towne32

Some, like this guy on movie-censorship, say the DVD was produced from the digital theatrical master. I'd really like to find more information written *before* the DVD was released, though, to be certain. Padme's awful "Yes" line had to have been a later fix, after reviewers mocked it, right? If nothing else, there would have been people arguing and defending the film as they did not witness it with "yes".

schorman13 said:

From memory, I remember seeing the different mechanical hand shot in the digital release at the time.  I believe this was a known difference.

 You guys are right: http://boards.theforce.net/threads/attack-of-the-clones-frequently-asked-questions.7163543/

There was a thread called "*Official* Differences between the Digital and Film Prints)" from around the same time, but sadly it seems to have been removed by moderators since at least 2005.

There is another thread, though: http://boards.theforce.net/threads/more-differences-between-the-film-digital-versions-of-aotc.7489352/#post-7489352

Q.I am not certain if this was intentional, but I noticed in the digital version Anakin's metal hand reaches and holds Padmé's hand. In the 35mm version, Anakin's metal hand is just shown hanging at his side which then cuts to them kissing. If this was an error, I would just like to know. I feel like I'm the only one around here who caught the difference. 

A.Yes, you've noticed a difference between the film print version of Episode II and the version that is being shown digitally. (We call it D-cinema.) 

Naturally, the process of making the thousands of physical film prints of the movie takes time, so we had to lock down that version in April. However, we had some extra time for the D-cinema distribution, so George [Lucas] had a few more days to make some final tweaks to the finished product. 


At the last minute, George felt the wedding scene needed the affection of Padmé taking Anakin's mechanical hand, so just a few days before Celebration II in Indianapolis we shot it and inserted it in time for the D-cinema version. 
That addition is by far the most noticeable change, but we actually made over 70 enhancements for D-cinema. Most involved sharpening, tweaking wipes and color adjustments. However, there are a handful that are definite visual effects changes. I'd be curious to hear if any fans have found any of the other changes. 

Fang Zei said:

I remember a discussion with the vfx guys posted on the official site around the time of the dvd release in which they claimed to have made several dozen changes.

The only change anyone seems to have noticed is the speeder during the Coruscant chase.

Wasn't there also discussion of the sparks on Jango's jetpack right before he's killed in the arena battle? On the commentary track during that scene, Lucas actually expresses surprise to the vfx guys at how quickly they were able to get the changes done.

 http://www.dvdactive.com/editorial/articles/star-wars-the-changes-part-four.html?post_id=79063&action=report

edit: I see now that you account for some of the other changes and that they might have come about prior to the DVD. It's really interesting that you note the mechanical hand as part of the digital theatrical release. Has this been confirmed anywhere? It makes sense. I had always figured that the reason for not including it in the theatrical release was the fact that it wasn't ready to go yet, given that it was included on the DVD months later.

The speeder scene change is so subtle that there's no way anyone will know on memory alone, but perhaps it was the same on DVD and digital theatrical.

Do we know that the digital theatrical version was identical to the film version? I assume centropy's was a recording of the 35mm? It seems unlikely that the film->DVD changes we already know of might have been in the digital release, given that the two audio changes were probably made in response to criticisms of the film. But the speeder and 'hand in marriage' shot were a little more arbitrary and, unlike previous Star Wars releases, II came out on DVD soon after the theatrical release.

Any reason to think there might or might not be variation akin to the 35mm/70mm versions of the original film?

Supermartyoh said:

#2 - Max Fleischer's Superman: Collectors Edition

-Along with major sync issues (Clark having Lois' voice and vice versa), video quality is similar to...

 They've got the complete set on the Superman I-IV blu-ray set. Any idea if they're the same transfers/masters?

The aliasing on the other shoulder and head are improved though, strangely.

camroncamera said:

DrDre said:

Progress is still slow. However, in the mean I've also been working on SRV13. I actually have to agree with g-force for a change. There's an ugly slow moving grain in the upscale that is really visible. I've updated my script to get rid of it. Here's a first screenshot comparison:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/137467

More to follow when I get home from work...

