Sign In

boris

User Group
Members
Join date
24-Apr-2006
Last activity
11-Oct-2006
Posts
447

Post History

Post
#250913
Topic
The preservation of techincal flaws
Time
First off a whole bunch of replies were written when I was writing mine, which I haven't seen until now...

Laserman:
It is about taking the movie that was actually made and fixing some errors - and even that only *after* a straight untouched preservation is completed.

I understand, I just feel that a lot of members here are now seeing the retouched version as being of more value than the un-retouched preservation.

Laserman:
As far as the DC version of the discs go, it has now been madde somewhat obselete by the release of the GOUT, although it didn't preserve the opening crawl from the laserdisc version.

No, it was better. But I can understand if you want the ANH crawl in there... after all we've all gotten used to it for so long.

Laserman:
As presevation goes though, if you stop at that point, you have only preserved the laserdisc, not the experience of seeing the film, or in effect the film itself.

You seem to be agreeing with me; unless you're trying to create a greater experience?

Laserman:
What I mean by that is the laserdisc has artifacts that were not in the film, or at least not in a good first run print of the film, it has the DVNR, has lots of dust and scratches, droputs and film damage that is not going to be on the negs or a first run print.

People might think cleaning up the film damage is somehow 'not original' but every film print struck will have differences.


True, but that's not the same as special effects compositing. Most of Lucas' changes (and lets face it, only a couple like Greedo firing his gun actually make a difference to the story) are just trying to upgrade the effects in the movies. In actual fact, it may well have been more exciting in cinemas to have Greedo and Han have their shootout ... but that's not what was done in 1977. You could just as easily take the Special Edition - and keep 90% of the new effects (and possibly more) without modifying the story, if you so wanted. I'm just making a point, I'm not defending the SE ...

Laserman:
Quick question.
If you don't agree with people going through a film and creating a fan edit or fixing glitches etc. what is your interest in visiting the "fan edits" forums?


Well they don't call it restoration for a start, they call it a fan edit. Let's get one thing straight - I don't care what you do with your edit ... I just don't understand why people think your edit is closer to the OUT than the OUT. We seem to be talking about different things.

Laserman
There was no reason for an NTSC owner to really want PAL capability back then either, their TVs wouldn't cope with it and there were very very very few titles that got a true PAL release anyway.

However, the Star Wars Trilogy was one of those very very very few titles that got a true PAL release, ironic isn't it?

Anyway, I'm not attacking the X0 project. How many different LD releases did you use for it again?
Post
#250847
Topic
The preservation of techincal flaws
Time
Originally posted by: Mavimao
I see you looked through the thread, but if you'd paid attention, you would see that the X0 LD player's circuitry is dedicated solely to NTSC. Yea I know, it just amazes me they limited such a good player to ntsc only.
Instead of going "This is wrong! No no no!"
Well I don't remember saying it like that - besides which I already explained that I know the X0 is doing it both ways, I just fail to understand how people can think it should be the "touched up" version with no untouched version.They must resell or something...
BTW I called my ISP and they confirmed they don't resell from offshore. I was given two conflicting stories - I think netspeed handles the customer accounts but are supposed to use a different IP.
Post
#250712
Topic
The preservation of techincal flaws
Time
Originally posted by: Moth3r
You have posted from the same ISP (NetSpeed) I have posted from Netspeed? ... wow, you're right. And it's not their public proxy either (unless their proxy number is dynamic)... weird I can't explain that. I'm not DanielB though.
as one of his socks "Star Wars Kidd" Out of curiosity - what was his original ISP, was it Netspeed? I'll bet it was, lol. I have a hard time following past forum history, I can see he re-registered after being banned, but I don't know how many times or what usernames he used.
Originally posted by: Star Wars Kidd
I said I'd help before... before well, you know... how about I save up my paypal account and buy a set off ebay after X-Mas, then you can borrow them capture and I'll re-sell them!

- all I ask in return is my name in the DVD credits "the XØ team appreciates the help of DanielB" or something like that! LOL... I take it he's not the anonymous 4th member of your preservation team, X0? I guess you must have deleted most of the 6 posts he made under that username, Moth3r.Originally posted by: DanielB
That's probably for the best mate, as I said earlier you are the one who has to decide your course of action, people just trying to change your mind - I know is confusing and frustrating. I myself hope you take the project back up, and as I said I am willing to help out in it with funding. If I manage to get a faster PC (than this old 750mhz thing) then i'd be willing to take a copy of the source cap and painstakingly create a watchable DVD from it too.
You're confusing me with the guy that said THAT in the X0 thread? It's funny, I'm sure he was probably being sarcastic or something... but the meaning is lost on me reading into the past. Did he say the same thing I said? That the DVD>=X0 transfer quality? there's so much editing that he's done, I can see he removed entire posts and replaced them with flowers.

