DuracellEnergizer said:
And now memories of the Spider-Man Clone Saga come unbidden to my mind ...
Ah yes, the saga of Ben Riley and the cutoff hoodie.
Looking good, guys.
Kingherb said:
zee944 said:
Kingherb said:
Despecialized 2.5 of Star Wars was based on the Tech IB colors, that looked excellent on my screen.
I can't decide whether you're arguing or agreeing with me.
I was just trying to say i like the Tech IB colors and how they looked in despecialized, i do not know if Harmy had the same refrences as used for shots here but he did a good job in any case.
So I think the answer is 'agreeing' more or less. The first claim (and I think one that most of us are on board with in the last few posts) is that while the color of the print is good, the contrast and brightness aren't necessarily usable as-is. And the color is exactly what Harmy mimicked in 2.5. This, along with Harmy's judgement on the contrast, is what you've said you like. But the latter doesn't really represent the print.
I don't remember the line, but that's exactly what I thought it was about. Jango didn't want to have a son that ages 15x (or whatever) faster than him.
Kingherb said:
zee944 said:
So you did mean it, no irony anywhere?
A video of a video as a proof of the right colors? Come on, that is absurd.
By the way, I personally didn't criticize the color balance, in fact, I said the TechniColor IB's colors could be used, BUT with reduced contrast, else it wouldn't look good on TV screen.
Despecialized 2.5 of Star Wars was based on the Tech IB colors, that looked excellent on my screen.
He based his colors on the IB color. But obviously he did it manually and used some judgement about how it looked on a monitor. His palette was based on Mike's scan, but the levels, brightness, and contrast were adjusted (shot by shot, I'm sure).
moviefreakedmind said:
John Doom said:
Is Legacy, a true masterwork itself, going to be used for the rumored new OUT release?
If this were the case I doubt Lucasfilm would want him to say anything about it. It'd be awesome if it is though :)
I'm sure he would have to sign an NDA before even beginning to discuss the possibility of using Legacy, as he would learn about their intent/plans to sell the OOT.
swagmasta69 said:
towne32 said:
swagmasta69 said:
^ This much is sufficient in your case. :P
my name is a post-post ironic critique on the idiocy of youth today.
I assumed so, given how over the top it is and your otherwise coherent writing. :)
swagmasta69 said:
^ This much is sufficient in your case. :P
And ruin my joke!
Loisten to Frink.
eks20 said:
And plz loist direct links to torrents on spleen if can if cant PM ME
As poita said, this is a no-no. Not sure why PM would be necessary. You're a myspleen member, so someone could just post an exact copy and paste of the title of a torrent. This would also allow for a possible conversation/disagreement/whatever to occur and give other people a reason to read the thread.
I can only hope that the edit you made betwen 1:11 and 1:16 was due to the realization that you could change Batman to Buttman.
yotsuya said:
the core issues with ANH stem from the condition of the negative and how it was scanned, not what Lucasfilm did after that.
Could you go into more detail about how the scanning method is thought to be a major source of the problems for the 2004 transfer?
Also, the secrethistoryofstarwars article also suggests Lucas was indeed responsible for the color of the 2004+ editions. I had not read before that Lowry didn't actually do the color for Empire or Jedi. Though, I cannot seem to find Matt Hurwitz's article in Videography that is used as a source for all this.
Then the issue is that FAT32 doesn't support files of that size. You might notice that the actual error states that the file is too large for the drive, rather than that there is insufficient space.
You'll need an NTFS or FATx formatted drive to extract it to.
Yes, you've got the version numbers correct.
Darth Lucas said:
Having talked to someone on the restoration team at disney I have to say they know what their doing when given sufficient time and funds for a project. The problem is that if the executives don't think that the film will bring in big money from the re-release, they will give them not enough time and not enough money to do a really good job so we end up with crappy restorations. To see what they're capable of with enough time and funds, look at the blu ray of Bambi. I think it looks pretty spectacular. No frankenfilm there.
You mean the restoration person that (IIRC) you spoke to this summer, right?
Also, was Bambi not entirely rotoscoped over digitally the way most Disney animated 'restorations' are these days?
SilverWook said:
Fox is in a bit of a pissing contest with Marvel over the movie rights to The Fanstastic Four though. And Disney owns Marvel.
It's turned into a pissing contest of who can most effectively destroy the franchise that people are already kind of "meh" about.
moviefreakedmind said:
Fox would WANT this to happen because they only have a few years left to make money off of most of these films. Refusing to accept their distribution cut would literally just be turning down money for no reason at all. If anyone wanted to wait for some reason it would be Disney if they wanted to hold off until 2020 so they wouldn't have to give Fox a percentage on Empire and Jedi. I don't think that would happen though since the movies are all being released both physically and digitally.
