INv8r_ZIM said:
Is this introduced in the telecine, or in mastering?
I'm not sure, but I don't think the actual LD's had this problem, so it was probably something introduced when they mastered the DVD's. Icing on the cake. ;)
natethefighter said:
I've had similar issues attempting to get a hold of this through a couple of torrents; no one is seeding it. I'm particularly familiar with torrents... any other options I don't know of?
I gave you an invite to MySpleen where it's still seeded.
Harmy said:
Awesome 1971 hour long interview with George Lucas conducted just after THX flopped in cinemas: http://binarybonsai.com/blog/george-lucas-maker-of-films-1971
You can kind of see where this whole "it's my movie and I can do whatever I want with it" thing comes from emotionally. Almost makes you feel sorry for the guy.
Yeah, it's a great and interesting interview, a DVD was made of it. Here's the thread:
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/George-Lucas-Maker-of-Films-documentary/topic/10403/
danny_boy said:
but the original film was restored
If the film was restored why wasn't the National Film Registry given a new print for preservation, why did Lucasfilm try to persuade them to take a SE print instead, Fox who paid for this whole "restoration" in the first place could've made this happen, right? It's because it was a half-assed restoration done in order to revise the film. A year or two later Lucas had acquired the full rights to Star Wars and nothing was stopping him going ahead with his plans.
danny_boy said:
Sorry dude---my 1982 VHS tape is not being surpressed by ol' George.
And George could easily have stopped that IB technicolor print from being shown to the public in Baltimore in 2010 even if it was for free.
Well, we're talking about suppression of the original FILMS, not your pan & scan video tape of the '81 re-release.
Yes, but he didn't because it would've made Lucasfilm look very stupid in the media.
danny_boy said:
As long as those films are locked away there will be fans who are upset about this.
And I am one of them------but I don't hate George for it.
And neither do I, but I don't have to like him either.
Mike O said:
What did they do for Blade Runner?
They used existing IP's for the archival versions.
danny_boy said:
There was a seriouse restoration done to star wars in 1995!
Let's clarify one thing to make it understandable to all------the physical condition of the original camera negatives(that were used for printing in 72' and 77' respectively) of the Godfather and Star wars are roughly the same(despite the clean up and restoration done on them)----the Godfather is probably in worse condition.
The new Godfather 4K master files that are now used to generate new archival or theatrical prints were sourced from many elements(dupes/interpositives/outtakes and the original camera negative--itself)------in other words-----this 4k digital negative corresponds to only half of the OCN:
The newly restored Godfather relies on snippets of film culled from many sources. “There was no foundation left. It is a Frankenstein,” Harris says,
http://www.postmagazine.com/Publications/Post-Magazine/2008/November-1-2008/RESTORATION.aspx
Is that any different to the Star War's"frankenstein" digital negative?
Yes, Lucas had to get it restored due to the bad shape it was in, in order to release the Special Edition, but as we all know by now, the purpose of that event wasn't to restore the original film, that being made was just a stepping stone towards the revised cut of the film. It was in fact not restored in the truest sense either, the 62 shots made on CRI-stock for example were replaced with digitally re-composited shots, all the optical wipes were redone etc. No new video-release made, (the one released in '95 when the "restoration" was still in the work was dubbed "The last chance to own the original Star Wars) no newly restored prints for exhibition, no new print of the original sent to the NFR, even though they had requested it since the film was selected in '89.
The goal and purpose of the Godfather restoration shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as the Star Wars - Special Edition, it was something entirely different. If the negative is a "Frankenstein" or not is irrelevant, it's sad but the films are saved and restored, Star Wars is not, quite the opposite. Suppressed, hunted down and despised by its maker is more like it. Could it perhaps be some of these actions that causes frustration and anger directed towards this man? If he only was quiet about the issue it would be bad, but he has also been quite arrogant in media about it;
So when he says things like "care deeply about the fans" it becomes quite laughable. Many people love these films, and the only one who stands in the way of a true restoration happening is Lucas. Get real and see the facts, THX 1138 is treated in a similar way and to a lesser extent American Graffiti, had it not been for Spielberg we wouldn't have the original Indy films restored either. You're on a site that was created with the goal to get the original Star Wars films restored and you wonder why there is frustration directed towards him. As long as those films are locked away there will be fans who are upset about this. Your historical comparisons with Coppola and the Godfather films are embarrassing.
