msycamore

Yeah, I understood it had to do with the animation element obviously but I was a little bit unsure by how exactly it came out that way, it all sounds like a good explanation for what we're seeing.

TServo2049 said:

Yes, notice that the color of the bright edge garbage is basically the same color as the saber glow. That's why I think it was burned in with the glow itself. 

Yes, if you look more closely at the 2nd frame I posted, you can clearly see that there's actual saber glow animation visible at the top not just a bright edge.

Thank you for posting those -1. :) This is obviously not supposed to be seen if the cropping is done correctly, but anyone have a good technical explanation for what we're seeing here?

It would be interesting to see how some of these frames look without cropping -1, the large framing on the Special Collection LD in these scenes, reveals what looks to be what none described in another thread, light that bleeds between frames causing the neighboring frame to change color along the bottom and top edge. Don't know how visible it is on these frames but in motion its a pulsating and glowing light along the the top and bottom of the frame.

Seems to be around 10%, at least on this frame.

Edit: actually, on a second look it seems more like 7%. ;)

I wonder how much the Technidisc transfer is cropped when placed in that chart, maybe around 10%? I know that it show slightly more at the top and bottom compared to the GOUT in some scenes though, but I feel the cropping on that is a little too much.

TServo2049 said:

 

I think the 5% cropping there is about as perfect as you'll get it.

Yeah but I believe you got the brightness quite right, TServo. Here's an example.

No, I actually thinks the examples you posted here: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Star-Wars-Colortiming-Cinematography-was-What-changes-was-done-to-STAR-WARS-in-93/post/567965/#TopicPost567965

comes pretty close.

You sure knows how to find old abandon threads. :) These old primitive AviSynth experiments of mine is no good for any comparison. Today, I would actually say the original GOUT comes closer to the real deal than my crude tweaks except the hue on the close-up of the suns. I think with a little brightness correction of your frames, this will look great. How come this reel is so dark?

Interesting, don't think I've seen that interview before, where's it from?

TServo2049 said:

OK, this is something that has bugged me for years. I'm not buying the "vaseline" story. If there were really vaseline on the lens, the blur would be in the same place on every frame.

Don't quote me on this, but I've always assumed that animation department had to take every frame and create a piece of fake ground where the wheels were, then maybe blur it so it would blend in with the live footage. Unlike the mirror in the Death Valley pickups, it did not show up the same color due to the flaws of optical duping.

Then, after that pass, they had to dupe it *again* to add the shadow under the speeder. The problem is that this was on regular 35mm stock, while all the effects scenes were 8-perf VistaVision with twice the image area. Thus, the grain buildup and generation loss was much less noticeable, and the effects blended in with the live scenes once reduced to 35mm. Not so with this scene.

Therefore, the amount of duping this poor 35mm footage endured resulted in this extreme amount of grain. Combine with the extra grain from the negative to the actual theatrical prints, and this scene did almost look like blown-up 16mm.

Sounds like you just answered your own question, this is probably why the difference in grain is so stark in this sequence, even on low-res material such as the LD transfers the difference is very visible. Where comes that "vaseline on the lens story" from, was it from Lucas in the SE documentaries? maybe they cover this in Rinzler's making of, but what you describe sounds correct. I recall some story about the effects people being quite chocked at what footage they had to work with for this shot, I think the pan caused some serious problems. I agree that it's not the films proudest moment in terms of special effects, but I still like it better than the entrance shot into Mos Eisley with Toshi Station in the background, that one always looked fake to me.

Yes, that's why I posted a pic from the surrounding footage.

I guess it's only natural that most people wants this pass by shot to have the same grain quality and sharpness as the surrounding footage. That's why most optical effects were digitally recomposited for the SE in the first place. But the extra layer of grain is part of the effects technology of the time, many optical effects were even done to look as good as possible with this extra layer of grain in mind. If you remove it you're just doing the effect a disservice, removing the environment this effect were meant to occupy, the softer and grainier look helps mask any shortcomings. If you're ok with that, why not remove the matte-lines as well?

