towne32

Zyrother said:

I agree with towne32, even if you don't want to release the films themselves, releasing the script would be a major step forward in allowing other people to do their own thing, and maybe get even better results. Not only with Star Wars, but other films that have not gotten the proper treatment they deserve.

 Furthermore, if the script is done, I don't think the person who has spent so much time on it needs to be the workhorse in producing the output. In fact, I think he's the last person who should have to take that burden.

It made sense that he was doing it before, as the script was being updated continually. 

I think it is a good question. One that I probably wouldn't have brought up, due to the hard work you've put in. But if you're at the point of deciding whether or not to begin another massive encode, it's certainly worth discussing.

I admit that my enthusiasm in the end product (but not the technique) has waned a bit, now that TN1's work is shaping into something quite nice. The benefits of your upscale, to me, were:

1. It's 'pure' SW. There's no mixing of sources that need to be matched or rotoscoping to be spotted by the trained eye. This is also the main benefit of TN1. 

2. Color. It's not perfect, but it's roughly the color of the film I grew up watching. It's fairly consistent and not insane like 2004 and onwards. As you say, 35mm projects can be made to match the GOUT for those who are interested.

3. You've come up with a great script that has already been applied to other things, like Hal's project. It can be used for DeSp type projects where nothing better than GOUT is yet available.

The cons:

This is going to take you a very, very long time to start over with. You have other great projects going on. And there are two other films which will need adjusted scripts and again enormous periods of encoding.

DVNR. It's not going anywhere. 

This (I mean encoding the entire film, *not* the R&D) is being done for practical use, to view a less ugly version of the (approximately) untouched film. It's one of many options. That's what's great about this community. It has kind of a shot-gun approach. Every imaginable way of making this film exist is being attempted. That said, what is the userbase that will prefer this version to TN1 or Harmy or Team Blu? If it were a 2-day encode, I would say who cares? Let's add it to the pile and the list of options! It's not trivial when we're talking about probably more than half a year spent encoding the trilogy, if it's something five people watch once. 

I'm sure people will disagree. But I say, just get the script out there. People can do the scenes they need. Or the entire film if it's really ready-to-go. Someone might figure out how to get distributed computing power working for this, some day, and we can get it done rapidly.

I think this is worth discussing!

g-force said:

Blu-ray regraded from post 445 is better than the improved from post 449 

 I agree.

The screenshot comparison does show some kind of color shift.

:(

Best wishes, poita. 

I'm not sure. I also don't know if the inflation would be strictly a MKV:M2TS ratio, and I don't know if audio/video tracks have different impacts on the end size.

I've fought with it before, just going from m4v exported from premiere, and then muxing to m2ts. Thought I had calculated everything correctly, but M2TS files are just bloated. I think all containers add a bit, but MKV fares much better.

I couldn't find any solid info on calculating the overhead, so I just did it empirically and, after a few wasted encodings, ended up with an approximate ratio for the project.

Just finished watching. Very nice, as usual. Quite seamless as far as I could tell. The only deleted scene that stuck out was the probe droid one. Just seems to be lower quality or have funkier color. 

For any newcomers who are trying to burn this to BD using tsmuxer, make sure you select "Do not change SEI and VUI data".

I think it might have to do with the difference in M2TS overhead, but I'm not sure. Yep, removing an audio track is a good way to go.

Just so you know, you're about 250mb over BD25 capacity I think. :D

Images. Though I believe now you can export a LUT and apply that to whatever segment of video you want in Premiere, etc.

Harmy said:

Well, I based that decision on the fact, that they supposedly used an I.B. Tech print as a reference for the '97SE grading.

 True! I think you were probably more faithful to it than Lucas, though. :D

As far as this vs. Harmy, I prefer the Team Blu edition. Part of what's specific about the 1997 edition is the color grading. That's preserved in this version. Harmy's is interesting, as it is a tweaked grading of his DeSp, making it like a 1977 inspired 1997 version. 

There's merit to both of them, but I would generally rather watch the purer version in the already very rare occasion that I watch a 1997 SW film. I think this will be the go-to until some lunatic cleans up a 35mm copy. :P

V4 is out!

JawsTDS said:

bbhaltz said:

Thanks for the reply, I managed to preview the partially downloaded TB of ESB just to see how it fares in picture quality. I must say it looks pretty good already, definitely watchable. Would love to see what Team Blu could achieve with this source.

Would anyone be able reseed the TB Special Editions on myspleen?

I have the TB versions but I can tell you that the rip for ROTJ is terrible, and looks almost like VHS, so you can't get much out of it.

 Hmm. It's been a while, but for RoTJ I thought it was the Gkar that looked very much like VHS. The TB seemed a bit clearer, with better colors, but there are definitely some pixelated artifacts going on. I might be mixing them up, though.

As far as I know, the TB are still the best way to watch 1997 ESB and RoTJ. I'm sure someone can seed it for you, or maybe it's available on usenet.

I'm still hoping Team Blu will get around to those two at some point. 

Fang Zei said:

If TFA is simply opening with the Lucasfilm logo, I think it would be better to just not hear anything before the main theme. I'm surprised that isn't what they did for the digital release of 1-6.

 Definitely. It would be jarring to have some kind of theme just for that quick logo, as it needs to be silent for the next card.

Bob Iger has apparently mentioned in some kind of mass Skype with a college class that there will be no Disney logo before the film, for whatever that's worth.

https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/comments/3nwl7m/from_disney_ceo_there_wont_be_a_disney_logo_in/

g-force said:

Impressive.

-G

 I'm impressed by your edit as well as Dre's corrections. :)

Darth Id said:

hairy_hen said:

Pretty much everything about that scene, from the way it was written, shot, and edited, is just plain bad. 

 But...but...without that scene, we wouldn't know why Palps was all wrinkly and shit.

I distinctly remember watching RotJ as a kid and thinking:

Why is the Emperor all wrinkly?   There must be some pat explanation for that.

I sure hope they make a movie one day that accounts for all those wrinkles in one single, climactic scene!

 They could have at least been consistent and shown us why Beru aged 50 years in 20 due to that moister vaporator accident.

Can someone remind me what the suspected origin of the LPP is?

Bootleg of the film made in the early-mid 80's based on a Kodak print that had only begun to fade? 

Danfun128 said:

I hope not. Even if you don't like the practice, there are legitimate reasons for editing a post very early or very late.

True.

There are things like privacy related concerns that might come up later. Those are probably rare and could be dealt with by a mod.

Leaving the first post open to editing I guess would be the main thing. With project threads the first post should be continually updated.

Frank your Majesty said:

Coming to a site called originaltrilogy.com.

Being offended when most people prefer the original trilogy.

Nobody thought that this could happen.

 This is what the TFN kiddos do in their spare time to feel better about themselves.

Harrold Andraste said:

---

Are you ever going to post something that you don't redact? I've seen a lot of this from you in the last day or so.

I hope the new forum software has a time cutoff for post edits. Really obnoxious when people abuse it.

You guys used to give updates on what % complete each reel was. Any chance for a current list?

If the majority of the film looks as good as the recent previews, it seems you might be getting close...

Like I said, you are a fan of 1997 effects, which are outdated. Every single effect needs to be made in the current era, or you too are stuck in the past.

If you think there are no 1997 effects in the 2011 versions, I don't think you are familiar enough with these films to hold an intelligent conversation.