 Fabulous work, as always, DrDre. I believe managing that grain is a worthy goal. I remember our feedback on the screenshot comparisons was to keep the film grain intact, but after watching the moving SR clips - as amazing as they were - I agree that the big grain that appeared to be "floating above" the upscaled moving image could be distracting, and was not necessarily representative of the actual film elements. Eager to see a moving clip of SRV13.

 Yes, I agree. It was really the only problem with SR12, and the reason I was reluctant to move on from preferring SR10 for a while. Hard to tell from a single frame, but 13 seems to look nice.

Jonse said:

Salutations, all. This is an update.

So, I didn't reply way back when because I have nothing to say to the not so helpful anymore poster above me. Wonder what his problem was...

 He comes off as harsh but he generally has a point that he's making.

It's true that you mentioned that it was specifically the ones you've come across. But Frink (a moderator at Fanedits) is familiar with the many, many, many fanedits of the prequels, as are plenty of other people.

While it's great and ambitious to start your own project, if one of the driving forces that's compelling you to do this is the fact that you have seen few to no HD edits, it means you are perhaps behind in what has been accomplished with these films. There's a wealth of great ideas in those more recent edits. Some ideas and techniques you could perhaps use, or maybe something that fits your own tastes enough to watch as a go-to. I would certainly recommend checking out Hal9000's, l8wrtr's, and Q2's prequel trilogies.

I haven't read all of your other details/goals yet. But as far as yubnub goes, it seems people are pretty split on preference. KK650 actually releases his edits in both forms for Jedi. Though, I imagine it's a relatively small group of people interested in OT fanedits compared to the prequels anyway. 

Cool! Would like to see more of the color corrections. 

The Aluminum Falcon said:

IIRC, Roger Ebert hinted at the time that the 35mm prints may have been deliberately struck poorly, with low brightness, density, and saturation, in order to push the thought that digital, which was then poor resolution, was ready as a theatrical format. 

 Interesting. Half of his review is indeed about how poor the 35mm experience was compared to what the digital previews seemed to suggest the film looks like. 

edit: beaten to it. Yeah, he doesn't come out and say it, but perhaps he thought so and implied it elsewhere.

kane1138 said:

I'm having issues with my bodypart, so I've submitted to .info

Should appear in due course!

 Thanks!

btw: your bodypart seems to be working up and running as far as I can tell.

kane1138 said:

...and against the rules to discuss distribution methods. I can neither CONFIRM nor deny.

 My understanding is that this rule is antiquated and this is not the case at all anymore, as long as you're not providing direct links.

Is that not correct? I just assumed that at some point it was realized that being almost sneaky about it was the same thing as just saying myspleen/tehparadox.

To be fair we never crossed the line into Batman insults.

clutchins said:

towne32 said:

clutchins said:

towne32 said:

No.

We need another source, such as 35mm scans, of at least two parts as far as I'm aware:

The speeder shot where Obiwan catches the lightsaber (to reinstate deleted speeders)

Anakin's mechahand not doing anything before the pan up during his wedding.

 That's what I was afraid of. I'm guessing we don't have any 35mm prints lying around here either yet.

 I believe a potential sale was mentioned of the prequels on AmpsDeux. I may be misremembering, but Team Negative might also have access to a print for scanning down the road when their schedule is freed. 

Though, unless I'm mistaken, it's really only those two quick shots we need to get a hold of.

Yeah I think you're right. Thankfully it's only those two visual changes that need scanning. I don't suppose the film needs any major color regrading, does it?

 I don't think it's as big a disaster as TPM and the OT (haven't watched the blu-ray all the way through). But it's a bit blue, right? I believe the HDTV/DVD version had good color.

clutchins said:

towne32 said:

No.

We need another source, such as 35mm scans, of at least two parts as far as I'm aware:

The speeder shot where Obiwan catches the lightsaber (to reinstate deleted speeders)

Anakin's mechahand not doing anything before the pan up during his wedding.

 That's what I was afraid of. I'm guessing we don't have any 35mm prints lying around here either yet.

 I believe a potential sale was mentioned of the prequels on AmpsDeux. I may be misremembering, but Team Negative might also have access to a print for scanning down the road when their schedule is freed. 

