negative1

well,

that's good to know!

later

-1

sunday256 said:

Cobra Kai said:

 

 

 

 

 

here's our uncorrected version from the LPP:

----------

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Star-Wars-Colortiming-Cinematography-was-What-changes-was-done-to-STAR-WARS-in-93/post/593311/#TopicPost593311

later

-1

jero32 said:

In that case, picture quality is pretty great. Any chance you could post a png for comparison? (Also personally I always use imgur for pictures, it has less ads)

hmm. i use imageshack because it has an batch uploader.

i don't have the original source files on me right now.

these are screencaps.

later

-1

AntcuFaalb said:

 

Are we discussing the cloud or networks in general?

Networks are great for CLI stuff (e.g., connecting with a terminal emulator via SSH to a big *n*x box -- I do my work like this all the time), but the cloud seems to be a less-rigidly-defined means to deal with "big data".

GUI stuff is, more often than not, nasty over a network. However, X11 does a pretty good job at it, IMO.

a little bit of both..

how would you go about setting up a 'star wars' server?

obviously it would just be plain data storage.

but there was speculation that using some online scripting,

you could do some simple preview cleanup of frames. (i think

'none' suggested that)... and submit some of that back

to the site..

also, you could probably submit avisynth scripts,

and have it run remotely on a faster computer.

and see the results.

i only have access to dual core computers from

about 6 years ago.. so anything more powerful

would be great. i'm not doing any heavy duty

editting, but i can run the software for cleanup.

the other guy have much more powerful computers.

i could use more ram, but at some point i'll upgrade

in the future. however, running windows 7 64bit

works well enough for me with 2 gigs of ram.

it does take a long time to render/convert stuff,

but i'm not in a rush. it's better to get it done right,

than rush through stuff with errors.

later

-1

how about?

(still haven't quite figured

out the aspect ratio for

display yet)...

================

jero32 said:

Detail seems good. White seems a little blown out maybe? (look at Han's chest plate)

this is the temporary untouched version

from the capture. still needs to be tweaked.

i was only talking about the picture quality,

not the colors.

later

-1

lpd said:

I've come up with a saying about digitally created sets n stuff, are you ready....

"If its done well, you shouldn't be able to tell" (copyright lpd)

 

i think there will/possibly be digital touch-ups or replacements

to background sets and  scenes if star wars is redone for the 3d

conversions. you won't be able to tell the difference.

later

-1

Molly said:

The cloud is a giant step backward...

no, it's NOT!

IT'S great for low level, CLI stuff.

text based forms, and data entry.

which is what a lot of it is..

for anything fancy, gui-based,

or data intensive. i can't stand it..

but if you have a superfast network connection,

or something else, it really shouldn't make a 

difference.

i have yet to see a video intensive EDITING

(not watching like netflix/hulu/etc) application

that can work through a network or wireless

connection that works right.. i could be wrong

in the future it could get better.

later

-1

better/worse?

later

-1

Brooks said:

negative1 said:

well, hey, we just got to mars recently.

so it's not like we knew how it really look before!

 

i'm sure we could make some sets look just like it now!!

 

later

-1

The tatooine sets looked pretty good, it was mostly things like the grasslands of naboo (cartoonishly green) and the interiors of Grevious's ship that bothered me the most.  And I think there's something to be said about having the actors able to interact with and react to an actual environment, but I don't mean to derail the thread. I just want to restate  how much I appreciate the screenshots because it reveals how much craft went into these films.

agreed..

but if you watch the originals, there's a lot of computer

graphics (death star), and computer controlled camera

movements, compositing etc..

for its time, there was a lot of work done using computers

just for those films.. i sure people that did special effects

like in king kong, or sinbad also though that using this

'new' stuff wasn't at all like the old school way of REALLY

making films...

every generation is going to complain, that we aren't

doing it the WAY IT SHOULD BE done back then.

star wars isn't immune to that thought either.

later

-1

Brooks said:

negative1 said:

 

if the set looks real,

what difference does it make?

ever see this:

 

stargate studios virtual backlot

========================

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PIEC4WqGOw

 

 

who need's real sets? ha ha

 

later

-1

That is really neat.  Why didn't the environments in the prequels look that good?  Maybe it's because they weren't based on real world settings like the ones in that video were.  I did notice that the other worldly setting in the youtube video was the worst looking one.

well, hey, we just got to mars recently.

so it's not like we knew how it really look before!

i'm sure we could make some sets look just like it now!!

later

-1

Harmy said:

The official AVCHD is still a few days away. Guys, I have my FINAL exams tomorrow, if I fail, I'm totally screwed, so I don't have time to f*ck about with this right now, so you'll just have to wait a bit.

As to that bright scene... F*CK IT!!! I already said it looked like this in my reference IB Print scans. Period. I really wish I could post some of them but I promised not to and I'm a man of my word.

