The average person can't tell the difference, and anyone who could tell the difference isn't buying their TV at Sears in the first place.
I don't know of such a list, but I'd imagine it would be hard to mix and match as each editor has his (her?) own motivations and goals in why they did their edit the way they did. You'd have to just watch the various edits and decide for yourself what's the ideal combination.
"Biography" = created by someone else
"Autobiography" = created by you about yourself.
Just wait. Years from now when Lucas is dead, you'll see at least three "unauthorized biography" books come out telling what it was REALLY like to work with him.
Region 2 PAL. When you find something Region 1 NTSC, then we'll get excited.
adywan said:Looks like i have a lot of catching up to do and a lot of reading. So i'll try and reply to everything a bit later
Short version: Big debate about the logistics of Star Destroyer movement and trajectories. Nothing was really solved.
vbangle said:Asteroid-Man said:Wait what's the difference between DVD5 and DVD9?
You mean other than taking two seconds of your own time to Google it and find out for yourself?
DVD-5 is a standard DVD with the capability of holding 4.7 GB of data. A DVD-9 is a dual layer DVD capable of holding 8.5 GB of data.
Thus the DVD9 version will have a higher bitrate, the better the bitrate the better the quality of the image.
In think he means in reference to ANH:R.
The DVD-5 and DVD-9 are the same as far as the film itself. The 9 has some more bonus material - a couple of extra deleted scenes (Alderaan destruction concept and Luke & Biggs), isolated music track and FX breakdown comparison. The 9 also has better video quality but you have to have a huge high-end HDTV to see the difference.
Purist Edition, by contrast, only comes in a DVD-5, has no bonus material at all - not even menus - and has some changes to the film as mentioned earlier in the thread.
Janskeet said:I have never owned a laserdisc player, but it sounds like a primative form of DVD. It sounds like a better format compared to VHS to me because it contains data digitally on a disc so it doesn't degrade over time like film in a VHS tape. I wonder why VHS won the format war over laserdisc? Can people with more knowledge explain the pros and cons of VHS and laserdisc?
Short version, yeah, LD is the basis of what DVD is now. Same basic technology, just in an earlier form.
As for the "format war" of VHS vs LD, at the time, LD couldn't record. CD-Rs were just starting to evolve, and they were limited to computers.
From a technical quality standpoint, video in those days was measured in horizontal lines of resolution, since everything was limited to what is now considered "480i" vertical resolution. Under that standard, VHS was about 240 lines where LD and S-VHS were around 400. This was back when widescreen and HDTV were still just ideas being experimented with in R&D labs.
S-VHS was a hybrid of LD quality recordable on VHS-equivalent tapes, but the tapes weren't electronically backwards compatible with standard VHS machines - you had to have an S-VHS machine to play it. You could put an S-VHS tape in to a regular VHS deck, but the picture would be all bright and streaky. VHS tapes could go into S-VHS decks without a problem though, but S-decks were considered "high end" at the time, just like LD.
S-VHS and LD worked on the same basic premise - video quality was improved by keeping the brightness and color portions of the signal separate, combining them only at the last second in the TV. This eliminated cross-talk and interference between the signals. That's where the S-video connectors started, and the Y-Pb-Pr (Red-Green-Blue) connection on DVD players now is an extension of that concept.
The public has always had this weird love-hate relationship with home video technology. They want something better than what they've got but once they learn that it will cost them money, they change their minds. Blu-Ray is the first time the concept of "new"="expensive" is finally sinking in, but it's still slow going.
Janskeet said:I have never owned a laserdisc player, but it sounds like a primative form of DVD. It sounds like a better format compared to VHS to me because it contains data digitally on a disc so it doesn't degrade over time like film in a VHS tape. I wonder why VHS won the format war over laserdisc? Can people with more knowledge explain the pros and cons of VHS and laserdisc?
Short version, yeah, LD is the basis of what DVD is now. Same basic technology, just in an earlier form.
As for the "format war" of VHS vs LD, at the time, LD couldn't record. CD-Rs were just starting to evolve, and they were limited to computers.
From a technical quality standpoint, video in those days was measured in horizontal lines of resolution, since everything was limited to what is now considered "480i" vertical resolution. Under that standard, VHS was about 240 lines where LD and S-VHS were around 400. This was back when widescreen and HDTV were still just ideas being experimented with in R&D labs.