Of course, I don't know how big of a cut Fox would get. But is it worth losing five years of sales to get the Fox margin back on two of the three films? Star Wars will probably still be big, then, though folks might be a bit saturated with it by that point. But they *know* it's big now. And it would do some good to turn back some of the more jaded fans as all the new material begins to run its course.
I thought the youths liked vintage now anyway. Turntables and sepia-murdered digital photos are cool, but film vintage is not to extend beyond the late 90's, I guess.
Fox has video distribution rights. I think they could play it in theaters without Fox's consent. V and VI could apparently be distributed digitally without Fox?
But I think an important point that people sometimes gloss over is: would Fox try to withhold this? Why would Fox try to withhold this? Would they simply not want to put money into it themselves? I can see why Disney might not want to go through with it until Fox's rights expire (or are otherwise dealt with for IV), but I can't quite see what Fox has to lose, here.
Mike O said:
moviefreakedmind said:
CatBus said:
moviefreakedmind said:
I'd love to hear what Landis himself said verbatim, but it seems that Empire magazine interpreted his statement as being the original versions specifically.
Sure, but Landis is already not the first speaker in that game of telephone. He heard it from Lucas. Lucas may have said "the original trilogy--yes, John, THE original classic films that started the whole thing, back in 1977, with no changes at all to what I intended all those years ago". A normal person could walk out of there thinking Star Wars was finally going to get a decent home video release and say that to the press without reservations, but in Lucas-speak, that just means a new 2016 Specialer Edition where Yoda is now CGI.
I don't think for one second that Disney would allow more changes to the trilogy due to the backlash it gets every time it happens. I could see Disney sweeping it under the rug, continuing to release the 2011 SEs, and then never mentioning the OOT ever again, but adding even more changes I just can't see them doing.
The backlash from 14 people on the Internet. 99.9999% of the population don't care at all, hence why it was the bestselling Blu-ray of all time when it came out and why it would break box office records in a heartbeat if a new version was released theatrically. People who care about the OOT are a tenth of a tenth of a tenth of a tenth of the population.
I think the number of fans who get excited by a new version are probably even fewer than those demanding the OOT. I don't remember any "FINALLY, blinking Ewoks" articles. They draw a bit of criticism with each new version. But you're right that the majority of fans seem to just accept the latest version as the real and final version, and sometimes consider previous ones as "unfinished" or "the ghetto version" (real quote). These are the same people who absolutely exploded when they heard that they would not use George's pages of scribbled notes on what he wanted the ST to be.
It's difficult to pin down numbers or ratios of fans who actually strongly care one way or the other. But it's fair to say that there are enough people who either like the SE or don't care.
On the other hand, Disney/Lucasfilm are obviously catering very heavily to the fans who would like to see more practical effects and less intrusive CGI in the ST. To the point that they're being mocked for making sure it's mentioned in every interview. I'm sure the party lines aren't exactly the same as the OOT/SE division, but it's probably a similar type of crowd who strongly cares one way or the other in both cases. This isn't a move they needed to win over the 99.99%, or whatever is the massive percentage of fans who don't give a shit.
I hope it's true so that he changes the thread title because Frink loves post editing.
Are the crushed blacks being discussed in this specific example just in the shots of 3PO in the dark?
towne32 said:
There are several other threads about that, and it's off topic in this thread.
For instance these ones:
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/More-OUT-Rerelease-Rumors-from-John-Landis/topic/18219/
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Star-Wars-theatrical-versions-not-coming-in-2015/topic/18110/page/5/
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/4K-restoration-on-Star-Wars/topic/16857/page/89/
pittrek said:
The colours look pretty good, but the whole video is so dark... even the blacks look crushed.
The motion is "weird". There's even some motion smearing, I hope that's the correct term. It's nowhere as bad as the GOUT but it's pretty annoying. And I didn't notice it in further scenes.
Owen and the stuff behind his back - what's going on ? In some shots it appears like Owen's stable, but the background behind him is "dancing", in other shots the background looks almost like a static painting. In the "he doesn't exist anymore" shot the whole picture is "weaving", just like in the shot where Luke wants to go to the academy.
The shot of the two suns the white sun is shaking. It's extremely annoying.
The rest is pretty much great.
I agree that the colors look quite nice. I honestly never thought this print would look as good, color-wise, based on the early (and even more recent) samples. Not sure about the blacks being crushed. Probably not the best example to tell by, but doesn't seem unrecoverable based on this.
Regarding the 'dancing' I see some of what you're talking about and agree that having a time stamp would be useful to discuss more specifically. Seems to be incomplete stabilization and some single frame warping due to the scan itself. Noticeable in a few places.
Cleanup looks good, but still incomplete. The first night shot with the twin suns could use a bit in particular. And then from Luke's closeup to the end there are tramline issues. They're thin and migrate horizontally through static shots, so they should be removable to a decent extent. There's a rather bright one on the left in the very last shot.
Coming along nicely, overall.