bilditup1

Mavimao said:

 

pat man said:

bilditup1 said:

pat man said:

This is a non-faded Technicolor 35mm pint.From 1977,there was not many made for a home release.

.      

...That's an IB Tech print, not 35mm. The one Harmy timed it to is in better condition and doesn't have the vagaries of how the digital camera processed the image or whether the Senator used the right bulb

 sorry I didn't know :(

No, you were right, the IB technicolor star wars prints were regular 35 mm sized prints.

 

Yeah, I understood that they were the same size. But I meant to object to the idea that the Tech prints = the 35mm Eastman prints that Harmy referred to a few posts above his, which is why pat man posted the pictures from the Senator to begin with.

And I could watch it again. It's almost like watching for the very first time, what with all the little nuances and details that I now pay attention to which just aren't in LD rips and upscales.

finally got to watch this today, for the third time, in proper fashion (51" plasma, 5.1). my friends, this thing not only has to been *seen* to be believed...you've gotta hear it, too. I need to get a better sub, I've discovered.

That reminds me though - where are we on syncing Scofield to GOUT? It would be nice to use that audio with Harmy and esp puggo grande. I would do this myself if I knew anything about syncing audio properly

h_h - I'm trying to figure out if I'm dreaming or not, but it seems like during the Fox Fanfare the audio sounds digitally compressed (late 90s mp3 style), at least on the rear channels. I listened to it a few times now and made sure my receiver and computer weren't doing anything to the signal. anyone else experience this? otherwise of course this was just totally brilliant.

pat man said:

bilditup1 said:

pat man said:

This is a non-faded Technicolor 35mm pint.From 1977,there was not many made for a home release. 

http://petergaultney.smugmug.com/Movies/historic/Star-Wars-at-The-Senator/13089279_nXePV#!i=948664666&k=B94PY 

  This is how Harmy made his V2.0.Just his is a shad brighter.I would say lower the brightness by 2% or lower the gamma just a hair,but this is Harmy and others edited's,so it's their opinion.      

...That's an IB Tech print, not 35mm. The one Harmy timed it to is in better condition and doesn't have the vagaries of how the digital camera processed the image or whether the Senator used the right bulb

 sorry I didn't know :(

Yeah, dw about it dude.

The linked-to videos are also included on the (free) AVS 709 disc. But they're convenient to have separately as well.

negative1 said:

sunday256 said:

 

Oh and in response to -1, those look really dark. Way darker than I remember. But until I see them in the full context of the video it would be hard to comment more. If you post that scene (corrected) in one of your 35mm threads, let me know.

the original IS a lot darker than people remember it.

also, due to the nature of the print, and the bulb used

to project it. that has a big impact on it. we will try to

simulate that also in our version.

 

i'm sure harmy's version is very close to the ib tech

as it would have looked.

 

later

-1

I'm sure this has been asked before, but if Harmy ever decides to go for round three, could parts of your 35mm project potentially be used as a superior source? I understood that the end result is supposed to look kind of grungy, from what I read in your thread.

pat man said:

This is a non-faded Technicolor 35mm pint.From 1977,there was not many made for a home release. 

http://petergaultney.smugmug.com/Movies/historic/Star-Wars-at-The-Senator/13089279_nXePV#!i=948664666&k=B94PY 

  This is how Harmy made his V2.0.Just his is a shad brighter.I would say lower the brightness by 2% or lower the gamma just a hair,but this is Harmy and others edited's,so it's their opinion.      

...That's an IB Tech print, not 35mm. The one Harmy timed it to is in better condition and doesn't have the vagaries of how the digital camera processed the image or whether the Senator used the right bulb

And good luck with your finals!

Harmy said:

The official AVCHD is still a few days away. Guys, I have my FINAL exams tomorrow, if I fail, I'm totally screwed, so I don't have time to f*ck about with this right now, so you'll just have to wait a bit.

As to that bright scene... FUCK IT!!! I already said it looked like this in my reference IB Print scans. Period. I really wish I could post some of them but I promised not to and I'm a man of my word.

Calibrating you monitor to make the scene look like you think it should will TOTALLY fuck up all the rest of the colours in other scenes!!!

NO...WIRE...HANGEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERS

(but yeah, we should really just redirect people to the earlier discussion)

Now helping to seed the DVD5 on the spleen; should help it go quicker (the MKV still have a boatload of seeders, myself included)

TV's Frink said:

Dear Everyone Who Asks For A Myspleen Invite,

Please read the OP.

Sincerely,
Everyone Else

God bless you, Frink.

Jan said:

The upload on usenet is finally complete :-)

That's great Jan! The more the better! 

bilditup1 said:

lpd said:

Harmy. This version is absolutely excellent. Thank you very much for letting us all share in your hard work. All the very best to you. Long live the Original Trilogy!

...it is tempting to declare 'mission accomplished!'

Mmm, tempting, but then I saw 'The Dark Knight Rises' again in IMAX, and understood. Never surrender!

Sorry to hear about the German track and possible issues with other dubs. Sounds like the fixed standalone tracks could altogether comprise a new torrent all their own...

walkingdork said:

bilditup1 said:

walkingdork said:

I just made the torrent FREELEECH on MySpleen so you guys don't kill your ratios. ;)

Thanks Harmy!!!

