better quality ( which is what i would recommend )

If you want to prevent your video from being blocked due to copyright issues, add this to the YouTube description. (Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. No copyright infringement intended)

Post
#1669206
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

MORC said:

One thing I’ve been thinking about this restoration is: How are they going to handle the international dubs? For example, are they simply going to hire a Brazilian studio to make a new dub (as the special edition versions we have probably won’t fit well) or are they going to restore the old Herbert Richers dub somehow?

Disney maintains its own archive of every dub created for its films. For example, in 1997, when the Special Edition was released in Spain, 20th Century Fox commissioned the dubbing of the new scenes using the existing dub as a base. To do this, they first had to digitize the dub so it could be played on a DTS CD and then combine it with the new dubbed scenes. However, the dub from the unmodified version was still present, albeit in analog format. What Disney would have to do is re-digitize each dub for this restoration, since, as I’ve already mentioned, the changes for the Special Edition were made and applied digitally. It will be difficult to re-digitize each European dub, the Asian ones, and perhaps the Latin American one, but digitally they won’t have to modify anything, just clean them up until they sound like new, as they’ve done with previous releases (except for the Castilian Spanish dub, because we continue use the DTS 5.1 DVD track in 2025 thanks to Disney and Divisa Films).

Post
#1669091
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

oojason said:

NEW SCREENSHOT COMPARISON - AND A NEW VIDEO CLIP - FROM RETURN OF THE JEDI

 

ALI…

God, I want to share my thoughts, and this can’t be ignored, but look at that level of quality. ALI is proving to be technological magic. Initially, I raised an eyebrow in concern when I read that this software extracts all the grain, fixes the underlying image, and then adds it back in. Even though they claim that not a single detail is lost, I was still worried, knowing that official Star Wars releases are usually disappointing and always seem to do something to ruin them. Here, they’re simply doing something unbelievable. If this is the level a 35mm film from the '70s and '80s can actually offer, imagine what we’ve possibly missed from other celluloid productions released on UHD. A while ago, I saw the new remaster of Jaws, and I couldn’t believe it; it looked PERFECT. The quality and the grain were exactly what this production was meant to showcase. But now I’m wondering if the ALI process would make it look even better.

Post
#1668997
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

That guy with no name said:

Mocata said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

JadedSkywalker said:

I’m really curious as to where they will get the original colors from 1977, 1980 and 1983 and to know they are accurate.

What references do they have. I’m somewhat skeptical because Lowry messed them up twice.

I don’t think Lowry “messed them up”. The DVDs and BDs almost certainly looked as George wanted them.

He just really loves magenta.

Which is odd, considering he oversaw and approved the gorgeous 1997 SE color grade lol…

The original negative was so faded that when it came to making the IP that would be the basis of the SE, they couldn’t afford to “experiment” with the colors that could be achieved with analog color correction; it was either have color again or never finish and end up completely wearing out the OCN until it was too late. With digital technology, George had the luxury of doing it, but for the 97 SE they had to be sure with what they had.

Post
#1668926
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

 
UHD…

This is one of the few shots that made me say, “UHD is far better than HD04.” While it’s obvious that 4K crushes the terrible 2004 transfer, it wasn’t a job that met modern viewing standards, with its horrible monochrome colors in HDR (I don’t know how it looks in Dolby Vision) and excessive DNR. Now we’ll have a true remaster, and it’s from the original, no less.

Post
#1668762
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

That guy with no name said:

YAREL_RGP said:

That guy with no name said:

YAREL_RGP said:

Detail: ALI…

 
Detail: UHD…

Well, it’s important to note that this shot was digitized in 2K in 1997 to add the rope holding Han, so the UHD not only includes that shot with a clearly lower resolution, but also suffers from excessive DNR for the 3D conversion, which caused the image to lose detail.

Yeah, the point of the comparison is that this isn’t sourced from the UHD. Or you’re right, it would also have quality loss. Also good to note that the 97 filmouts also had fake digital grain added on top to disguise the new CG! So yeah, doubly worse…

I don’t know why you say “digital fake grain was added.” This shot was scanned, digitized, had CGI added, and was reprinted. If there’s supposedly more grain, it’s because of the reprinting. Although, back then, films had very fine grain, so no detail was lost when reprinting a film a second time. In the case of the enhanced shots in Star Wars, they look “worse” because they were rendered in 2K.

No, they had fake grain added onto them aswell… even in '97.
https://youtu.be/RMzif1D0nyA

Well, I think it refers more to the completely computer-generated shots, like the CGI shots of the Battle of Yavin, the CGI arrival on Bespin, among others, but the existing shots that were altered already had grain, and when reprinting, the natural grain of the new film did its thing.

Post
#1668634
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

That guy with no name said:

YAREL_RGP said:

Detail: ALI…

 
Detail: UHD…

Well, it’s important to note that this shot was digitized in 2K in 1997 to add the rope holding Han, so the UHD not only includes that shot with a clearly lower resolution, but also suffers from excessive DNR for the 3D conversion, which caused the image to lose detail.