FremenDar said:
Since the JAWS Blu-ray is only going to have 7.1 DTS-HD MA, anyone have a high bitrate PCM track from the Signature Collection Laserdisc?
Have this really been confirmed? I guess a PCM rip would be nice anyway, as there's a pretty big chance the mono mix will be lossy on the Blu-ray if they include it.
Coligion said:
I was just about ready to order the region A Blu-Ray when I read some posts about the 5.1 remix being subject to criticism. Can anyone that owns this release of Escape from New York confirm whether or not it has the original soundtrack used in the first edition DVD?
I have not yet been able to get an answer to this. Maybe someone who owns it will see this and confirm it for us, as there's a chance one of the releases just have a stereo fold-down of the re-mix.
No matter. Think back to 1977. You’re in the theater,
Then, the infamous credit scroll — rows of yellow letters drifting away into space. The words “Episode IV” appear. What on earth could that mean?
It means that you've attended a screening in 1981 instead of 1977.
-1, the title Episode IV - A New Hope did appear on the published script of the film in '79, film prints with the redone opening did first show up on the '81 re-release.
none said:
As there are laser bolt fire frames before and after these modified ones, which don't seem revised (?) why change these three? Guess it's more dramatic having the bolts near the rebels heads... Some occurances of laser bolt fire being changed for the SE have coincided with another type of revision either in the same shot or neighboring scene. This catch seems to add weight that everything was recomp'd.
Yeah, it might. There are more than just these three I posted in that particular shot that are re-comped, probably all of them, these were just the most obvious ones, that's why I decided to post just these three frames.
I was a little sceptical about it before, because all the timings and positions of the elements seems to match the originals so precisely, whereas in all other cases of re-comped shots in the trilogy, you'll immediately see the difference if you studying it, this may all have to do that the positioning and timings had to match the on-set footage in this case with all the blanks that is fired.
doubleofive said:
if you grab the others, I'll put them up as is.
Will try to grab them for you.
We wondered a few pages back if the laser bolts in the blockade runner shootout were re-composited, at least some of them were. It appears to me that all of them were re-composited in this last shot just before Vader boards the ship, these three frames are the most obvious due to the different positions of the elements:
Top: GOUT Bottom: 2004 DVD
Top: GOUT Bottom: 2004 DVD
Top: GOUT Bottom: 2004 DVD
I'm now pretty sure more of them were redone, but I don't think I have the patience to go through it to be honest, I have been called "the comparison-freak" by none in the past, but even I have my limitations. ;) This was done in '97 btw.
On comparison 13 of Star Wars, the description says: "This first shot of R2 and 3PO has been reframed, possibly due to a tear in the negative. (1997 Change)"
In the other thread dedicated to the tears that appeared on the release prints and on some home video releases, Tservo pointed out that the camera shake in the original film was a combination of a real camera shake and optical effect, and he is absolutely correct about that, for the Special Edition they most likely went back to the original production footage, either to avoid additional grain caused by the opticals or maybe due to CRI-stock fading.
There are also at least two other shots with an optical camera shake, they appear on shots of Solo and Luke in the Falcon when they're preparing for the incoming TIE's, oddly enough both were repositioned one frame later in the '97SE, much like the dissolves between Luke and Vader in ESB. This difference was easier for me to describe than it would've been with screenshots.
danny_boy said:
You missed my point mate.
Are you f**king serious? The only one who misses the point is you, the story about The Godfather films you bring up as an example of "why are people angry at Lucas but not Coppola" is ridiculous, this whole issue became news first when film-preservation expert Robert Harris started to work on the restoration, nobody knew about this, not even Paramount. And even if this had been known, there's no comparison... what the hell have this to do with Coppola?
I admit that some things I mentioned earlier were a bit silly, the separation masters and negative being in bad shape was obviously out of Lucas control, but when it became clear how bad the situation was for Star Wars, there should've been a serious restoration done, new preservation negatives created, a new print sent to the National Film Registry for preservation, instead of this he created The Special Edition and tried to get the NFR to preserve a print of that instead of the original film. All this from a man who is on the board of directors for The Film Foundation - an organization dedicated to protecting and preserving motion picture history. If this isn't enough he also basically tells the fanbase in the press from time to time who would like to see the films restored, to fuck off along with other bizarre statements.
