msycamore

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

Take a look at this comparison:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_sFW8grQtU

WOWOW has the original matte painting scene, don't know about BD (it should be the same); the bottom CGI scene could be found on HDnet.

The BD uses the original jeep matte. The DVD's and HD-broadcasts contains other much more subtle tweaks like this matte shot for example: http://www.caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleiche/comparison.php?cap1=14343&cap2=14327&art=full&image=2&cID=1273&action=1&lossless=#vergleich

See removal of mattelines and tweaked shadows in the water. The BD is the original. I'm not the biggest fan of the timing on the BD but they did some things right.

SilverWook said:

Or the D704?

Ah, yes. You're right, I encountered the issue on the D704 - caps as well, might be the DVD recorder then.

SilverWook said:

Maybe I ought try the analog input on my DV camcorder...

Worth a shot.

Gragory1500 said:

What is this version of Star Wars, displayed on the screen?

It is either the 1977 original or 1981 re-release version.

SilverWook said:

Can you give me the exact time references, so I can try a recapture when I'm ready? If there's something wrong in my pipeline, the sooner I find it the better.

I could but as the issue apparently appeared randomly between your captures I'm afraid that any time references wouldn't be of any help to you if you would attempt a new cap. :( Another problem, is the culprit the LD player (8210) or your DVD-recorder? Don't know what would be the best way to find out...

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

Back to WOWOW: I'm sure that EP1 has original non-CGI scenes, while the BD has the *improved* versions...

If you mean Raiders of the Lost Ark, several shots have been digitally tweaked since the DVD format, the "WOWOW- broadcast" is altered, the BD less so.

SilverWook said:

If other LD's have the same hiccups in the same places as mine did when digitized, we might finally know what exactly has been giving msycamore headaches.

The hiccups are capture related, missing fields and frames at different places between the captures, nothing wrong with the actual LD's. Well, besides "Coily" but I guess he could be present on the o-neg anyway.

FanFiltration said:

I think this must really be the best gif ever made. It's basically the gif other gifs are made of. Nothing will ever again reach the same level of artistry on display here. : )

No, I'm pretty sure that was what RAH said, but it may only be what he assumed as it would be the reasonable thing to do.

But yeah, reading that American Cinematographer article again it certainly sounds like they actually did directly alter the O-neg. The horror... whatever the case is, restoring and preserving Star Wars and its sequels is not an impossible task if only there's will, the money and expertise exist.

Mavimao said:

Btw, whatever happened with this 1st generation VHS tape version?

Hefa seems to have mysteriously disappeared, never heard from him again.  Maybe he realized he didn't actually have the specific version we were looking for or maybe I scared him away. :(

If "Alderaan shot first" is in it, I'll buy it right away.

If it's true that the 2004 DVD version actually makes an appearance again, it should be noted that Lucas consider those versions important: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/May-2004-Be-With-You/topic/15349/

Just to let people know, I'll pass the torch to Spaced Ranger who was kind and offered to help out with this. That is great as I rarely find the time and motivation on this these days. And I'm sure he'll do a great job and gets things moving on this ever delayed project. Fresh blood is what this project needs...

When it has already taken this long, I was suggesting that we may as well start from scratch and do this right, so I asked SilverWook if he would like to do a fresh cap and also Antcufaalb who also seem to have some fine gears for capture. Luckily both agreed but at the moment they don't know when they will be able to...

AntcuFaalb said:

I'd be willing to TooT it if someone can help me track down two more cheap copies.

I'll be on the lookout for it. Again, thanks for the willingness to help out with this. Much appreciated. :) I'm also willing to pay if there's financial issues.

Fang Zei said:

Anyway, I was convinced George was eventually gonna get around to restoring the OOT someday. Didn't he make some comment at Celebration Europe about how it was still "too expensive" to restore the original versions? That right there pretty much sealed it for me: it was about money. All the Disney deal did was make it that much more of a sure thing, and pretty much guarantee it would happen sooner.

No offense but I honestly don't know if you're just playing dumb or if you genuinely bought that excuse. This was the film that practically made the company.

"Too expensive" said the billionaire who has basically declined a fully-paid-for preservation of the existing materials in the past.

"Too expensive" said the billionaire who never answered to film historian and preservationist Robert A. Harris offer doing it for free back in 2006.

