|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by yoshimi
(Post 10844097)
Hope this new HD transfer makes Luke's lightsaber on the Millennium Falcon even greener. That would be awesome.
|
re: Star Wars
SDCC is coming up, will they have more stuff to show us?
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Spottedfeather
(Post 10844122)
He already has a perfect anamorphic HD version of the original versions of the movies. He had to restore the movies to make the special editions. I'm getting really sick of him constantly ignoring the fans who made him who he is and have grown up and love the true versions of the movies.
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by JayDerek
(Post 10843482)
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by MinLShaw
(Post 10842661)
He really believes these changes better represent his "vision" (whatever that term actually means in this context, I've questioned since the early 90s). I wonder what the George Lucas who made THX 1138 would say about all this.
|
re: Star Wars
I wonder who will have the rights after George is gone....when we're on the next format of home video too if there is one besides streaming....and if we'll have a chance at the OT being released then.
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Quack
(Post 10844839)
I wonder who will have the rights after George is gone....when we're on the next format of home video too if there is one besides streaming....and if we'll have a chance at the OT being released then.
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Quack
(Post 10844839)
I wonder who will have the rights after George is gone....when we're on the next format of home video too if there is one besides streaming....and if we'll have a chance at the OT being released then.
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Spottedfeather
(Post 10844122)
He already has a perfect anamorphic HD version of the original versions of the movies. He had to restore the movies to make the special editions. I'm getting really sick of him constantly ignoring the fans who made him who he is and have grown up and love the true versions of the movies.
http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/savingstarwars.html At this point a quality version of the original 1977 version of the film is very much possible, but would require much work. A digital restoration would be relatively easy, a real photochemical restoration (like Vertigo and The Godfather underwent) would be very hard. |
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by MinLShaw
(Post 10844573)
Wait, wait, wait...Lando gets a disc? My guess is that each Trilogy box gets one of the two droids, which would mean Lando is the Saga-exclusive bonus 9th disc.
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Guru Askew
(Post 10845204)
All 3 bonus discs are exclusive to the box. The individual trilogies are 3-disc sets.
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Mabuse
(Post 10844873)
It's far from that simple
http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/savingstarwars.html At this point a quality version of the original 1977 version of the film is very much possible, but would require much work. A digital restoration would be relatively easy, a real photochemical restoration (like Vertigo and The Godfather underwent) would be very hard. |
re: Star Wars
Speaking strictly photochemically reconstructing the original 1977 version would most likely involve recutting the negative or a duplicate negative and may result in lost frames at the heads and tails. All optical wipes (of which there are many and SW is famous for them) would have to be recreated and timed exactly. The article goes into it at great length.
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Breather
(Post 10831661)
I received a reply to my followup email to Lucasfilm, in which I asked about the three prequel docs and if there was a possibility of FSWTJ and EOD getting a separate release. In the first email I posted here, she mentioned that the press release didn't reflect the the set in its entirety. She did confirm that the two OT docs weren't there. In this one, she says that everything that will be presented in the set is listed in the press release.
Ugh, getting a little money back and recovering some shelf space is a big benefit of upgrading for me, so this is real disappointing. So it looks like we have to hold onto all three prequels and the original trilogy set? |
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Mabuse
(Post 10845535)
Speaking strictly photochemically reconstructing the original 1977 version would most likely involve recutting the negative or a duplicate negative and may result in lost frames at the heads and tails.
1) There's really no need to re-cut the negative in order to photochemically restore it; the existing negative and the trims from replacement FX can be restored separately and the original cut then edited together digitally after scanning the product. 2) There's really no need to perform a photochemical restoration, in the first place, if your goal is only to release the original cuts on Blu-ray. The post-production procedural challenge is not the difficulty in this situation and any necessary work would easily pay for itself. Lucas' preference is the only impediment here. |
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Doctorossi
(Post 10852173)
Two points to be aware of here in this digital age...
Originally Posted by Mabuse
(Post 10844873)
A digital restoration would be relatively easy, a real photochemical restoration (like Vertigo and The Godfather underwent) would be very hard.
But I agree that, while it's not as simple as slapping an all-ready transfer of the unaltered OT onto a disc, the real impediment at this point is Lucas. |
re: Star Wars
FYI for those interested, Overstock is selling the Complete Saga for $20.99. Glassdragon posted it in the Bargains forum.
http://www.overstock.com/Books-Movie...=173z9j0jouvcu |
re: Star Wars
Already sold out. Will they hold your order till they get more in stock?
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by trespoochies
(Post 10852225)
FYI for those interested, Overstock is selling the Complete Saga for $20.99. Glassdragon posted it in the Bargains forum.