If Lucasfilm doesn't get their act together soon and make a restoration, his crusade to eliminate these films will make him look even more ridiculous in a few years when some fans have scanned some prints and released those to the public.
You know very well why people are upset, but if for some weird reason you don't, I'm afraid I cannot help you.
danny_boy said:
Oh come on dude----Star wars was incredibly popular----that meant that the original camera negative(OCN) was used extensively to create "new prints" from 1977 to 1981(long before any thoughts were given to preservation)
It is pretty much symptomatic of the era----the OCN of Taxi Driver, The Godfather and Jaws are in woeful condition too------so much so that the OCN of the Godfather cannot even be passed through a pin registered mechanism anymore without falling apart(but Coppola does not get the type of vitriolic hate that is often attribued to Lucas because of it)
Dude, that's because he have taken care of the issue, these films have been given the care and passion they deserve, they are safe. When Lucas found out about the state of Star Wars, what did he do? not a restoration, that's for sure and that is a pretty big difference. If Coppola had treated The Godfather films in the same way that Lucas have treated Star Wars and its fans the last fifteen years, you would see quite frustrated comments attributed towards him. If you don't get why people are upset, then I don't know what to say, there is actually a reason behind all of this. Do you see George Lucas as a man who really cares deeply about the fans of these films?
Baronlando said:
My favorite look: 70s mall girl. I would like to pick her up in my Trans Am, go see Bay City Rollers.
Agree, nice pic. She was very cute back then. IMO she was also very cute in Star Wars and Empire, her look in Jedi is very much like the film itself, uninteresting. Some more nice pictures of her:
^ Young Carrie in the film Shampoo from '75.
A beauty high on coke.
Unrelated to the topic, but when I searched around for Carrie pics on the net I found these two:
Someone made an animated gif of that filmstrip in the making of book, kinda nice.
No, I haven't actually tried anything to get the subs any better, I also think other guys have since improved upon my work.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/06/01/whos-replacing-george-lucas-at-lucasfilm
"I also care deeply about our fans and it was important to have someone who would carry on the passion and care that I've given the films over the years."
"Care deeply about his fans", give me a break.
Sure, if he really have given the films this passion and care over the years, why did a film collector need to save his ass back in the '90's when he couldn't find a print of Star Wars in good condition for his so called "restoration". Why is the original negative deteriorated, why are the color separation masters incomplete. Why does he refuse to provide The National Film Registry with prints. Why oh why doesn't he let a true restoration happen?
Lucas: "You have to go through and do a whole restoration on it, and you have to do that digitally." "It’s a very, very expensive process to do it."
But the passion and care is there, right?
Thanks, g-force. I blame you and Moth3r as it was you two who made me want to check out AviSynth scripting in the first place. ;) Maybe this could be incorporated into your script somehow?
This maybe makes it easier.
Before
After
djchaseb said:
forgive my ignorance but what differences am I supposed to be noticing here?
See the improper color registration, watch the color red in my screenshots.
This particular issue is not on Star Wars as far as I know, never did watch if Jedi have this problem, but it's possible. This was actually something I applied when I made my own encode over a year ago, have wanted to point out this easy fix before but thought I had trashed my notes of it, until I found them today. These transfers really have every video-flaw in the book, Empire is hands down the single worst video transfer I have ever seen of a major motion picture. Can anyone tell me if they've seen any other film with the amount of DVNR-artifacts that is on display here?
For those of you who wants to apply my correction, be sure to not apply the chroma shift on any other parts of the video except on those frame counts I posted. I remember going through the whole film meticulously and making notes, so it can be trusted. Don't know how good it can be seen on those comparisons I made, but it really makes a difference.
For those who are still interested in improving the GOUT, here’s a way to deal with the bad color registration in Empire.
The frames that needs correction:
NTSC
Just add this command into your AviSynth script: chromashift(v=2,u=2)
Plugin:
http://www.geocities.com/siwalters_uk/chromashift.html
The frame numbers have been updated and a blue plane correction have also been added, thank you Red5!
