If there is anyone reading this who owns an early vhs and wants to digitize and share it I BEG YOU DO IT !!
Original
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2446yi8&s=5
Corrected
*deleted*
*deleted*
*deleted*
*deleted*
*deleted*
I did my first adjustment
Original DJ 92 FS
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/717/redfpp.png/
Auto white balance and lowered brightness
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/600/adjust.png/
*deleted*
*deleted*
*deleted*
I was wondering if the following Dark Jedi Preservation which seems to have different color qualities would yield a different (maybe better?) set of results from GOUT?
You_Too said:
Well, first of all the GOUT is not sourced from technicolor prints. Actually only SW was ever printed by technicolor. What I'm trying to do is bring back the original look of the prints that the GOUT is sourced from, or at least bring back the life in them and correct them as good as I can, without any real professional knowledge about the prints.
Unfortunately, the skin tones in SW are a bit more pink-tinted than in the other 2 movies, and because of that, it's impossible for me to get everything to look as good as Mike's pics. If I correct the skin tones, everything that's supposed to be red turns orange.
Yeah this was my sense of what the scope for improvement was - working back to the copy source whilst trying to undo as much of the colour shifts as possible
I gotta say though that the current result looks very good, just don't expect a technicolor look!
It looks brilliant, everyone keeps raising the bar - I think I was thinking a bit too impractically about what the Gout source is actually capable of yielding.
Anyway, I won't be posting more samples here now, since me and dark_jedi have started to work on a "surprise" for you guys. :)
Yay!
perfectlovehere, i think you set yourself up for that comeback!
You_Too, I was going to ask you if the recent photos of the 70s-projection-look Mike posted in the Despecialized thread made you think if this effect would be able to be replicated with your colour toolbox.
This is not a new project request, just an 'in theory' question (!)
mverta said:
The print itself isn't necessarily as warm - the color temperature of the light source changes everything about the image. I wanted to see -as far as possible- what environment the filmmakers were judging color in. Older bulbs were warmer by nature than we're used to today. Our computer monitors have a far cooler white than projector bulbs from the 70's and 80's did - they were more yellow. But the coloring from those light sources is what was driving decisions in color timing. To my eye, the film is "too" yellow when viewed that way; but that eye has been tainted by 30+ years of getting used to increasingly cool/pure whites.
This is a really informative post to see the huge difference in accepted colour standards via projection, between then and now. It also explains in part why people talk about 'warm' memories of the 'golden' age of film. I've got to admit to my 'modern' eye, the current way is too cool but the old way now looks too stylized perhaps. However, the old way does have something similar to rich/romantic 'magic hour'-quality light, which is very appealing to the eye.
This makes me wonder what a contemporary film of the time with already natural golden colours like "Days of Heaven" would have looked like through 70s projection.
Jaitea said:
OHHHH this could go on forever!!
I used the image Harmy posted from the DVD and mucked about with it....dunno looks a bit warmer...maybe too warm
J
Definite improvement
mverta said:
This screening was done with 70's era bulbs on a 70's era screen to recreate the experience of its actual projection when it first came out.
*weeps*
hairy_hen said:
But it's very important to be able to recognise what works and ought not to be changed, and exercise restraint accordingly.
My understanding of George Lucas is that had to fight so much against the received wisdom of 'what worked' to produce Star Wars, that his scale of restraint got screwed up a bit.