This is a guy who doesn't want his original films restored and preserved, it's that easy. Of course there is time and expense needed for it to happen but when the mogul of a multi-billion dollar company like LFL lament such a thing as being too costly, you don't need to be Einstein to get what he says is just a really bad excuse. And that without even knowing about all the facts surrounding his revisionism crusade for the last two decades.

I mean this is the same guy who apparently had written into his contract with Fox, stating that any prints of the original film that are found must be hunted down and destroyed. Do you think LFL provided The National Film Registry with a 1980 print of The Empire Strikes Back when it was selected for preservation in The Library of Congress three years ago? I think Irvin Kershner would have liked the idea...

LucasFilm didn't fund the "restoration" back in '96, it was all funded by Fox. Maybe it's time LFL lift their fingers and give something back to its devoted fans that really should have jumped ship a long time ago after all the kicking in the nuts. If not for that, do it for American film history.

lightspeed2112 said:

But didn't George say that the originals were "destroyed" while making the Special Editions, so they couldn't be released even if he wanted to? Would this not make him out to be a liar then?

IIRC, Robert A. Harris mentioned years ago that the actual original cut negative wasn't altered (it was disassembled, cleaned up and reassembled). A new duplicate negative was what all the work was done on preparing Star Wars for the Special Edition. Everything else is just horror stories made up to conveniently make it seem like a restoration is somehow impossible.

SilverWook said:

msycamore said:

Very nice results poita! Love that texture/grain, gorgeous.

You of all people didn't notice an "old friend" hiding in the bottom right of the frame? ;)

He-he  I did notice him, but in this case it wasn't anywhere near a problem I think. Is it your super 8 print, Silver? Maybe you are followed by him.

Very nice results poita! Love that texture/grain, gorgeous.

This is fucking disgusting. Didn't actually know how bad it really was with some of these classics. Thanks for this thread, Doctor M. It makes sense to now have LFL under this same roof.

I'll be damned, the info on IMDB was correct after all. Glad to finally get this confirmed.

I felt the picture needed to be posted in the thread just for the sake of it. ;)

Wow, that is early! Many interesting things about it...

"4EB"- Still the full student film title.

"108 minutes of the future" - they already had the running time set in stone?! Little did they know that it would ultimately be cut down to 81 minutes by stupid Warner executives.

"bart patton - a COPPOLA COMPANY" - I know who Bart Patton is (he was a director and friend of Coppola at UCLA and he helped produce Rain People) but was this the first name American Zoetrope went under or something else? Never heard the name before. EDIT: Bart Patton did apparently do some voice work for THX 1138.

"Warner Bros. - Seven Arts" - means the ad is from '69 at the latest, as that was the year it was acquired by Kinney.

Oh, hi btw. Sorry for my absence again, work and private life is killing me at the moment. :(

Spaced Ranger said:

How's the THX 1138 preservation coming along?

That's a quite demonstrative picture of where the project is at. ;)

Laserschwert said:

Makes you wonder, why the Death Star wasn't called Star Destroyer, and the Star Destroyer wasn't called Death Triangle.

Because they obviously were based on the real Destroyers used in WWI and II, but instead of the sea they are used among the stars, hence Stardestroyer.

AntcuFaalb said:

msycamore: Good point(s). I will reconsider my position.

I'm not saying you should, I understand your view on it. It's just that we are for some reason seen by some as crazy already for asking about a simple restoration of a cultural milestone.

But, I guess we are pretty crazy around here, why would a company like to sell a product everyone wants to buy? That doesn't make any sense...

Jonno said:

Syncing of that will take longer (the rather clunky Womble is the only tool I know that can edit 5.1 AC-3 without reencoding) but it'll become my top priority once you manage the capture.

Thanks for the willingness to help with this!

I found this old post by MrBitperfect invaluable on the subject: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Preserving-DTS-LaserDisc-tracks-specifically-Jurassic-Park/post/577655/#TopicPost577655

Jonno said:

I actually have quite a soft spot for the 1999 DVD myself - I can remember the excitement of importing it from the US and exploring the features and commentary. And of course the film looked and sounded fantastic, at least for the time. I can certainly try to fit in a sync for that, but realistically I'll only have time (and patience!) for one - would you prefer the Dolby Stereo or 70mm mix?