Calibrating you monitor to make the scene look like you think it should will TOTALLY f*ck up all the rest of the colours in other scenes!!!

if other people want to step in recolor the scenes and do their

own versions.. go ahead..

we get questions about the colors of our version all the time

too... people... the reference is the reference.. we're going

to go by what's on the film, and adjust it from there, but we're

not going to change it to something that's not true to what it

actually is..

if it was like that on the film, it's going to look like that

digitally (once scanned or transferred)..

projection is different from scanning though of course.

go look in this thread for a ton of examples of that:

====================================

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Star-Wars-Colortiming-Cinematography-was-What-changes-was-done-to-STAR-WARS-in-93/topic/9805/

this version is basically mimicking the colors of 

the ib tech.so that's what you're getting..

when you see ours, you'll see the coloring of the LPP

version... each one is distinct, and though there is

some overlap. due to the nature, and the further

generation of the copies, our LPP is darker in some

areas, and lighter in others... no one will be completely

happy with every scene..

i just watched the rough draft of our entire LPP

and the colors look great.. most of them match

the IB tech, although there are some differences.

at some point in time, we'll post some comparisons

to show you what it's like.. some people like the

look of this, because its nearly authentic.. other

people that are used to more modern color palettes

may not care for it so much..

either way, it is, what it is.

later

-1

Mike O said:

skyjedi2005 said:

Seeing as Lucas is a billionaire if he wanted it he could have the best scanning equipment money could buy. 

But you already know that.

It is more of a is it worth it for him money wise considering the expense of restoring the version he would prefer stay buried.

 

Because the version of the trilogy my generation despises with Hayden at the end is the version that broke BD sales records, nail in coffin.

Yep. Just more proof that we've lost. 

i'm glad you guys never venture out of this forum

to see all the work that harmy, dark jedi, and puggo are

doing.. shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

we don't want anybody knowing that

we're actually ok with that!

======================

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/forum.cfm/Star-Wars-Preservations-and-Other-Fan-Projects/forum/17/

later

-1

Brooks said:

 

That is interesting, I never would have noticed that.  One of the things I love about the screenshots you guys post is seeing details in the film that I've never noticed.  Not just strange artifacts like that but just how elaborate the sets were in scenes like that one.  It's amazing they built all of that for such a short shot.  I miss the days of real sets.

if the set looks real,

what difference does it make?

ever see this:

stargate studios virtual backlot

========================

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PIEC4WqGOw

who need's real sets? ha ha

later

-1

Rox64 said:

That's funny, I was about to post about the raw pics.

I think everybody could have just a percent of the total raw files to avoid buying several HDD. This way, three or four users have 20 minutes of the film, another three or four users have the next 20 minutes of the movie, and so on. So then if you need the raws from a certain scene, you just need to ask the users who have them. In fact this could work with P2P...

It would be even better if you release the raws at 4k, for preservation purposes, so we could always reedit them in lossless format and then create 1080p or even higher-resolution mkv, but that's just an idea. 1080p is still nice.

that wouldn't work.. people want all the files locally.

i would hate to have to wait on someone making the

files available to me when i needed them.

===================================

looking at this again, making a private

Star Wars Server would be cool, but very difficult

legally.... it would take A LOT of resources to

get it up, have server space, do administration, etc.

i HATE anything CLOUD related.

we don't have the files in 4k anyways, that would make

it even larger!

================

about the other file formats.. like cineform

we just have had issues exporting it those

formats and re-importing them back into avid,

after effects etc.

later

-1

AntcuFaalb said:

Davnes007 said:

And, I still have my VCR.

Excellent -- me, too.

VCRs are, in some cases, magnificent pieces of engineering.

a friend just gave me a stereo vcr for free

recently a few weeks ago. my old one was

mono, i didn't know that. well, i'll have fun

trying it out soon. will be downconverting

some digital -> vhs soon.

later

-1

DaveSimonH said:

But sadly I'll have to make do with the atrocious quality non-anamorphic DVDs.

 

huh? the point of this site is to give people

alternatives. including several versions, such

as harmy's, dark jedi's, and the 35mm version.

get one of those!

later

-1

now you can examine harmy's b ffet 23 

sequence up close:

===========================

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Star-Wars-Tantives-Orange-Items-Thread-other-unintended-objects/post/593364/#TopicPost593364

would have never seen that, and probably

not even in slow motion!

later

-1

look at the b ffet 23 sequence

and frames as found by harmy:

=========================

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Star-Wars-Tantives-Orange-Items-Thread-other-unintended-objects/post/593364/#TopicPost593364

pretty neat..

later

-1

Harmy said:

In all pre 2004 versions of this shot, the stormtrooper passing near the camera seems to have been affected by some composition error where something was scribbled over one of the composite elements. Check it out, there's clearly a sign saying something like B FFET 23 over his path:

here is our version..