LOL, walkingdork is a nicer admin than I'd be :)

I think this is worth some freeleech, don't you? :D

LOL yeah. But on the last wave, I invited a few people who then promptly got what they wanted and disappeared. For me, this feels like some kind of moral failing

lpd said:

Harmy. This version is absolutely excellent. Thank you very much for letting us all share in your hard work. All the very best to you. Long live the Original Trilogy!

...it is tempting to declare 'mission accomplished!'

pvanb said:

For those without a MySpleen account, it's also on The Pirate Bay (won't post a link, but you can search for it.) Not many seeders though, so you could be waiting a while.

Spleen is up to over 60 seeders and nearly 100 snatches, and down to around 20 leechers, if anyone's interested.

Tashi Stationary said:

bilditup1 said:

 

EDIT: Actually, it looks like NTFS write support IS in the OSX 10.6, but not 10.5 and below. It's just not enabled by default. See here for instructions:

http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20090913140023382

That Apple didn't enable this feature by default should be a strong hint though, so caveat emptor. The comments aren't too reassuring either. So if your HDD doesn't have anything else on it, it's probably worth risking; otherwise I'd just try to hunt down ntfs-3g, which I've used without issue back in my hackintosh days and still use, currently, on my family's Macs

You could make a shared folder on your mac and then access it over the network on the pc, transferring the file to the external drive (which you'd have connected to your pc).  Depending on your router, it shouldn't take too long.  In the sharing control panel, turn on file sharing, then choose to share via smb so windows can handle it.

Or you could format the external as FAT32 (which is mac friendly), split the big files into smaller (sub-4gb) rar files and copy them to the drive, then connect it to your windows computer, copy the files off, unrar them, reformat the drive as ntfs, then copy them back to the external.  ok, that sounds like a stupid idea.  would work though.

Yeah, making a network share is the least painful option in terms of mucking around with system files, avoiding the whole issue of corruption by not using an HDD &c. Sending a file like this over wifi would take a few hours, and he'd have to learn a bit about CIFS (Samba) networking and how to connect from a Mac in order to do it. Probably worth doing in the long run, but I'm not providing remote tech support for that :)

Just finished going through the rar file. What a trip. You notice the extra detail when you're watching the film, but I don't think that you fully appreciate it until you go back and look at what the already-tweaked 1.0 was. I did that back when the first 2.0 workprints were being released and was, uh, totally floored by what I saw, but flipping back and forth with the stills really puts the two in sharp relief and smacks you in the face with the facts of how far we've come.

Unbelievable, Harmy!

THX11384EB said:

Are images 1_00072.jpg and 1_00073.jpg mislabeled in the Google+ album?

Yeah, it looks like the second one is much darker and less detailed. But I don't think they're mislabeled - the model of the Falcon in the second screenshot is clearly the older one. I guess ya can't account for the way the 2004 edition was colortimed, whatsoever...

Or, ya know, I'm totally wrong :)

Hey all, it seems like on a close listen, compression artifacts are audible in the isoscore track that has the '93 LD tracked in for silences (but not in the other isoscore track). Anyone else experience this, or am I dreaming? Take it with a grain of salt - I'm really not trying to detract from this release here, and this track was not Harmy's work, and am just curious. It likely won't affect the experience at all for most viewers.

avrgejedimaster said:

i want to change the file name of the mkv, but doesnt that affect seeding the torrent? i feel like it would but does anyone know for sure if renaming the mkv will affect seeding the torrent?

I don't know what client you're using, but with uTorrent, you can relocate each file individually, re-check the torrent, and then start uploading again as usual. I would be surprised if such a feature were not commonplace among torrent clients.

leo87 said:

I was all ready to watch this tonight, and now I have a problem. I watch MKV by putting it on my portable hard drive and playing it through my Blu-ray player USB. I have a PC laptop, but I wanted to download this on my family's MAC, since I don't like leaving my laptop on all day. So it finishes downloading, and I put my portable hard drive in to transfer the file, and it can't be done, and shows the hard drive is read only.

Anyway to get by this? I guess I'll have to buy a BD-R, and burn it as data disc to transfer to my pc?

Most probably, your Mac is running OSX 10.6 or older, which to my knowledge doesn't have NTFS write support; your external drive is most probably formatted with NTFS. What you need to do is get Tuxera NTFS ($30) or an old copy of the ntfs-3g package + macfuse package on which Tuxera is based. google/torrents are your friend. 

EDIT: Actually, it looks like NTFS write support IS in the OSX 10.6, but not 10.5 and below. It's just not enabled by default. See here for instructions:

http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20090913140023382

That Apple didn't enable this feature by default should be a strong hint though, so caveat emptor. The comments aren't too reassuring either. So if your HDD doesn't have anything else on it, it's probably worth risking; otherwise I'd just try to hunt down ntfs-3g, which I've used without issue back in my hackintosh days and still use, currently, on my family's Macs

Ripplin said:

Dude, neither of those links, which I've already read, answered my question. ;)

Ugh, I'm such a klutz. *headdesk*

I'm sure when the time comes walkingdork will consider setting freeleech, though that's a ways away still. I was actually wondering if he'd allow for the AVCHD version at all, being inferior and everything. The BD, as it'll have lossless audio and other features/is a friggin' BluRay I bet would be allowed.