towne32

thorr said:

http://www.vudu.com/movies/

A New Hope is listed as 20th Century Fox and doesn't have the blue Disney bar at the bottom.  The others are Lucasfilm Ltd.

 Aren't the others supposed to be under Fox distribution until 2019 or something? Does this mean that they worked a deal out to hand over the others early, but Fox is of course hanging on to distribution rights for the one they own in perpetuity? 

The 2004 HDTV versions in my collection are Schorman's releases, which are from various sources. Perhaps he would be able to fill you in on what options there are and how they compare to BR?

His release states that he uses:

1) German HDTV (1080p ts found on usenet)

2) British HDTV (HV versions found on usenet)

Also: I really like the color grading. Would be interested in a GOUT-inspired color project!

I feel like this was discussed very recently.

Hal 9000 said:

I wonder if there's any possibility of seeing HD versions of the PT deleted scenes as part of the bonus material.

 http://www.vudu.com/movies/#!content/658208/Star-Wars-Attack-of-the-Clones-Deleted-Scenes-featurette

Looks like maybe?

GlastoEls said:

towne32 said:

GlastoEls said:

http://www.vudu.com/movies/Movies_mobile.html#!content/656496/Star-Wars-Episodes-1-6-Bundle-plus-bonus-features

?

 Trailers show they're SE. 

God bless magenta!

 For people who are more familiar with the Reliance samples: Is this VUDU stuff the same restoration? Such a waste of time and money.

GlastoEls said:

http://www.vudu.com/movies/Movies_mobile.html#!content/656496/Star-Wars-Episodes-1-6-Bundle-plus-bonus-features

?

 Trailers show they're SE. 

Hopefully that guy's iffy memory  ("I think" and "some kind of warm chemical bath") is incorrect. But wow. That sounds... entirely unprofessional.

Frank your Majesty said:

MrPib said:

Frank your Majesty said:

Now, here it says Lucas has final cut rights on Star Wars. Still, Disney would be stupid if these rights weren't included in the deal. Any idea how to find out who has these rights at the moment?

 I know not, Sire.  AFAIK, the details of the buyout haven't been given.

 So in other words, saying Lucas still has final cut rights is just as much speculation as saying Disney has them. We don't know for sure, this guy

http://furiousfanboys.com/2015/02/action-figures-confirm-a-digital-release-of-the-star-wars-saga/

doesn't know anything either and everyone spreads their own favorite scenario of what is going to happen.

Yeah, I think many details of their deal (as well as Fox's rights) are cloudy or unclear. Personally, I hadn't even considered until now that Lucas might have managed to bargain OT final cut rights into that deal. But who knows.

skyjedi2005 said:

mverta said:

We know the ON is incomplete at best, and I do not believe they have intact 3-strip masters, at all.  There are WAY too many lack-of-detail and/or suspect internal color problem shots present in every official restoration for me to believe that.  If they have them, then somebody should be shot, because you'd have to be trying to fuck things up that badly.

 Didn't George Lucas claim to  Christopher Nolan that they found the 3 strip was unusable.

I mean somebody in another thread said they saw that in an interview i have not seen it myself.

 Unusable in 1995-7 doesn't necessarily mean unusable today, though. Wasn't the issue supposedly with alignment of one color channel?

Lust-In-Phaze said:

I don't suppose there's any way to know how ROTJ is coming on, but I have a very active interest in this, as I'm sure most of us do. I just wish there were more updates on progress (unless there are frequent updates I just don't see)

 Last we heard (late feb?) he had only finished a few shots. He just got a new kickass job, though. So things might be busy with that. Or maybe he's too busy making progress with Jedi to give us updates. :)

Jorel81 said:

It was Star Wars on the big screen! And Boba Fett was in it! And people were getting rowdy and everyone was really enjoying it and it was just an amazing thing. It was beautiful to be in a dark theater with hundreds of other Star Wars nerds watching the movie and cheering and all that stuff. HOWEVER...nobody told us at that point...or at least I didn't know, that the original negatives had been butchered for it. And I didn't realize, that the plan was to change the movies forever. 

 I think many of us had the same experience. I saw absolutely nothing wrong with adding to them for a special anniversary release. And it was fun having "new" footage of Harrison as Solo on the big screen, even with a weird looking Jaba. Greedo shooting first? It's probably sacrilege, but I'm not sure that I noticed the first time.

It wasn't until years later during the build up to the DVD releases, and the retirement of VHS collections, etc, that it dawned on me that the originals were being buried alive. Surely the anniversary cut from 97 should be material for "disc 2" in a DVD release? And that's how I found this place, the first time. Everyone at the time was excited about a silly soon-to-be-vaporware fancypants laserdisc encoding. Look how far it's all come...

DrDre said:

Original 1080p original vs super resolution:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/118497

 Are the screenshots correctly labeled in this one?

The super resolution one looks pretty noisy. Look at the border of Leia's chin and the white below it. And the edges of her bottom teeth, for example. I'm sure it looks better in motion, but it seems like elements in a shot that are not static between frames are going to have some issues?

