I don't know if Virtual Clonedrive is free, but you may get the same results with DVDshrink, which is free. (I don't know, because it has been a while since I used it, but I believe you can load the ISO and click "backup" to backup to your regular VIDEO_TS folder. Hope that helps!)
When you open VLC, you should be able to open it using "Open File." If not, what I did when I wanted to watch it on my computer was to extract the VIDEO_TS folder from the .iso and select the stream from within that folder. You could try that.
By the way stst415, what is the picture in your avatar from? I have the feeling I have seen it before somewhere, but don't know where.
'Cause that ain't how the CatBus rolls. He wants his BluRay now! lol
Oh, I don't know. I was just thinking that if Harmy hasn't started ESB or ROTJ, maybe that technique would be advantageous for those films.
I wonder if those fixes would work for ESB and ROTJ?
Pheran said:
CatBus said:
I remember paying to see something that looked suspiciously like the Despecialized Editions a few decades ago, but that guy is probably long gone by now...
Thanks CatBus, that made me laugh out loud. :)
Oh, I just got that. Good one, CatBus! XD
I haven't seen the new WP, but from the pictures posted, the new color is awesome! I know that it is radically different from the color timing we are used to, but I think that is a product of the digital timing we use today.
One thing that stood out to me about the color changes was the fact that people actually looked different in different locations! That is the most bothersome thing about color timing in recent years - a person will look exactly the same in 95 different light situations. This new way you timed the films, Harmy, the light is accurately reflected and people look like they are conceivably in a new, distinct location. Great job!
Harmy said:
OMEN!-_-! said:
...
I enjoy watching films that look and feel like they were made when they were made and like they were shot on film.
My sentiments exactly. :)
OK, I grant the part about the wire in the TIE explosion, but I'm still on the fence about the burn mark.
I am for the burn mark because of the inherent problems with managing the negative and matrices during the making of an IB print. I have a number of IB prints (16mm) which have marks on the negatives of an otherwise pristine print. Dirt and dust are certainly not part of a "theatrical experience" - at least not in my theater. When I screen a print, I am sure that everything is clean - print, projector, the works. However, I cannot, just as a projectionist then could not, fix a problem on either the matrices used to strike the IB print, or the negatives themselves. That is why I am for the burn mark. I realize that it seems very "non-HD," but sometimes accidents happen in the lab or during processing that hinder the work that was the "original intent." While we're on that topic, wasn't Lucas' original plan for the Special Edition to fix things that hindered his original intent?
none said:
The Star Warses's.
Sorry, just had to quote this. That is how I am going to refer to the OT from now on! :D
Isn't the mark for like one frame, anyway?
I agree with CatBus, though, that it falls under a "What type of project is this" question. If it is a full fledged restoration, then it should come out. If it is an original theatrical restoration, then it should stay.
corellian77 said:
Harmy said:
...
If you go down that line of reasoning, isn't it like saying, "Well, Star Wars went from film, to laserdisc, then was ported over to DVD, and along the way a number of visual artifacts (DVNR, jaggies, etc.) were introduced, but hey, all that preserves the history of what this movie went through, so it stays?"
Does Mike Verta have any comment on this particular issue? What's his sources reveal regarding the mark?
Yes, but that is the history of the film as it went from format to format. This is the history of the film as it was initially seen in theaters - with the burn mark.
I don't know, I think that it is a fine line between improving and restoring...
The film was new, but still had the mark, so I would be inclined to leave it in. However, I'm sure Harmy will make the right choice!
edit: Harmy beat me to it. :)
Wow, I haven't gotten to see the newest WP, but that looks exactly like an IB print would look - IE: boosted colors like the red on the control panel behind him. I guess the wife of the guy that invented IB was who you had to clear your timing with in the olden days, and she was a big fan of pushing the limits of saturation on scenes with a lot of different colors.
IMHO, if it was on all the prints in '77, that's good enough for me. Burn marks, for me, please! :)
MKV is just a file that contains a high-definition video. It will work in a Blu-ray player if you encode it to the proper specifications.
I believe Harmy is making a DL DVD, as well, with the possibility of a Blu-ray.
I think he said he only got reel 1... On 35mm, that is approx. 12min, right?
^ And that is the important point I tried to make. Newspapers actively canvas for sources, and no-one gives them a hard time. As someone trying to do the same thing with a different film, I know how difficult it is to get sources, and how much work you have to do once you find it. That is why I think Harmy is A-OK for keeping his sources secret. It is a sad fact that that kind of mentality does hinder the creative process, but that's just how it is IMHO.
I don't know. To some extent, I understand not sharing very specific, high-quality sources (for the same reason a newspaper doesn't share its sources) but I can also see your point of view. Either way, I'm just glad someone is getting to see the sources. :)
Oh, then I guess it was back to 24fps. I just assumed that it was converted to 29.973, but that's what you get for assuming. :)
"Now there are two of them!"
:D
OK, let me dig up the email.
I just sifted through all of our communication, and it looks like he used SRestore plus another tool which he apparently made.
I sent another email asking him to describe what he did, so if he gets back to me, I will post it.
Not 24fps to my knowledge; I actually didn't do the work. An AV friend of mine did the work in exchange for a copy of the film. It is pretty good! I am working on getting an LPP print telecined, so maybe I will have that to add in the next few months, as well.
Just thought I'd post this: I uploaded a corrected copy of the BBC version to Myspleen a few months ago. It was mildly color adjusted as well as deinterlaced and converted from PAL to NTSC.