Well, it wouldn't kill me if it's slightly cleaned up, like I said I think I'm in minority here, it's just that I have a hard time to see what's so bad about these frames -1 posted other than its soft quality, the condition on it seems to be great. This was a film made in the 70's by humans, this crude optical effects footage didn't look as crisp as its surrounding footage with its extra layers of grain, the various black splotches seen in this sequence were on the original prints, a modern video transfer on Blu-ray would obviously don't leave such things in, I was just saying that I hope -1 leave it alone.

Harmy said:

Well, not necessarily. I think what DE did there is just about perfect, because it gets it much closer to what it would have probably looked like on an earlier generation print.

No, the built-in dirt was very much seen even on brand new '77 prints, I just hope -1 doesn't clean it up.

That reel seems to be in fantastic condition! please leave the optical dirt alone, I know that I'm in minority in this thinking but if you're going to clean up footage that is in this good condition you may as well get rid of the orange blob under the speeder.

Not exactly related to the topic but back when I IVTC'ed the Technidisc LD, I came across these white horizontal lines on the Binary Sunset, what's odd about them is that they along with other dirt spots, tell us that these frames were reused a couple of frames later in the sequence but in opposite order, this was possible as Luke had not yet entered the frame. As far as I know this seems to be how it have always appeared, just thought I would share this pointless info.

The screenshots are from the Technidisc LD as the marks are mostly gone by DVNR in the GOUT.

NTSC GOUT-frames:

36266 reappear as 36282

36267 reappear as 36281

36281

36282

It have since been discovered that the bright sunset picture where you quote me is a promo pic of the '97 Special Edition. It was also used in Rinzler's making of book.

Ah, that would've been awesome, thanks but after my search around various forums today, it seems that's one of those sound cards that unfortunately post-processes the SPDIF input streams, resulting in non-exact captures of the digital audio. While it still works for regular PCM audio streams, it will render non-PCM (AC-3, DTS) datastreams useless.

The M-Audiophile 2496 and AudioTrak Prodigy 7.1 should be able to handle it. As I own a LD player with an RF demodulator and other discs with tracks I'm interested in getting preserved, it may be time for me to buy a new soundcard, will keep you updated.

Damn, my soundcard doesn't have a SPDIF input. :(

According to my friend, it should be the same mix on both tracks. Unfortunately he has not the equipment/sound card needed to rip the audio. :( I made a quick look at what sound card my PC have, it's a Sound Blaster Live! 5.1 Digital (SB0220), have no idea if it's able to handle this or not. As I'm a complete rookie when it comes to this, I'll need to search around and see what I can find about it.

Would be great to have a rip of both tracks, but if I'm not able to, is there still interest in a basic capture?

SilverWook said:

Thanks for uploading the clip. It looks pretty seamless. :)

No problem, let me know if you guys want to see more samples, I'll try to post screencaps later today of the pink tint I have reduced so you guys know what I'm talking about.

SilverWook said:

One preservation project I'm contemplating is going to need footage from PAL and NTSC DVD's to work.

Ok, what is it? maybe I can help you with it.

Chewtobacca said:

Yes; I think that I prefer the Technidisc too.  Combining your v2 of the Technidisc with the scenes that look very from the JSC would be the best that one could do, I think -- at least until negative1's project is completed.

Here's a quick contrast and saturation tweak on my Technidisc capture.

top: DVD transfer / bottom: Tweaked

http://www.sendspace.com/file/ta5z4d

You can can improve it quite a bit just by tweaking the contrast and saturation etc, but you really have to do it on a shot by shot basis and I'm not sure if it's even worth it with all the great projects that's going on right now.

Sorry, had trouble uploading the sample yesterday. Anyway, here it is:  http://www.sendspace.com/file/12m4ry

a short clip from the point where it goes from PAL source to NTSC source, nothing too exciting, just to showcase the difference between the two sources.