Anyway, what was this thread about?... or wait, did he tell you not to take the matte-boxes out? I can't see him saying that, or that DVD>=X0 quality... I can see he rambled on about converting Laserman's X0 player into a PAL machine (though it doesn't look like he started the discussion on that just continued it). It makes me think now, if the X0 is the greatest laserdisc player, ever, how come it could only play NTSC? I mean there are players that play both pal and ntsc and automatically flip sides too! Anyway, I'm sure the Japanese had no use for PAL or something.

So on the topic of technical flaws:Originally posted by: Mavimaoq
Why can't we have both?
I don't care if you do have both. It's like the special edition - there are things about it that I actually like; I just don't like it when Lucas tries to pass it off as being the original trilogy. Likewise, I don't care if the X0 team wants to have their own "X0 edition"... I just don't think they should try to pass it off as being the OUT. And I know they're not trying to - but other forum members I think are.which appears to be an Australian ISP even though you claim to be in New Zealand.
PS: don't call me Australian! Nah you're right, it does appear to be an Australian ISP. They must resell or something... though why they'd resell from an Australian data centre confuses me, I wonder if other ISP's do it? Surely not.
Post
#250680
Topic
The preservation of techincal flaws
Time
I still contend that I was posting on topic in the original thread; as I was expressly about the X0 preservation.
Originally posted by: Laserman
If I didn't see the glitches at normal playback speed, I wouldn't fix them - I'm not bothering to fix any glitches I don't see in normal playback.
What I mean, is that it wasn't ever intended for customers to go through and fix the glitches frame by frame. In actual fact, it was never intended that customers fix them at all - but I chose to put it this way since this is the way in which you're going about it. Of course you can see the problems at normal speed, as can I. I put it to you, though, that film colourization in essence was the process of making the movie appeal more to today's audience; and that in essence cleaning the mattes and other technical flaws is also the process of making the movie appeal more to today's audience. You may not feel it's the same thing - the way Lucas may not feel that the Special Editions are the same either.

To put it simply, today's audience is spoiled by newer movies with more advanced effects, using the latest technology. And the average cost of producing a Hollywood movie today is much much more than it was in 1977. But in 1977 viewers had never seen the effects we now have today, and so seeing problems like matte-lines were second-nature. Today though it would be considered below par if a film was made which had obvious black matte lines. Therefore it is now second-nature to think of older films which have these defects in them as being "below par". I wonder if anyone will ever really be happy, if all they ever think about is "this is how it was meant to be"; and I wonder if the movie was really was "how it was meant to be" the first time, would it have been as grand a masterpiece as it is?
Post
#250654
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES)
Time
Originally posted by: Laserman
And yes if a restored OUT was released on HD-DVD and still had those obvious glitches, I would set about fixing them for my own viewing pleasure.
Well I put it to you, that those glitches may not have been intended - but that it was never intended for home viewers to go through the film frame by frame.
Post
#250622
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES)
Time
Originally posted by: tweaker
I forgot that, being hardcore fans, you'd be archiving both versions "Both versions"? That has been my point there entire time, that there is only one version. And Laserman, I'm aware you're doing it both ways, and I have been for quite some time - I just don't understand why. By the way if you took what I said in context, you would have realized I was remarking that the matte boxes (not the lines) are barely visible on the DVD. But dress it up how you might, it doesn't alter the fact you're using today's technology to edit yesterday's movies. I never saw Babe Pig In City... but I remember when I saw the original Babe, because I wanted to have pork-chops!

Anyway, you yourself said that you've thought of colourizing the black R2D2 - and I suppose somehow this is still different from colourization?
They weren't a 'necessary' by product, just an unwanted one.
They were both - they were unwanted, but necessary for the special effect.True the matte lines were somewhat visible at the cinema ... 1: However, they were never intended to be an integral part of the film, 2: they are akin to a processing error, or a scratch on the film
Let's see: #1. Well intention does not guarantee performance. The best intentions in the world don't necessarily make right. Imagine going through an old film scene by scene and adjusting colour, brightness and contrast to make it more consistent, and then saying "this is obviously what they would have done if they could have, they obviously intended to have their shots look a little more consistent". While you're at it you could say "And they obviously intended it to look cinematic, which is difficult these days since widescreen subtly makes people feel the movie being cinematic, so we'll convert it to widescreen - which is what they would have done, if they'd made the movie today".

With today's compositing techniques the matte boxes would have been avoided entirely. With today's compositing techniques they never would have used a black R2, they would have used green-screen. With today's compositing techniques they wouldn't have had black matte lines either. With today's compositing techniques they could have removed the speeder wheels digitally. With today's technology, they wouldn't have made the movie they way they made it in 1977.

Your project is supposed to be a preservation project, and as I understand it you feel that Lucas can make changes to his films - but that he should also preserve the OOT, correct? Well that's the way I feel; and if some people want the 1997 SE preserved as well - well then Lucas should preserve it too. Maybe if I lent you my copy of The Terminator you could digitally paint out the wires connected to the flying HK's, and make the stop-motion animation look a little more fluid? Of course, if they could paint out the wires in 1984 they wouldn't have shot the shot in the same way - the lighting, placement of the camera and amount of fog was carefully used to make the wires as invisible as possible. What about the wires in the levitation scene in The Exorcist... they painted those wires the colour of the background to try and avoid them being visible - but I'm sure digitally painting them out would be a good idea, because "they were never intended to be an integral part of the film, they are akin to a processing error, or a scratch on the film, i.e. something that may have been unavoidable, or missed, but definitely unwanted"? Or how about digitally adding their breaths to make it look more consistent - never mind that they had to actually refrigerate the set so that their breaths would show up on film - they look inconsistent, and so you should fix that by digitally creating their breaths.

Maybe I'm wrong... and all these things *should* be fixed. But I didn't make the movies and so I certainly wouldn't go through and fix them myself. I can't understand - and if I can't I'm sure Lucas doesn't - how you, Laserman, can spend so much time and effort preserving the OOT from a laserdisc cap, and then go and make some of the exact changes that Lucas made to the Special Edition. No wonder he actually wonders if people really want the OUT - or if they want a *fixed* version. And to make matters worse, so many people complained about the production errors with the 2004 version, however when they made it they rushed it ahead of schedule because of piracy... and so I understand that the errors made for the 2004 version are largely the result of there being so many "Five Star Special Edition" pirated copies of the SE on eBay back then, and Lucas just wanted to get the damn thing out before everyone had one. Imagine if you will that 18 months from now the OUT is released fully remastered to HDDVD and BluRay. With no technical glitches repaired. Do you mean to tell me you would then take it apart and spend days or even weeks fixing them?
Post
#250619
Topic
POLL: Which version of the OT do you own?
Time
Originally posted by: Darth_Evil
Not to be cruel, but boy, I though I had bought a lot of releases of the OT. How very wrong I was... I wonder if some people here are suffering from some sort of chronic compulsive buying disorder?Originally posted by: MagnoliaFan
...
Star Wars Trilogy - Special Edition VHS - P/S
Star Wars Trilogy - Special Edition VHS - Widescreen
Star Wars Trilogy - Special Edition VHS Reissue w/ Episode II Featurette - P/S
Star Wars Trilogy - Special Edition VHS Reissue w/ Episode II Featurette - Widescreen
...
Let me guess MagnoliaFan, amazon.com last month sent you a letter congratulating you on being the first customer to pre-order the 30th anniversary box set, and last week you received a letter confirming this from Lucas himself? Out of all your collection, which is the best?
Post
#250390
Topic
Auto-correction from SE colours to GOUT colours
Time
Originally posted by: boris
MoveAlong - I've been thinking about your TV caps and I think I may have figured out what they've done. They've squashed the picture for 16x9 so that people who watch it in 4x3 mode (and lets face it, so many clueless viewers will do this) have about the same picture distortion! That's the explination, I'm sure of it.
And now what I saw in my mind is shown to you all:

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/7958/tbwt7.jpg
http://img290.imageshack.us/img290/9721/goutst6.jpg
http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/4949/4to3rb1.jpg

I can't believe they'd do such a shoddy broadcast!
Post
#250388
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES)
Time
Originally posted by: tweaker
Considering the availability of "deleted scenes" on DVDs these days, it should've been more obvious to you that it is extremely common to shoot more film than you need, so you have a lot to play around with in the editing room. Shooting a scene does not in and of itself does not mean that it should be part of the movie. So that's a bad argument to make there. Untrue. Monty Python and the Holy Grail has no delted scenes - every scene they shout for the movie they used in the movie (of course there'd be out-takes, though). It if was in the script, then it was intended to be in the movie, and some limitation forced them to remove it. It may have been special effects limitations, it may have been that the scene ruined the flow or pace of the movie... the movie may have been too long, or it may have been that the film had a big glaring scratch in it that couldn't be removed! Scripts, from what I hear, are about 120 pages long. That's less then 1/3rd the number of pages in a novel - and from what I've seen of scripts they contain much less words on each page than a novel does - and many of those words are wasted on describing lighting and costumes and such. I don't agree that they start out deliberately with this flexibility to remove stuff - that's just stupid. It happens later on because for whatever reason they can't use the scene in their movie.
I think preserving the matte issue is kinda ridiculous. We're not talking about something that is a result of special effects limitations of the day. You don't see similar issues popping up throughout the film (not that I'm aware of). Somebody screwed up , and the crappy mattes made it into the finished film. As sort of a side thing, I can understand the preserving of the mattes in order to keep that "opening night" feel, but as far as the finished film, no.
"Somebody screwed up"? No, that's just an unwanted by-product of the special effects of that day. It's like filming a TV... it may flicker... or filing a helicopter - depending on the camera used the helicopter blades may look fluid - or they may look uncharacteristically stilted. Cleaning out matte lines/boxes is just like colourizing a film. Besides which, if you've seen the OUT DVD you'd know they're barely visible at all, except over other spaceships (and how do you expect the X0 team to fix those ones? but levelling out the blacks... that won't do there!)The mattes, on the other hand, are the result of somebody in the SFX department being asleep at the wheel.
They were a necessary by-product of the special effects. Just like the black R2 unit used in blue-screen shots, next you're going to say he should be digitally colourized?

BTW, Welcome to the forums blitter!
Post
#250386
Topic
POLL: Which version of the OT do you own?
Time
Originally posted by: THX
Um, the SE is not the OOT. Sorry, the options that read "I don't own any legal copies of the OOT." should read "I don't own any legal copies of the OT." At least it's only a minor error, I think I made the options quite well overall though - it should begin to show just how forum members are enjoying SW at home!

JamesEightBitStar, I never thought of it like that, but you're right - I own the OT twice over on DVD because it includes two versions of the film - plus I own the 1995 VHS which means I own the OT 3 times... kind of. Although, my VHS tapes (aside from being in great condition) are WIDESCREEN, not foolscan... I mean not pan&scan .I have four official sets: VHS (PAL), LD (NTSC), '06 DVD (PAL & NTSC).
Yes, but which are you most happy with? The LD... the DVD... the VHS or the bootleg copy? The poll for how many copies of each film you have, however, belongs in another thread... this one is more about the copy you have which you are most happy with! PS: did you forget you have those two special edition sets too THX ?
Post
#250346
Topic
.: The XØ Project - Laserdisc on Steroids :. (SEE FIRST POST FOR UPDATES)
Time
Originally posted by: Dunedain
In any case, they were certainly never intended to be seen, so naturally we want to make the restored version look the way it was intended to look at theaters on opening day, that means no matte lines.
So what? of course they weren't intended to be obvious, but then again neither was leaving Jabba in ANH on the cutting room floor. Lucas had obviously intended to put it in if he'd shot the scene... going with what was in '77, though, the matte lines and boxes, the orange blob under Luke's speeder were all there.
Post
#250267
Topic
Auto-correction from SE colours to GOUT colours
Time
Originally posted by: Zion
Boris, the problem is with the warping of each version. When you overlay one on top of the other, they never line up exactly right. That's what all this morphing talk is about. It's not just some crazy Power Ranger business. Zion I'm well aware of that, I jut thought I'd point them out to other forum members who may not see the problems as quickly as I did.Laserman: Is it really necessary to do a tracked warp? I would imagine the warp to stay coherent within each shot, otherwise there would be a wobble, right?
What if the 2004 version was digitally stabalized reducing camera wobble, and the OUT wasn't?

MoveAlong - I've been thinking about your TV caps and I think I may have figured out what they've done. They've squashed the picture for 16x9 so that people who watch it in 4x3 mode (and lets face it, so many clueless viewers will do this) have about the same picture distortion! That's the explination, I'm sure of it.
Post
#250151
Topic
Auto-correction from SE colours to GOUT colours
Time
WELCOME TO THE FORUMS!
Originally posted by: superrune
I thought it might be interesting to apply the GOUT colours to the new SE edition image. In other words, keep the excellent edge sharpness of the new transfer, but retain the old colours of the laserdisc version of the film.
I know I'm no expert, but I can see clear image flaws which have resulted after your combination - with ghosting as the main problem. Here are some examples:

http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/9367/prob1kk1.jpg
http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/3246/prob2ba7.jpg
http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/7127/prob3yl9.jpg
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/7832/prob4un7.jpg
http://img176.imageshack.us/img176/3949/prob5no0.jpg

Interesting results nonetheless.
Post
#250116
Topic
"..secret to the future is quantity," Lucas said
Time
Originally posted by: lordjedi
VOD and downloadable media are a long way off.
Really? I know for a fact that Foxtel and Sky are both developing the ability for their set top boxes to download episodes and movies directly from the satelite to save to the STU, and then view - at any time. I think that the technology will pay off, because it enables you to sit down at the TV, and beam down the show you want to watch when nothing's on. It's a great idea, and it will work. From what I've heard, they both plan to release this technology within the next few years.
Post
#249974
Topic
"..secret to the future is quantity," Lucas said
Time
Originally posted by: Ozkeeper
Whilst some people strive for quality, Lucas strives for quantity. I'm surprised he admits it. That explains the PT just a little more.
What he said makes perfect sense, and they all do it. South Park is one of the few TV series today to still shoot half-hour length episodes... just about every new main TV series is an hour long - more quantity - I don't want to sit in front of the TV for a whole hour at a time! I want to sit down for half an hour, watch a complete show/episode ... do something else, and then maybe watch another show for half an hour. But nooo... I get a great choice of quantity or more quantity. It wouldn't surprise me if TV series began broadcasting 2hr long episodes (and not just 2hr long "specials" - but 2hr episodes every damn episode!)
Post
#249876
Topic
your buying the PT all over again in Blue ray !!!!!!!!
Time
Originally posted by: Zion
What the hell does remastering the OOT have to do with digital Yoda in TPM? Absolutely nothing.
Oh Zion, surely you can see that what he ment to say was: THE SE WILL BE REMASTERED! THE SE WILL BE REMASTERED! THE SE WILL BE REMASTERED!

Of course the OOT will be remastered, eventually. It won't happen for next year though.
Post
#249652
Topic
your buying the PT all over again in Blue ray !!!!!!!!
Time
Originally posted by: Nanner Split
My chemistry book last year classified glass as a "supercooled liquid". Wow, isn't that amazing how chemistry books don't know what they're talking about these days, thanks to the unquestionable neutral wonder of wikipedia ?
PS3 and Xbox 360 may be offering better graphics, but no innovation.
What makes you think PS3 will have better graphics? PS2 had the poorest of the three last time...Originally posted by: Tiptup
I wholeheartedly believe that Nintendo will come out of this generation strong. It's the one system I'm pre-ordering and Nintendo doesn't have to sell its system for a loss just to entice customers. Microsoft can kiss my ass.
Microsoft's strategy with the XBOX paid off quite well last time. I think Nintendo will pick up ground this time round, however I still believe Microsoft's XBOX-360 has the biggest growth of a fan-base, and getting in early will have been a huge advantage for them. Today you cannot own a PS3 or a Wii - but you can own an XBOX-360.

It all comes down to what Sony fans do, really. If their market goes to Microsoft - then MS will be the strongest party this time, if they go to Nintendo - then Nintendo may win. I think though that Sony fans will probably prefer XBOX-360 - because it's the closest system to what the PS3 is, whereas Nintendo is off in a world of their own. If I get any, it probably be the Wii - but I don't know about the "sports" - I've never been a fan of videogame sports. If I want to play tennis I'll play tennis, not a Nintendo.
Post
#249478
Topic
Star Wars DVD Covers
Time
Originally posted by: Falle
out of curiosity.. what did boba feta say? his message doesnt show..
Whatever he said he edited it out quickly:

Posted: Wed October 04, 2006 6:30 PM

Edited: Wed October 04, 2006 at 6:31 PM

Of course, the time will appear different from your weird position on this Earth.

My guess is that it was a reply intended for another thread... maybe even another forum.
Post
#249456
Topic
your buying the PT all over again in Blue ray !!!!!!!!
Time
Originally posted by: TheCassidy
See, that's why you piss people off around here.
Hey I'm showing you consumer choice live in action here... my choices may sound stupid to you, but that's how it is. EMI and Sony are blacklisted from my product choices, and so is every company who directly promotes them, or who directly benefits from their success over the success of their competitors.