That's very nice of you, I would prefer the 70mm mix as we already have the other mix synced officially. And I am only thinking of my upcoming audio rip(s). Your BD sync takes priority of course.

Jonno said:

As I've mentioned, I haven't done a full video test with the Dolby Stereo PCM but a quick sample indicates it's noticeably stronger and clearer than the weak-sounding '99 AC-3. Don't be surprised if it's a little quieter than the 70mm mix - the disc was mastered at a lower level (though it would be hard to match the 1995 laserdisc, whose PCM track is the most boisterous I've yet to encounter!)

Looking forward to take a listen...

AntcuFaalb said:

Also, what constitutes "original"?

The "tantive orange items" were part of every release print of Star Wars, including the IB Technicolor prints and the prints with the spliced-in '81 crawl.

http://fd.noneinc.com/Glitch/starwars-tantiveorangeerrors/starwars-tantiveorangeerrors.html

I'd consider any release that's missing 'em to be non-original, but I'm a pain in the ass. ^_^

And I thought I was one of a kind when it came to being a "purist"- I actually hate that epithet, it sounds like we are some kind of disorder when it is the other way around IMO. Anyway, if you consider those "tantive orange errors" as something sacred you're in a lot of trouble, these films are littered with various forms of anomalies like those, where do you draw the line?

Don't misunderstand me AntcuFaalb, I see where you come from but what about the other thousand/million dirt marks and scratches? For example, in 1980 when ESB was shown across the globe there was a quite big hair in one of the opticals when one snowspeeder fly between the legs of an AT-AT, remove that and it's not considered the original film by you? That is something that I can assure you would be removed if these films would ever be restored.

I'm not saying that it's not something I care about (these FX's are every bit as important as those of King Kong or Metropolis IMO) but we must be a little bit realistic, most people will not study them, they will just enjoy them. I fully agree that an theatrical IP would be the most ideal source for a new videorelease if something like that is possible.

The problem is that many fans just like Lucas fail to understand the great value of this film being done in the 70's, they like to pretend "it's always looked this way", they don't see it as the classic special effects film it is.

A great example of this is the reaction that thread of yours got where you suggested to make a sort of "de-specialized version" of Star Wars but only using the best possible original sources no matter how jarring the end result. The way a real restoration a la Criterion or Masters of Cinema would do it if no other element was available. But when it comes to Star Wars the view of it is I'm afraid entirely different.

Jonno said:

Thanks for your patience everyone - I've been working on a re-edit of the 70mm track which I wanted to finish before sending out any more links. I'm afraid it's still just the PCM Dolby Surround track (which will yield something like 4.1 through a Pro Logic processor), but this version syncs to the BD video far more tightly than before (and it should, since this is my third attempt!)

I'm sorry everyone for the lack of updates and progress, I'm pretty sure I've got everything that I need for bitperfect audio rips of the AC-3 Alien LD now. Read all the info I came across regarding this a few moths ago and it shouldn't be impossible with what I now have. I feel ashamed of myself that I haven't tested and done this already but I have seldom free time for the fun stuff these days, new job where I travel a lot and are seldom at home, several LD projects waiting to be completed... :( Jonno, will contact you regarding this as soon as possible, it needs to be done.

Jonno said:

I'll send PMs to everyone who's waiting, let me know if I forget you or if you'd like to be added to the list.

As a bonus I've also done a sync of the PCM Dolby Stereo mix from the 1992 collector's edition laserdisc. I haven't managed to do a full video test of this sync yet, but if you'd like to try it and let me know how you find it, feel free!

I would of course like to be added to that list. Awesome that you've acquired the PCM 35mm Dolby track! Not a bad bonus, very interested.

Thank you, Jonno!

Also, I know it's an old standard def transfer but can I be bold and request a potential sync with the '99 DVD transfer as well? I absolutely understand if you're not willing to as it's not fun and an easy job audio syncing, it is in fact a real bitch if I have to voice my opinion. ;) Just a thought I had as I'm still very fond of that old transfer.

I also plan to at least make a quick and dirty preservation of the AC-3 Alien as its color timing is quite interesting in a few scenes.