---------------------------------------

and all the frames around it:

======================

later

-1

put up a whole bunch of untouched

screen shots from several of the reels:

==============================

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Star-Wars-Colortiming-Cinematography-was-What-changes-was-done-to-STAR-WARS-in-93/topic/9805/page/12/

and here:

-------------

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Star-Wars-Colortiming-Cinematography-was-What-changes-was-done-to-STAR-WARS-in-93/topic/9805/page/13/

check them out.

later

-1

more reel 3:

=============

Some more big, high-res photos. First, the Death Star conference room:

 

 

Some more big, high-res photos. First, the Death Star conference room:

 

 

Preparing to completely blow away Alderaan. Lots of warm golden yellow on the button lights:

Luke takes his first step into a larger world. Nice and warm, natural skin tones, this is another one that looks about perfect to me:

reel 4:

==================

Luke has a bad feeling about this. Unfortunately, the light source is too concentrated, so the image is way too blown out in the middle. Not sure if the greenish look is due to fading or too much illumination. The colors on the right edge look good, though:

"This is some rescue!" Again, some blowout and greenish highlights (though it's certainly not as green as some of the Jedi1 scans of Death Star scenes):

From another seller, Ben Kenobi heading for the tractor beam, with a definite yellow-green cast. Not sure if this is due to fading, or due to the camera white balance - it's warmer than the Jedi1 scans, but still, I think it's *too* yellow-green:

Red Leader: (note the original is flipped, it should be mirrored)

later

-1

now onto reel 2:

=======================================

TServo2049 said:

R2 and 3PO - same shot as in my earlier post, the colors seem to match:

 

A big, sharp, high-res image of Luke, Ben and R2:

 

 

It's got some yellow-green in the walls and uniforms, but notice how much better the skin tones look, and how generally warmer it looks, than the Jedi1 scans from this same scene:

 

reel 3:

=====================

There's nothing you could have done." Same scene as one of the Derann images above:

Han introduces himself - pretty strong golden yellow cast here:

Chewie in the cockpit. Seems too yellow-green:

later

-1

TServo2049 said:

Some more film cell images I found on eBay, this time from the first film. These are a higher resolution than the ones I posted before, but lighting is  much more uneven - you can see that the person who took the photos was shining a flashlight down onto the cells, so some parts will look blown out, others look too dark/translucent (and you can often see the texture of the white bedsheet under the cell). Some of the images have similar greenish tendencies to the Jedi1.net scans, others don't.

 

 

Another seller's photo - this one of Leia and R2. Looks too cool?

 

we're going to try to do this by reels

starting with 1:

 

our untouched versions:

====================

"Secret mission? What plans? What are you talking about? I'm not getting in there!"

Another seller posted some images which are strangely lit - they seem to be backlit, but the light is some kind of rectangular shape positioned at an angle so that part of the image is blown out, and part is too dim.

Leia captured - wow, that's blown out. It looks cold where the light is strongest, but you can see yellow and green and cyan tendencies on the right side where there's not as much light:

Vader grills Leia on the Tantive. Again with the odd light source, not sure what to make of this image:

 

The Jawas - a nice reddish-gold hue, it feels right to me:

 

some are really dark:

R2 in the Sandcrawler - again, it has that warm look Mike has talked about, but the photo is kind of soft and there aren't many distinct colors visible, so again I'm not sure what to make of it:

 

later

-1

DVD-BOY said:

I made the comment on the old jedi.net forums, but Cineform HD avi is a great mezzanine format.  This is a segment of Temple of Doom:

General
Complete name                            : E:\CINEFORM\Temple of Doom\IndianaJones_TempleOfDoom_FilmLook_p1_CFHD_1080p2398.avi
Format                                   : AVI
Format/Info                              : Audio Video Interleave
Format profile                           : OpenDML
File size                                : 8.15 GiB
Duration                                 : 9mn 43s
Overall bit rate                         : 120 Mbps
Writing library                          : VirtualDub build 32842/release

Video
ID                                       : 0
Format                                   : CineForm
Codec ID                                 : CFHD
Codec ID/Info                            : CineForm 10-bit Visually Perfect HD (Wavelet)
Duration                                 : 9mn 43s
Bit rate                                 : 120 Mbps
Width                                    : 1 920 pixels
Height                                   : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio                     : 16:9
Frame rate                               : 23.976 fps
Scan type                                : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame)                       : 2.411
Stream size                              : 8.15 GiB (100%)

Now, I think I did this as Medium HD rather than High HD, but still the size of a feature is between 90-140GB.

It's now free for home use:

http://gopro.com/3d-cineform-studio-software-download/

Limited to 4:2:0 colour space, but definitely worth considering. We use the pro version at work to ingest from HDCAM SR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CineForm

This is very much a viable option - I wouldn't know where to start working with OpenEXR.

we have had terrible problems looking into cineform.

no way we would use that... then again, we haven't

tested openEXR either. 

so basically you have to choose your poison. 

dxNhd :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNxHD_codec

there are so many propietary formats used

by companys for their high end software,

that are kind of standards.. but not really.

if you stick with one software suite,

you want all your tools to work together.

uncompressed TIFFS are huge. jpgs don't

support some of the high end formats.

every filetype format has its pluses and minuses.

later

-1