SilverWook said:

AntcuFaalb said:

SilverWook said:

I wonder if the sort of color video voodoo the Dr. Who restoration team has done with episodes  that exist as black and white prints could be possible with this?

Unfortunately, no. IIRC, the BBC team relied heavily on the fact that the video was transferred via a composite medium by using information gleaned from the dot crawl to figure out which color caused the interference in the luma (B&W) channel in the first place.

 Actually, I was thinking of how they took the color signal from a fan's Betamax recordings and combined it with the monochrome 16mm.

 And in recent years, they actually used the technique AntcuFaalb was thinking of (chroma dot restoration), even when they did use the betamax chroma. The chroma dot color wasn't kept in the final DVD video in those cases, but it gave them a reference to de-warp the 16mm and align to the video color. :) Other releases were indeed restored only from chroma dots found on the black and white 16mm.

details: http://www.purpleville.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/rtwebsite/TheClawsOfAxosRedux.htm

I think the OP should have allowed more flexibility in the discussion by titling the thread: Star Wars.

In fact that's true of quite a few threads on this bulletin board domain.

GoodMusician said:

Well, don't they call it "The Star Wars Legacy" ? I've heard it called that numerous times. I'm simply talking about an audio presentation of "The Star Wars Legacy." It's like getting confused that I said "Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Complete Score" because it has the same name as the film. it's the film score presentation of the film...

 Do you just mean the movies are referred to in whole as Star Wars Legacy? I've never heard that. Saga I've heard, quite frequently, in places where people are comfortable with all six films. You'll usually hear the trilogies only referred to separately here.

Even if it's a reasonable name, the confusion comes from the fact that one of the main hubs of information about Star Wars Legacy, (one of) the most exciting restoration(s) of the original film, exists only within a couple threads from the top of this very page almost all of the time.

If the cartoon taught us anything, it's that they all need really neat haircuts for that purpose.

On a semi-related note: did Lucas decide to make the clonetrooper bodies CGI in episode 2 in order to make sure they really were identical in height, size, etc? Obviously, the results now look like a Sega Dreamcast era videogame, so it was by no means successful. But I'm wondering if he at least had a valid reason like this.

Messaged.

jedimasterobiwan said:

what did i do i just asked a question it wasn't even remotely a demand come on now you guys just attack me for asking a simple question. i wasn't demanding he make it get off my back.

 If anyone thinks I was being harsh or unreasonable and is not familiar with the above poster, please refer to their post history in Hal9000 threads to see where I was coming from.

jedimasterobiwan said:

harmy is 2.5 you final version or is there a 3.0 coming?

 A sincere warning to Harmy: Please do not answer this or any other question posed by this individual. He has moved on from Hal9000 to bigger fish.

DrDre said:

I think one 2014 Nobel prize winner would disagree:

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/2014/advanced-chemistryprize2014.pdf

 Keeping in mind that I'm a biologist and we sometimes use these techniques (TIRF, STED, STORM) but don't really properly understand them the way a physicist would:

I really don't follow how you're suggesting these specific techniques used for improving the resolution of fluorescence microscopy are related to enhancing images with a fixed number of pixels. Can you please explain? And to what technique specifically are you comparing it to? Temporal tricks like STORM, but across multiple frames rather than relying on the 'flickering' of fluorophores?

Harmy said:

Well, that's what I've been saying from the beginning - that I'm afraid they'll release some bastardized "close enough" version of the OOT and then when we once again complain, everyone will call us petty fanboys who are never satisfied, like with the GOUT. 

Even a disappointing release will be a fantastic source for projects like yours. Little to no rotoscoping, no low res elements, no issues with 35mm color and fade. Although neg1's RotJ prints seem damn near good enough.

When comparing SW restoration to the love and attention *some* other major films get, much time has been spent discussing the limitations of restoring the original film. The negatives and elements are obviously in a sorry state. But as far as ESB and Jedi go, is there any reason they can't perform restoration as good as, for instance, Jaws? There is no such thing as flawless, and as stated above, there will always be complaints. They'll have to make decisions that can never please everybody. But a professional quality release should actually be possible for those two, right?

timdiggerm said:

towne32 said:

Molly said:

Would that not indicate that the 2009 version is, in that one respect at least, an improvement?

 Not to mention that the 2009 releases brought back mono versions of everything that was originally mixed in mono.

 but only if you got the rare mono set, of course

I don't know about the CDs, but if they're that rare I'm sure they're easily 'obtained'. They sell and continue to press the "new" mono releases individually on vinyl, though. 

Molly said:

Would that not indicate that the 2009 version is, in that one respect at least, an improvement?

 Not to mention that the 2009 releases brought back mono versions of everything that was originally mixed in mono.

Darth Lucas said:

In fact, if someone's working on a blu ray with menus and whatnot, having an option to play either the '77 theatrical version or the '81 re-release version would be pretty darn cool.  

 A branching option would be fantastic!

Erik Pancakes said:

Or you could, you know, just buy the original Blu-Ray and watch that because there's no actual editing of any kind that needs to be done.

Here, I'll even save you the trouble of having to look for a copy.

 I'm not really familiar with the different predator releases. But isn't this considered one of the most botched blurays ever produced?