S-VHS was a hybrid of LD quality recordable on VHS-equivalent tapes, but the tapes weren't electronically backwards compatible with standard VHS machines - you had to have an S-VHS machine to play it. You could put an S-VHS tape in to a regular VHS deck, but the picture would be all bright and streaky. VHS tapes could go into S-VHS decks without a problem though, but S-decks were considered "high end" at the time, just like LD.
S-VHS and LD worked on the same basic premise - video quality was improved by keeping the brightness and color portions of the signal separate, combining them only at the last second in the TV. This eliminated cross-talk and interference between the signals. That's where the S-video connectors started, and the Y-Pb-Pr (Red-Green-Blue) connection on DVD players now is an extension of that concept.
The public has always had this weird love-hate relationship with home video technology. They want something better than what they've got but once they learn that it will cost them money, they change their minds. Blu-Ray is the first time the concept of "new"="expensive" is finally sinking in, but it's still slow going.
doubleofive said:Ziz said:
Sluggo said:
There was some talk a little while ago about a multi-disc cover for this set. Did anyone finish one?
I adjusted doubleofive's cover - the one that looks like the Vintage action figure cards - to list the features of both DVD-9 and Purist but I haven't uploaded it anywhere. 005 - OK with you to post it?
The rest of the ones I've seen have been either DVD-9 specific or generic enough that it could work for any version, single or multiple.
Yeah, Ziz, do it!
Finally!
Had a lot going on lately, plus almost had to buy a new computer (managed to dodge that bullet though...), but here it is.
doubleofive's cover, modified by Ziz
Mostly, it's textual changes. I redid all the text with the font that they used on the Vintage Star Wars action figure cards that his design is based on. I also modified the main "Revisited" logo on the front accordingly.
Now, if Ady wants to send me a full body shot of himself, I'll add him to the front as an action figure to make it complete. :-)
I'm with RidgeShark...I think you're working backwards. By trying to use filters to get rid of the "big" damage first, it's eliminating the subtle detail like rock textures, thinking that that stuff is damage as well.
By going through and getting rid of major issues manually, you're starting out with a better base image for the filters to work on, so they won't have to be set to such extreme levels to do their job.
skyjedi2005 said:You do know this is originaltrilogy.com and not tfn right?
So just because we don't kiss your ass and jump on your bandwagon, we're traitors?
Fuck you.
If you don't like it you can always start specialeditions.com or prequels.com, but those i will never visit.
There's an idea. At least it will be a way to avoid you.
The mission statement of this site had always been to get the real trilogy restored, if you don't like it then you can in the words of the stormtrooper "move along".
"Move along." Good advice. You should practice what you preach.
I notice you did not bother to read the Lucas quotes i gave as evidence that he has lost it.
How do you know I didn't read them?
Keep drinking the cool aide and buying all his shit while he laughs and further buries the trilogy.
There is plenty of Star Wars "shit" I don't buy, simply because I have a life and need to pay for other things...you know...food, clothing, shelter...unimportant shit like that.
He is not getting a fucking dime from me ever.
I'm sure Lucas is just shitting a brick that your specific lack of contributions to his finances will be putting him in the poorhouse any minute now.
Hey Sky - www.IHateGeorgeLucas.com is available.
I'm not so sure about "not enough Imperial presence". One of the things the films deal with thematically is the Empire's arrogance, that just the fact that they're there should be enough to scare people. To that end, they don't send everything they've got to every battle, just what they think will be needed for the situation. All they expected to be escaping from Hoth was a couple of slow, bulky transports, a few fighters and the Falcon. From the Empire's perspective, the Falcon was the only one that was a challenge - the rest were fish in a barrel.
As far as all the "ship travel direction" stuff, that feels like it's getting nit-picky. If you've ever tried to take real photos of objects staged a certain way you know that camera angles, shapes and perspective can play tricks on you if you're not careful. I read that when they first started filming the Enterprise D for Star Trek:TNG, the oval saucer was throwing them off - they had to film the ship from weird angles and going in illogical directions to correct the skewed perspective to make it look like it was going straight on screen. Could be something similar happening here.