Yeah, the point of the comparison is that this isn’t sourced from the UHD. Or you’re right, it would also have quality loss. Also good to note that the 97 filmouts also had fake digital grain added on top to disguise the new CG! So yeah, doubly worse…

I don’t know why you say “digital fake grain was added.” This shot was scanned, digitized, had CGI added, and was reprinted. If there’s supposedly more grain, it’s because of the reprinting. Although, back then, films had very fine grain, so no detail was lost when reprinting a film a second time. In the case of the enhanced shots in Star Wars, they look “worse” because they were rendered in 2K.

Post
#1668387
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

Detail: ALI…

 
Detail: UHD…

Well, it’s important to note that this shot was digitized in 2K in 1997 to add the rope holding Han, so the UHD not only includes that shot with a clearly lower resolution, but also suffers from excessive DNR for the 3D conversion, which caused the image to lose detail.

Post
#1668385
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

That guy with no name said:

Hey guys, I’m not trying to “gotcha” anybody, but I think that 4K77 is just the UHD, but color timed and regrained! And these two sources were created almost 40 years apart! TN1 are such hoaxers omg.

Damn, it was about answering him, not humiliating him.

Post
#1667323
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Do we really think George cares? He did in fact release the OUT on disc, just lazily and cheaply. And he has approved screenings of OUT prints. I think it’s more he never wanted to spend the millions to restore them, given they’re not his preferred version. If someone else spends the money, which Disney appears to be, I doubt he’d care so long as his preferred versions also remain available.

One might think that although George detests the OUT version and didn’t want to invest anything in that version but did in the SE version, he allows the original to be seen if you find a way to do so on your own, or even if someone restores the OUT version, he doesn’t care as long as they maintain the SE version. This is a new perspective that may be true. George could easily think, “Hey, I’m not going to release this version because I don’t like it and I’m not going to invest in it, but if someone wants to, go ahead.”

Post
#1666684
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

I still find it strange that the VistaVision intermediate film hasn’t been scanned at 8K. I don’t know if 6K is really that good, because even though VistaVision is high quality, how comparable is it to a 65mm film to warrant scanning it at 8K?

Post
#1666228
Topic
STAR WARS: EP IV 2004 <strong>REVISITED</strong> ADYWAN *<em>1080p HD VERSION NOW IN PRODUCTION</em>
Time

Hi Adywan, I know that among your sources you are using a 2011 Blu-ray downscaled to 720p and upscaled with Topaz AI to 1080p, and the 2020 UHD Blu-ray for scenes and details that look better, but recently a completely new and restored version was leaked using the OCN, without abusive and poorly done DNR as in UHD Blu-ray and with a much higher resolution and details. We know that all of your work on ANH and ROTJ so far has been with the previous sources, but if these versions were to come out in 2027, would you use them to improve your edition? In my opinion the news is quite hard for your situation, since you have had to work hard to eliminate static grain in the UHD Blu-ray, only for a version with the correct grain and much more detail to come out now. (Obviously this is incredible news since it’s a leak from the OUT and not a renewed SE, I say this from your position when working on Revisited)

Post
#1665944
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

timdiggerm said:

I also wonder if they won’t do a purist version (original effects) and a nicer-looking version (original but recomposited effects), with the latter being what gets released in theaters.

We were talking about this in TheStarWarsTrilogy forums in the 50th anniversary section, we fans feel that there will never be a so to speak “definitive version”, there will always be criticism about the grain, quality, audio, color, etc., so we think that the original versions should be released in theaters, what was seen in theaters at the time, but in UHD Blu-Ray like Ridley Scott they should release apart from OUT, the SE from 1997, and the recomposed OUT which was an option that like you I proposed. SE can boast that they recomposed effects but there are not that many recomposed, and they were done in 2K, then in 2004 for TESB and ROTJ they recomposed things but in poor 1080p, they should release a completely recomposed version of the special effects in 6K/8K, be it laser shots, vehicles, creatures, backgrounds and if you want even the transitions using the original elements without resorting to the good transitions optically recomposed by Pacific Titles, nor the original composite transitions they are using for this new leaked restoration.

Post
#1665941
Topic
⭐ Star Wars' <strong>50th anniversary</strong> in 2027 ⭐ | Your hopes and expectations <em>(if any)</em>...
Time

Broom Kid said:

oojason said:
They could be in indicator towards a physical media release (or large-scale internal archival project) - rather than just a DCP for a theatrical run for the 50th anniversary. I do hope we get to see some more of those kind of videos.

I think the dead giveaway this was always going to have some sort of physical release (whether it’s Disney doing it or they license it to a label like Criterion) - even before the official 50th announcement so early - is that they’re working on an Atmos mix next to the theatrical audio restorations.

I’ve heard the suggestions that it could be an internal archival project BUT an Atmos remix nulls all that out. You’d only be doing one of those if you’re planning on a big release, theatrical AND home, otherwise it wouldn’t make any sense to do at all.

I think in theaters we’re going to be able to hear that new atmos track that seems like it’s literally going to remix all the original audio elements, and when it comes out on UHD Blu-ray, there will be options for every theatrical audio track.