Overstock has been having pricing issues all morning. They earlier listed Wii and Xbox systems for $10-$20. The word is that they've been cancelling the orders that got through and slowly fixing the prices. |
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by milo bloom
(Post 10852246)
Already sold out. Will they hold your order till they get more in stock?
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Schloob1
(Post 10852427)
How exactly do they even have "in stock" of this? ;) Theoretcially one could say they have a specific amount pre-ordered from the studio coming to them and that is "stock" but at the moment they of course do not even have the product. And it does not matter since it will be cancelled as the previous post mentions they had a rather big pricing issue obviously from a system upddate they did overnight.
Not surprising this was an error. I'd still bite if I could get the Barnes & Noble $40 deal though. |
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Mabuse
(Post 10845535)
Speaking strictly photochemically reconstructing the original 1977 version would most likely involve recutting the negative or a duplicate negative and may result in lost frames at the heads and tails. All optical wipes (of which there are many and SW is famous for them) would have to be recreated and timed exactly. The article goes into it at great length.
|
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by Spottedfeather
(Post 10853289)
The original version of the movie is already restored and in anamorphic HD.
http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/savingstarwars.html It would have been far too cost prohibitive to scan and digitally restore the entire film at that time, so only the shots that were going to be enhanced with digital effects ended up in the computer... While ILM worked on digital upgrades, the degrading [optical composite shots on CRI stock] needed to be addressed... The solution, then, was to go back to the original pieces and make new composites. For instance, in a scene with a wipe transition, the original two shots blended with the wipe were still in storage somewhere, with the O-neg piece being a second-generation duplicate of them combined together... They re-composited all wipes and transitions (the "bread and butter" opticals, as Feiner calls them). These new negatives were then cut into the O-neg, replacing the originals (which, I must presume, were put in storage).... The visual effects shots were faced with the same problems as the conventional opticals... footage from documentaries on the SE reveals that ILM had gone back to the original special effects elements, which had been meticulously saved, and then scanned and digitally recomposited them (in some instances, their placement is slightly different than the original, even though the principle was to match them as closely as possible--for instance, the seeker ball in the scene of Luke's Millennium Falcon training is positioned not quite the same as the original composite, though the difference is basically imperceptible while in motion)... One caveat of this is that each time the negative has a new portion of film cut into it, a frame on either side of it is lost in the process of cementing the new film piece into the reel; if one compares closely the SE to the previous releases, one finds that any new shot is missing a few frames at the head and tail, though the difference is imperceptible when in motion... So if you want a true original copy of Star Wars (i.e. with the optical effects instead of the digital recomposites) then there's still some restoration to be done. Even if you simply want a Star Wars without any of the new SE footage, it's possible that there's still a few shots that were never digitally scanned. |
re: Star Wars
Originally Posted by PGHFlyer
(Post 10852060)
Ugh, getting a little money back and recovering some shelf space is a big benefit of upgrading for me, so this is real disappointing. So it looks like we have to hold onto all three prequels and the original trilogy set?
|
re: Star Wars
From the link that Jay G posted:
"This is normally the point of a restoration, and though I just a moment ago spoke of this not being the case for Star Wars, the other great irony is that it, at one point, was--before Lucas and ILM could enact the enhancement and alteration of the original content, the film was restored to its original state, the original negative meticulously and painstakingly repaired. This restoration was then used as the basis for digital additions, in effect making the restoration lost." In my opinion, I think the point that I've bolded above is where the difference of opinion between Jay G. and Spotted Feather originates. The site that Jay G. quoted mentions that the original negative was restored before the alterations began. Whether Lucas ever wanted to release the originals again or not, the sensible thing to have done after restoration/prior to alteration would have been to preserve the restored negative by either scanning it or making an all new negative to use for the alterations. In other words, can we believe Lucas when it comes to the subject of the negative and when he claims that the originals don't "exist" anymore? I always took that statement by him as philosophical and not technical. He's done some controversial and unpopular things as it relates to the originals in the last 15 years. On the other hand, considering his educational background, love of film, and experience as a cameraman, editor, and filmmaker, should we believe that he permanently altered the only negatives to the theatrical versions of arguably the most popular film series of all time? Without at least some form of preservation of those versions? It would seem insane to have not preserved them, whether he wants a future release or not. I don't know nearly as much about the subject of film restoration/preservation as some of you, but considering what was posted in the paragraph I quoted from the Secret History of Star Wars site, could it indeed be possible that Lucas has a restored copy, either in negative or scan form, of the originals? I'm not stating fact or even a strong opinion here. My post is actually geared toward asking those of you that know more about the subject of restoration/preservation than I do. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:28 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.