C3PX said:I guess with Rachel gone they will need another love interest for Batman/Bruce Wayne, but I really hope this doesn't give them the idea to use Catwoman to fill that void.
I just saw TDK again last night and was thinking about this afterwards. I don't think he should have any love interest in the next film. Have it focus on his detective skills and his "running from the law" baggage from the end of this film. As much as I like the Burton films, they're structured straight from the "Script writing for corporate Hollywood 101" textbook. Chapter 1 - Damsel in distress. Even BB and TDK suffered from that, although to a lesser extent. The next Nolan/Bale Batman film needs to break that mold and avoid the love interest angle completely.
They're all over at FanEdit.org. Just scroll down until you see his name.
This sounds more like a computer project than a DVD project. Marvel put out a few DVDs of scans of YEARS worth of comics. I have the Spider-Man one that goes from the beginning in '62 all the way up to about 2006 or so. They're organized by decade, then by year, with each individual comic scanned in as a PDF file, ads and all. You can print them out or read them on the computer at your own pace, rather than having to have your finger on the pause button.
Might want to investigate doing it that way instead.
"Canon" in time-travel stories is a relative term anyway. Eventually, the "bad" parts will be erased. ;-)
Thank you, Bingo. It helps when people read the text on the original post.
Sluggo said:Ziz said:Ok, in an attempt to help not only Ady with this but everyone else, and to give everyone a common frame of reference (in more ways than one) I whipped up this shot by shot comparison of the SE and GOUT Wampa sequences. The frame grabs aren't perfectly time-synced, but rather just to illustrate which shot we're talking about. I've also numbered them, with SE specific shots given sub-letter designations.
SE is on the left, GOUT is on the right.
GOUT3 and GOUT15 were flat-out replaced.
I'm guessing that SE7a is either an insert into the middle of GOUT7, splitting it into two shots (SE7 and SE7b) or that SE7b is a repeat of the end of GOUT7. My machine can't handle running two videos in parallel to compare them exactly. I'm sure Ady or someone else can give a definitive answer.
As for MJPollard's suggestion, maybe SE23a can be salvaged by matting in a section of the arm from SE15 to solve the shoulder/elbow issue?
What is the deal with the lightsaber handle in picture #20?
No deal. It's just motion blur.
HotRod said:I did like the wrapping up of the Scarecrow story tho. Surprised the actor playing him (sorry, forgot his name) agreed to such a small cameo.
Could have been cut in the editing room. Might be a deleted/extended scene on the DVD.
Ok, in an attempt to help not only Ady with this but everyone else, and to give everyone a common frame of reference (in more ways than one) I whipped up this shot by shot comparison of the SE and GOUT Wampa sequences. The frame grabs aren't perfectly time-synced, but rather just to illustrate which shot we're talking about. I've also numbered them, with SE specific shots given sub-letter designations.
SE is on the left, GOUT is on the right.
GOUT3 and GOUT15 were flat-out replaced.
I'm guessing that SE7a is either an insert into the middle of GOUT7, splitting it into two shots (SE7 and SE7b) or that SE7b is a repeat of the end of GOUT7. My machine can't handle running two videos in parallel to compare them exactly. I'm sure Ady or someone else can give a definitive answer.
As for MJPollard's suggestion, maybe SE23a can be salvaged by matting in a section of the arm from SE15 to solve the shoulder/elbow issue?
ladyferry said:
Darth Solo said:
I really love this pic, its soooo cute!
It's the eyes. If they were darker and meaner, it wouldn't look so much like a house pet with fangs.
ImperialFighter said:
As far as your added 'horns' on this preview go, I think you could amend them a little, so that they are even better. What I think could improve them, is if you did the more rounded, more tapered, and more 'gnarly' ones that seem to start quite thickly, higher up on the sides of the Wampa's head
That's what I was going to say as well. The idea of adding the horns is fine. The problem is that this is a first pass, so maybe better elements could be found for the final horns. The ones in there now look way too smooth, too even and symmetrical to be natural.
Yes, it's still being edited. Ady took one step back and two steps forward when he used a computer crash and upgrade as an excuse to start over in 1080p instead of standard def. Check the other thread for more info.