Btw, what are your thoughts on the 35mm PCM track Jonno? Compared it with the AC-3 tracks? Curious...

Oh, I misunderstood it, Andrea's LD transfer isn't a straight cap of that LD. Would be nice to have that one preserved. Incredible how they let such a faded source like that see a video release, the crawl is completely pink! Quite clean looking though.

Also, we have the PAL THX releases, which haven't been under much scrutiny, there's a quite big tear in the opening Fox logo in the Technidisc / GOUT source, have forgotten to check if it is present in the PAL THX releases... we know it's a different telecine than the NTSC versions but it would still be interesting to see if they share the same source.

TServo2049 said:

The presence of the original '77 flyover in the ITV leads me to believe that going back to the first 1982 transfer, the crawl, flyover and end credits were always from a different source than the rest of the film.

Agree, the "'82 IP" is most likely an opening day print with spliced in revisions, they only happened to miss the early Yavin composite when they prepared it for video. Just look at how long it took for anyone here to notice that minor difference. And we are freaks.

Perhaps been around from the very beginning, before the Tantive corridor damage happened.

TServo2049 said:

I'm still wondering if this was the same IP/IN used for the French LBX LD in 1989, or if that was just a similar IP. Andrea had told me that transfer didn't have the orange errors, but marvins' capture of the intro (posted in the French OT preservation thread) shows that they ARE there. And also remember, in the '92 transfer, it switches to the older transfer for the Greedo scene - there is also a source switch at the same point on the French LD. So both IP/INs (if they're not the same one) must have had the burned-in English subs.

Have downloaded Andrea's transfer but haven't checked it out yet.  Please share your finds if you're spotting anything unusual either here or in the other thread.

TServo2049 said:

I still have a theory that the unsubbed "first-gen" IP wasn't the main GOUT source, but was only used for the Greedo scene.

Yes, that is also what I have suspected to be what that Widescreen Review info was all about. It's the only thing that makes any sense.

AntcuFaalb said:

Can you re-post any/all of the conclusions you've come to in those other threads? It would be useful to start collecting that information here.

Actually my discoveries and conclusions are right there in that post: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Print-variations-in-77-Star-Wars/topic/14705/ 

...combined with the discoveries here: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Credits-Leaders-Thread/topic/12960/

It's quite easy to see the pattern...

'77 May, opening day prints: "cloudy composite" - "rough credit roll" - "Dolby mix prints only."

'77 June, wide release prints: "cloudless composite" - "revised credit roll" - "both Dolby and Mono mix prints." (other very minor differences are possible, there has been speculation about the opening crawl for example)

^ this is of course only my theory and it may be wrong, but a lot seems to support my idea that this is an opening day variation going by all the sources out there. This is what I, and I believe, none have settled with for now.

Puggo Krig (Swedish 16mm) is too blown out in order to make out what composite it uses but it's most likely a "cloudless"- source as it is a mono mix print and contains the revised credit roll.

Baronlando said:

We know now that some actual prints were made right off the negative and they would have had the subtitles, so that laserdisc interview makes even less sense to me now. The guy seems to be making a leap that the whole movie is a generation away just because the subtitles are present.

Have it been confirmed that theatrical prints were made right off the negative? I recall some speculation on Verta's site but was there a definitive answer to this? There has to be some intermediate steps where the Tantive tears originated. The 80's home video source lack them, which makes me believe the damage originated in the Interpositive stage or Internegative stage.

The IP/IN used for home video from '82 up to '92 is edited together in both small and large chunks with mid-reel changes which results in many frames tossed, a real glue-party.

The IP/IN that was first seen used for the '92 NTSC Letterbox VHS / Technidisc SWE LD release and subsequent THX releases (GOUT) is most likely an theatrical IP or IN, battered from making countless of prints, contains the theatrical timing, albeit severely pink faded in many instances and further removed from it when it was tweaked in post to counteract it.

What doesn't make any sense is that Widescreen Review blurb and the American Cinematographer article's info regarding the IP's. In one of those articles which focused on the SE, it was mentioned that a new IP was created in 1985 that was meant to be the base for all future home video releases as the old one was biting the dust. This definitely doesn't add up with what we know. There are mainly two sources that we have been presented with in the home video market, from 1982 - 1992 and 1992 - 1995.