Though, unless I'm mistaken, it's really only those two quick shots we need to get a hold of.

No.

We need another source, such as 35mm scans, of at least two parts as far as I'm aware:

The speeder shot where Obiwan catches the lightsaber (to reinstate deleted speeders)

Anakin's mechahand not doing anything before the pan up during his wedding.

edit: of course, I'm suggesting that centropy's release is far too crappy for these things. And although I was probably responding in terms of HD, I think you'd have to work miracles on that footage to get an okay looking reconstruction, even on DVD.

Mikeluv80 said:

chromesteel said:

LuckyGungan2001 said:

I hope chromesteel uploads it. This looks really interesting. It seems he kept a lot of stuff, but still managed to keep it under 3 hours. I wonder if he cut Grievous. I saw him in the trailer, but I don't know how ROTS could be an hour with him still in it.

Grevious is IN but he now does NOT not have asthma :) 

He also excapes quicker now, to build more of a cowardice to his character (rather than making him weak with cancer....)

 chromesteel, any idea when (and where) this edit will be available for download? i can't wait to make a night of this...

 Yes, I think many of us are wondering this.

Perhaps you are still tweaking things? Or, I saw you mentioned a premiere on Facebook. Probably holding off until after that to release it online?

I'm sometimes skeptical (and often wrong) when these ambitious edits come seemingly out of nowhere like this. But the JarJar clips make it pretty clear that this wasn't hacked together on a whim! Looking forward to watching it. 

CatBus said:

Film was used for the Star Wars credits even though we'd already made a very good reconstruction.  I'd say if he has the film elements, he'll use them, and stability/cleanup will be less of an issue for ROTJ than it was for SW.  I think the only reason we have a reconstruction for ESB is because the timing just didn't work out right for getting the film elements.

 Oh, wow. I knew that 35mm was listed as a source for the SW credits, but for some reason assumed it was used as the basis for creating a reconstruction. They do indeed look great.

yoda-sama said:

(I doubt that credits will need to be recreated like we did for Empire, but that's an example of a type of busy work we could hammer away on for you)?

 Do you mean because they might be available on 35mm? I wonder which route would take more work/time. Cleanup of the film vs. reconstructing? I suppose it will depend on the amount of damage and warping of the film.

NeverarGreat said:

crampedmisfit1990 said:

mumbles_ said:

I think Jedi is pretty important to preserve considering how butchered the film was with all the special editions. It was my favourite of the three as a child but now I think I like them all just the same.

 I share this opinion, I do not like Jedi any less than New Hope or Empire. In some ways it is my favorite, in others it is not. I always feel like watching all 3 together and feel weird if I only watch one at a time.

I think it would be weirder for me to watch all 3 together. Sounds like a mess ;)

 But only half as much of a mess as this.

clutchins said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. ROTJ is my favorite of the three.

 Probably not my favorite, but the most nostalgic to me, having grown up watching it the most. And indeed the most mutilated of the three by the SEs (and, so far, the least represented by the great reconstruction/preservation projects around here).

DrDre said:

team_negative1 said:

The beauty of the digital format is that, you can upgrade your monitor, projector, or TV when you wish, and gain benefit from it, accordingly.

The consumer race is over, only content creators care about increasingly high resolutions, and mastering issues.

Team Negative1

I think these statements are not accurate.

In a sense the digital format replaces the video rental market, which traditionally was very much larger than the video sales market. Many consumers don't want to own movies, at least not if these movies are very expensive. 

You also seem to treat the consumers as one homogeneous group, which is a gross simplification. Not everyone wants to drive a Volkswagen. Some of us prefer the Mercedes and are willing to pay through the nose for it.

 I completely agree. But keep in mind that you're addressing someone("s") that is not allowed to respond in this thread. So it's not quite fair to keep pointing out how wrong (t)he(y) are is.

Looks like an excellent print.

smudger9 said:

Yuri_Kenobi said:

I take it episode 2 is still not uploaded? 

Keep up the great work btw! 

It has been submitted.

It's being uploaded as we speak.

 Just watched the trailer for Episode 2. Looking forward to it.

And you really know how to make an exciting trailer.