Sign In

lurker77

User Group
Members
Join date
1-Sep-2011
Last activity
18-Oct-2020
Posts
114

Post History

Post
#1380327
Topic
Info: Mike Verta’s 4K Restoration - May 2020 Livestream
Time

yotsuya said:

The separation masters are B&W film with finer grain than color stock so they would not add additional grain compared to other sources.

They may be finer grain than colour stock, but you’re still layering three of them.

Also, they aren’t a magic bullet. They’re only produced to back up the negative, and as such aren’t always well produced.

Post
#1372158
Topic
Info: Mike Verta’s 4K Restoration - May 2020 Livestream
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

Yeah, the idea that it’s impossible to restore the original versions is patently absurd. Movies where the negative no longer exists in any form have been restored to excellent levels of quality. There’s plenty of source material to use.

This. And there should be a decent chunk of the negative remaining that’s not faded. The badly faded sections are effects shots that were composited onto Color Reversal Intermediate (CRI) stock. It allowed for positive-to-positive printing to reduce generational grain, but was very unstable. This is why for '97, many (all?) of the effects shots were digitally recomposited from their individual elements. All shots without effects should be fine, aside from that one shot that got dissolved during a cleaning test.

There are several routes available to restore the faded sections. The individual elements can be digitally recomposited again at 4K, though purists wouldn’t like this as it removes the theatrical grain/alignment/patina. To restore the original look of the film, interpositives would be the next step. If they’re too worn from overuse, then it’s on to separation masters, which aren’t ideal because they add grain, but the result would still look better than a theatrical print. If the separation masters have differential shrinkage, this is correctable digitally (and even to a certain degree optically, as was done painstakingly with Spartacus in '91).

If it isn’t in completely unusable condition, it may even be possible to scan the faded CRI stock and add the colour back fron a different source. Restorations often use multiple sources/methods depending on condition, what is ideal for a shot, and how it looks next to other shots.

Post
#1162748
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

Very surprised to see this much praise of Lucas’s use of digital cameras and CGI.

They (digital motion picture technologies) are useful tools, but not all-purpose ones. The way Lucas used them, and the way Hollywood has generally used them since they became widespread, are as crutches. Because storage space is cheap, settings can be changed quicker, the final result can be previewed in real time, and digital editing has so many more bells and whistles, there is less motivation to put effort into getting a good shot. This applies moreso to effects, as the digital world does not have the limitations of the physical world, allowing thought out and naturalistic shots to be replaced by hyperactive, sensory overloading flash and impossible scale. Early CGI like Jurassic Park and Terminator 2 looked better because effort was taken to get it to fit in with live action footage by not shoving it in your face and often augmenting it with practical effects. Now it’s the other way around, with the live action being an afterthought.

As for digital cameras, they’re best used in situations that demand a small, lightweight, or remote camera.

Post
#1077008
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

Dear Disney and Lucasfilm,

Today being the 40th anniversary of Star Wars, we just wanted to ask:

When will you properly restore and release on Blu-ray the original theatrical versions of the original Star Wars trilogy?

Please don’t leave us hanging. We would buy such a release in a heartbeat, if it existed.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
The staff and members of Originaltrilogy.com


Tossing my own version in the hat. Feel free to take out the “if it existed” part if you think it will read better.

Post
#1066597
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

SwissArmyTin said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Disney is run by putzes.

Disney seems to have completely forgotten the idea and vision behind EPCOT’s Future World, and it’s a hollow shell of it’s former self. They genuinely have no clue how to properly handle anything with an ounce of good in it.

If you ask me, the degradation of EPCOT has less to do with Disney’s managing style and more to do with the forward-thinking, technocratic attitudes of the 50’s and 60’s having been replaced with left-wing attitudes like hyper environmentalism, social programs for the dumb and lazy, and political correctness at any cost.

Post
#1066595
Topic
Celebration 2017 Speculation
Time

You know, I just realized something. If we ever get another official release of the OOT, it’ll be restored by DISNEY. The same Disney that has run roughshod over all of their classic animated features by degraining and enhancing the colours. Their classic live action has fared better, but many of them aren’t even fully cleaned up, just scanned and released with zero bonus features.

I suspect that anybody expecting a Criterion Collection-style treatment has a BIG wake-up call coming…

Post
#1065886
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

rogue1-77 said:
4. Most mentions of the SE, and since then refer to a private Technicolor print used by Lucasfilm.
Ref : http://savestarwars.com/technicoloribscreening.html
In fact, it was a private print lent to them for use in color reference.

This is common knowledge from here:

http://fd.noneinc.com/secrethistoryofstarwarscom/secrethistoryofstarwars.com/savingstarwars.html

You could’ve just made this clear originally instead of referring to a restoration using a Technicolor print.

And yeah, these archival clips are neato. 😃

Post
#1064937
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

rogue1-77 said:

The grain removal tests are decent. There are also black and white test shots too.

Some seem a little too scrubbed though. Also, note the color correction is not
that consistent.

The stories of a personal Technicolor reference for Star Wars, is actually the
same one from a private individual who lent it to Lucasfilm, since they didn’t
have one available at the time. This print is the one that has been scanned
and is the basis for current fan restorations in 4k.

R1

This is a confusing post, especially for those who haven’t been following this thread (such as myself).

  1. You have posted some stills. Where did you get them? What are we seeing in them? Are they downrezzed from a higher quality source? If so, what is this source, have you seen said source in full, and do you still have access to it?

  2. Do we know what kind of source the clips in the Vimeo link are from? Same source as rogue1’s stills?

  3. Are these clips/stills WIP or finished?

  4. Are you saying that a Technicolor dye-transfer print was scanned for restoration? If so, by whom? If it was by an official entity, they would be acting stupid, as IB prints are ill suited to proper restorations due to high contrast, and should only be used for rough colour checks (sayeth Robert A. Harris).

  5. What 4K fan restorations are there? Are you talking about Mike Verta’s hyped-up-but-not-for-public-consumption restoration?

CONTEXT, PEOPLE!

Post
#896180
Topic
Digital projectors in movie theaters (and other things digital)
Time

MaximRecoil said:
That doesn’t surprise me. I’ve long thought there should be an analog audio encoding format for optical discs. Several years ago someone pointed out to me that it has been done, but it never went anywhere. This is the link they gave me - http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue58/analog.htm

I’ve also tried explaining to people that analog information goes down to the molecular level. Yes, high-resolution digital can get REAL close, but there will ALWAYS be something missing, some drawback.

But alas, “good enough” is the trend of today. It doesn’t help that even mid-range analog audio equipment is expensive…

I’m big into the sound of analog synthesizers. Many digital synths and synth applications attempt to replicate their sound, but it always ends up too stable, too stark. I have NEVER heard ANY digital synthesis reproduce that analog “edge”. The difference (including the difference between VCO and DCO - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digitally_controlled_oscillator) is so obvious, it even comes through on YouTube videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyXVmqpUBe0

Post
#895485
Topic
Team Negative1 - Return of the Jedi 1983 - 35mm Theatrical Version (Release Details and Updates)
Time

I absolutely agree with MaximRecoil’s feelings towards digital projection. All of the movies I’ve seen in theaters since the transition have had grey blacks. The last time that I brought this up on a forum, people just didn’t understand - “durr…you can’t get blacker than #000000”. xD

In addition, I’ve yet to see any new TV technologies replicate all of the advantages of CRTs, including durability. Plasma has a slight fuzziness and wears out. Regular LCD has grey blacks. OLED is close, but also wears out. The closest is LCD with full-array RGB backlighting (edge-lit isn’t as good). Solid blacks, good colours. But CRTs still have better contrast.

A shame that SED never happened…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-conduction_electron-emitter_display

BTW, Pretty much all films since the 90’s have gone through colour timing via digital intermediate. Modern vinyl records also tend to have gone digital at some step during production.

Post
#789982
Topic
team negative1 - star wars 1977 - 35mm theatrical version (Released)
Time

That clip might be your best work yet. Aside from a very slight green tint (which has been around since this project started, but has lessened over time), it looks like an an actual theatrical showing*.

*The way my monitor is currently calibrated, it has an inherent black crush, so I can't judge that part.



EDIT:

towne32 said:


Cleanup looks good, but still incomplete. The first night shot with the twin suns could use a bit in particular. And then from Luke's closeup to the end there are tramline issues. They're thin and migrate horizontally through static shots, so they should be removable to a decent extent. There's a rather bright one on the left in the very last shot.

The first shot with the twin suns looks fine to me. It's always had a lot of grain, so care must be taken not to over-clean it.

Post
#776200
Topic
team negative1 - star wars 1977 - 35mm theatrical version (Released)
Time

Thanks for keeping me in the loop! :)

The reel 1 preview is cold, undersaturated, and a bit dark, but is stable, spot-free (aside from the infamous burn marks & reel change cues, of course), and lovably grainy. :)

The crawl looks much nicer, though the edges (especially the right) are a bit darker than the rest of it.

Forward march! :)

Post
#764374
Topic
Episode VII: The Force Awakens - Discussion * <strong>SPOILER THREAD</strong> *
Time

captainsolo said:

but I can't help but agree with HairyHen that something is missing that lacks the Star Wars feeling. To me it not only doesn't quite feel Star Wars, but it certainly doesn't look it.

I can explain it - it looks too polished. It's Star Wars, but (figuratively) photoshopped to death.

It looks to be full of good intentions, but they quite simply did too much.

The next one could be rescued by the filmmakers restraining themselves and stripping out all the gloss, but it wouldn't make business sense. People have become used to primary coloured, hyperactive junk such as Transformers, Fast and Furious, etc.

Post
#738043
Topic
Episode VII: The Force Awakens - Discussion * <strong>SPOILER THREAD</strong> *
Time

There were only two things I didn't like.

One was the lightsaber. Just like the twin-bladed saber, it's a case of "looks cool, but functionally idiotic once you think about it". The crossguard may be intended to protect you, but I can see it easily getting in the way and causing injury to the user. However, if it's just some kind of ancient model with an exhaust vent, I can deal with that...

Second, and worse, is something that plagued the PT and almost all Hollywood blockbusters for many years now - it looks too busy. CGI and colour timing aside, every frame just has too much going on. Being able to focus on just people, simple sets, simple objects, and a stationary camera helps pull you into the movie. But adding stuff like close-up group shots, blowing sand, flying water, quick pans, blur, bloom/lens flares, atmospheric effects, and just simply too much detail induces confusion and distraction.

Even one of the lesser Kurosawa films will probably end up being much more entertaining than this.

Post
#674550
Topic
Team Negative1 - The Empire Strikes Back 1980 - 35mm Theatrical Version (Released)
Time

team_negative1 said:

We continue to wonder why you would lower your quality standards for the video, when you are so critical of the still images and color? This seems like a double standard. You should be consistent in the quality levels.

Because even though it's not perfect, it looks much more natural than the official home video releases.