You_Too was kind to make this script of the fix to make things easier for you implementing it into your projects:
chroma=last
a=trim(chroma,0,90887)
b=trim(chroma,90888,96324).ChromaShift(C=2)
c=trim(chroma,96325,96446)
d=trim(chroma,96447,96650).ChromaShift(C=2)
e=trim(chroma,96651,96945)
f=trim(chroma,96946,97040).ChromaShift(C=2)
g=trim(chroma,97041,97529)
h=trim(chroma,97530,106132).ChromaShift(C=2)
i=trim(chroma,106133,129145)
j=trim(chroma,129146,129574).ChromaShift(C=2)
k=trim(chroma,129575,150203)
l=trim(chroma,150204,155767).ChromaShift(C=2)
m=trim(chroma,155768,155837)
n=trim(chroma,155838,159587).ChromaShift(C=2)
o=trim(chroma,159588,159652)
p=trim(chroma,159653,163075).ChromaShift(C=2)
q=trim(chroma,163076,163145)
r=trim(chroma,163146,165306).ChromaShift(C=2)
s=trim(chroma,165307,165516)
t=trim(chroma,165517,166149).ChromaShift(C=2)
u=trim(chroma,166150,166213)
v=trim(chroma,166214,168066).ChromaShift(C=2)
w=trim(chroma,168067,168236)
x=trim(chroma,168237,168761).ChromaShift(C=2)
y=trim(chroma,168762,168849)
z=trim(chroma,168850,169402).ChromaShift(C=2)
z2=trim(chroma,169403,169484)
z3=trim(chroma,169485,169928).ChromaShift(C=2)
z4=trim(chroma,169929,170763)
z5=trim(chroma,170764,170858).ChromaShift(C=2)
z6=trim(chroma,170859,170978)
z7=trim(chroma,170979,172852).ChromaShift(C=2)
z8=trim(chroma,172853,0)
a+b+c+d+e+f+g+h+i+j+k+l+m+n+o+p+q+r+s+t+u+v+w+x+y+z+z2+z3+z4+z5+z6+z7+z8
Some examples with chromashift applied, unfiltered on top.
A simple shift of the chroma makes a subtle but in the end big difference.
captainsolo said:
Was it ever determined if the Technidisc pressed ESB and ROTJ were similar to the SW transfer?
About ESB, I know that the Special Collection (Japan) and SWE (Pioneer USA) is two different transfers of the same master, a master which is unfortunately very problematic in its colors and its many missing frames around reel changes and also in between them, my SWE copy (Pioneer USA) lacks more than hundred frames in total and I think the Special Collection is even worse. How the pressings of Pioneer Japan, Mitsubishi and Technidisc compare, especially in the colors is something I'm curious about. I have asked Aluminum Falcon to check his Mitsubishi copy for me and Darth Mallwalker said he would check his copies.
Some examples of the ugly hues in my Pioneer copy compared to the more natural hues seen in the '85 LD:
Pretty nasty hues... the '85 release isn't perfect either, it's often too yellow and green, but overall the original timing is pretty much there. The Special Collection and SWE release of Star Wars is also plagued by these unnatural hues in places, that's one of the reasons why the Technidisc pressing of the first film was so great and it didn't lack any frames, unfortunately it seems the other pressings of ESB are made from the same master but I have a tiny, tiny hope that they could have at least more stable colors.
Jonno said:
The Empire teaser sounds like an apt choice - what's the best source for the McQuarrie version? The 2004 bonus disc?
I guess the one on the 2004 bonus disc is in best quality but it's quite severely cropped, here's a comparison with the 4:3 version on the Editdroid extra features DVD.
Original '79 teaser in 4:3 - Editdroid DVD:
Original '79 teaser in 16:9 - 2004 Bonus DVD:
It also seems to be a different variation from the one found on the editdroid extras DVD as it lacks this crude early logo at the end:
If this bother you, I would suggest the second '79 teaser mislabeled as Launch Trailer on the 2004 DVD, that one is in very good quality. I don't know, maybe there's a better version of the original teaser on some fan disc out there.
frank678 said:
If I can veer off topic for just a second...
Can anyone comment on whether the NTSC pan and scan VHS versions from 1990 and 1992 are from the same source (and/or if any additional processing was done for those releases)
I'm mainly interested in whether the colours would therefore be the same for pan and scan vhs tapes from 1982 up to 1993.
Have no idea if they recycled the same transfer on other releases, there's a possibility however that the '92 VHS got the same treatment as the widescreen tapes that year; a new video master was created from a different IP and used from then on.
Interesting that your rental copy didn't have the FOXVID-code in the upper corner like Starkiller's tape had:
