Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[NYorker]

Originally Posted by kenkraly2004

I just want to let everyone know their is a new section on the official star wars website about the blur-ray box set here's the link : http://www.starwars.com/movies/saga/ and also their is a official youtube channel for star wars http://www.youtube.com/starwars

I'd like to know who downloads those grade-z wallpapers...

[Aquel]

Originally Posted by NYorker

I'd like to know who downloads those grade-z wallpapers...

. Though you are right, they aren't very good.

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by NYorker

I'd like to know who downloads those grade-z wallpapers...

(UHG!)


Probably the very same person who picked them out for sets...



his daughter.



.

[Aquel]

Originally Posted by shelldweller

I´m not trying to excuse a potential lazy transfer. I will be let down like most of you but the shots on the official site look pretty good don´t they. I´m still hoping for more enhancements and improved effects and I will be disappointed if nothing has been done with all the time on their hands. But the fact that they used scans from 2004 doesn´t mean the movies are not going to look good. I think there´s nothing wrong with the actual scans (besides the Yavin battle error Adywan pointed out, maybe) but with the contrast and the colors... the black crush has been fixed for instant.

Here´s a comparison between TE DVD, SE DVD and BD for shits and giggles:

Theatrical DVD:


2004 DVD:


Blu-Ray:

Though the colours of the Blu Ray closely resemble those of the 2004 SE, it does look the colours aren't as boosted as the 2004 SE. The blue of the chamber looks somewhat more natural and both lightsabers have a little less pronounced colour (noticable on Vader's lightsaber, which as a consequence looks a bit less pinkish to my eyes).

[adywan]

Originally Posted by Aquel

Though the colours of the Blu Ray closely resemble those of the 2004 SE, it does look the colours aren't as boosted as the 2004 SE. The blue of the chamber looks somewhat more natural and both lightsabers have a little less pronounced colour (noticable on Vader's lightsaber, which as a consequence looks a bit less pinkish to my eyes).

The images from the Blu-Ray site not only have had the gamma boosted but also have their colour range set to Studio scale (16-235) which is the blu-ray and DVD standard. But when capturing images from a DVD or the HDTV broadcasts this will change to PC scale (0-255) The saturation and brightness will be different between these captures so you have to make sure that they are both set the same before comparing. This is why the Blu-Ray capture looks lighter in the blacks and mid tones and less saturated. So changing the colour scale and increasing the gamma give you this (the lightsaber is slightly different because these two pictures aren't the exact same frame):



But every image on the star wars site has had the gamma increased, including eps 2 & 3. So i wouldn't take those shots as an indicator as to how the blu-rays will look because if they have just increased the gamma then you are going to get shots like this: (exact same adjustment settings to match the ROTJ picture on the site)

[chip75]

So what's the consensus at the moment?

I'm in the camp where at the moment the Saga is a lot of money to spend if the original trilogy is identical to the 2004 DVD release apart from a HD AV overhaul.

Sure I want to own the Blu-ray (of all six films) but it may sway me from a day one purchase to maybe just picking up the prequels (which hypocritically will be the same as their DVD releases with the exception of The Phantom Menace).

To be honest if there haven't been any significant attempts to remedy the flaws of the 2004 release then I'm going to loose a bit of respect for some people. That saddens me more than anything else....

As the old saying goes 'Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.'

Adywan, I love the matte lines on the Tie-Fighter, awesome....

[Aquel]

Originally Posted by adywan

The images from the Blu-Ray site not only have had the gamma boosted but also have their colour range set to Studio scale (16-235) which is the blu-ray and DVD standard. But when capturing images from a DVD or the HDTV broadcasts this will change to PC scale (0-255) The saturation and brightness will be different between these captures so you have to make sure that they are both set the same before comparing. This is why the Blu-Ray capture looks lighter in the blacks and mid tones and less saturated. So changing the colour scale and increasing the gamma give you this (the lightsaber is slightly different because these two pictures aren't the exact same frame):



But every image on the star wars site has had the gamma increased, including eps 2 & 3. So i wouldn't take those shots as an indicator as to how the blu-rays will look because if they have just increased the gamma then you are going to get shots like this: (exact same adjustment settings to match the ROTJ picture on the site)

Ok thanks, that clears it up a bit. Guess we do have to wait for people who have actually seen it.

[earmullet]

Here are frame grabs from Episode VI one from the blu ray site and the other from the 2006 Bonus Disc port. For all you people complaining about color timing this should silence the debate (but I know it won't).

[adywan]

Originally Posted by earmullet

Here are frame grabs from Episode VI one from the blu ray site and the other from the 2006 Bonus Disc port. For all you people complaining about color timing this should silence the debate (but I know it won't).

The 2006 bonus discs were taken from a screwed up laserdisc master. This shot never looked that way in other transfers so you can't use that set as a comparison. That set had many problems . Earlier transfers looked more like the 2004 colouring. But your picture is not exactly what's on the bonus disc as yours seems to have been darkened quite a bit.

[earmullet]

Originally Posted by adywan

The 2006 bonus discs were taken from a screwed up laserdisc master. This shot never looked that way in other transfers so you can't use that set as a comparison. That set had many problems . Earlier transfers looked more like the 2004 colouring. But your picture is not exactly what's on the bonus disc as yours seems to have been darkened quite a bit.

I agree it is pretty dark, but still the detail in the small still from the blu ray page has far more definition and color.

[miniroll32]

I don't even know why fans think the 'Original Theatrical Edition' DVD's are representative how of the films originally looked. The LaserDisc master was barely any better than the VHS's, and they themselves were absolutely terrible - in particular, the Hoth scenes in Empire Strikes Back. Its only when you watch the films on these modern mediums such as DVD that you can appreciate detail that has not been seen for years. I originally watched all three Star Wars films in the 1980's, and although my memory is rightly waining, the 1997 Special Editions were a god send as they revived the films.

Sure, the colour timing for 2004 in particular was poor, but lets not forget the amazing restoration of the actual print. Its a typical Lowry job - flawless and free of any artefacts. Special Edition changes aside, i'd still take those DVDs over anything right now.

This is what bugs me when people say "I want the original trilogy unaltered, fully restored [blah blah]. If this ever happened, I imagine people would be completely underwhelmed at the results, because the films simply never looked any where near as good as what they do today.

You only have to look at this excellent Technicolor print of A New Hope to appreciate that, despite being dye based (meaning it won't fade in good conditions), the film demonstrates features that were normal of the period. There were no super-duper-over processed contrasts or hues, it was just a standard Kodak print.

‪The Senator Theater's Last Night‬‏ - YouTube

Even the colour of the Star Destroyer ship that swoops past in the beginning looks as though it was photographed in a studio, because its lighting looks natural.

I've always loved these films, but because they've been released in so many different versions, formats and originated from different prints, it doesn't surprise me that fans themselves convince each other over what is right and wrong.

[miniroll32]

If I win the Lottery, it'll buy that print chances are though I wouldn't have enough money!!

[adywan]

Originally Posted by miniroll32

I don't even know why fans think the 'Original Theatrical Edition' DVD's are representative how of the films originally looked. The LaserDisc master was barely any better than the VHS's, and they themselves were absolutely terrible - in particular, the Hoth scenes in Empire Strikes Back. Its only when you watch the films on these modern mediums such as DVD that you can appreciate detail that has not been seen for years. I originally watched all three Star Wars films in the 1980's, and although my memory is rightly waining, the 1997 Special Editions were a god send as they revived the films.

Sure, the colour timing for 2004 in particular was poor, but lets not forget the amazing restoration of the actual print. Its a typical Lowry job - flawless and free of any artefacts. Special Edition changes aside, i'd still take those DVDs over anything right now.

This is what bugs me when people say "I want the original trilogy unaltered, fully restored [blah blah]. If this ever happened, I imagine people would be completely underwhelmed at the results, because the films simply never looked any where near as good as what they do today.

You only have to look at this excellent Technicolor print of A New Hope to appreciate that, despite being dye based (meaning it won't fade in good conditions), the film demonstrates features that were normal of the period. There were no super-duper-over processed contrasts or hues, it was just a standard Kodak print.

‪The Senator Theater's Last Night‬‏ - YouTube

Even the colour of the Star Destroyer ship that swoops past in the beginning looks as though it was photographed in a studio, because its lighting looks natural.

I've always loved these films, but because they've been released in so many different versions, formats and originated from different prints, it doesn't surprise me that fans themselves convince each other over what is right and wrong.

But this was filmed using a video camera in a cinema. How can you even say about how the colour looked originally from this? And saying that the films never looked as good back then as they do today is just ludicrous. The detail that was in the original prints/negatives was far greater than what was on the DVD and will be on the Blu-Rays. Just because all we had was VHS/Laserdisc versions taken from a telecine means nothing. Sure things will look better today as the film is scanned. There are a lot of fans out there that have done a lot of research as to what the films looked like originally with the colouring etc, using unfaded prints as a reference and they looked closer to what we saw in 1997 than any of the various VHS/Laserdisc releases, although some scenes were re-colourtimed for the SE's. But the 2004 set looks nothing like the films ever did. The stardestroyer NEVER looked like it was filmed in a studio and anyone who actually saw it in the cinemas would know that.

They may have restored the print but what else they did to it was an abomination. I'd rather have the films looking how they did originally with a few dust marks and scratches here and there over what the 2004 set looked like, and i know for a fact i am not alone on this one.

[georgec]

Originally Posted by miniroll32

I don't even know why fans think the 'Original Theatrical Edition' DVD's are representative how of the films originally looked. The LaserDisc master was barely any better than the VHS's, and they themselves were absolutely terrible - in particular, the Hoth scenes in Empire Strikes Back. Its only when you watch the films on these modern mediums such as DVD that you can appreciate detail that has not been seen for years. I originally watched all three Star Wars films in the 1980's, and although my memory is rightly waining, the 1997 Special Editions were a god send as they revived the films.

Sure, the colour timing for 2004 in particular was poor, but lets not forget the amazing restoration of the actual print. Its a typical Lowry job - flawless and free of any artefacts. Special Edition changes aside, i'd still take those DVDs over anything right now.

This is what bugs me when people say "I want the original trilogy unaltered, fully restored [blah blah]. If this ever happened, I imagine people would be completely underwhelmed at the results, because the films simply never looked any where near as good as what they do today.

You only have to look at this excellent Technicolor print of A New Hope to appreciate that, despite being dye based (meaning it won't fade in good conditions), the film demonstrates features that were normal of the period. There were no super-duper-over processed contrasts or hues, it was just a standard Kodak print.

‪The Senator Theater's Last Night‬‏ - YouTube

Even the colour of the Star Destroyer ship that swoops past in the beginning looks as though it was photographed in a studio, because its lighting looks natural.

I've always loved these films, but because they've been released in so many different versions, formats and originated from different prints, it doesn't surprise me that fans themselves convince each other over what is right and wrong.

Firstly, original theatrical dvds don't exist - those Laserdisc hack jobs in 2006 do not represent the material.

The Lowry job was not flawless. It had many flaws - crushed blacks, red appearing pink, green instead of blue lightsabers, etc.

If the Criterion Collection or other studios can restore classic movies from the 30s and 40s to high definition quality, what's stopping George Lucas? Time? Money? No, he has plenty of both of those. What stops him is that he doesn't want people to own the original movies before he did the Special Editions. The reasons may be debated, but that is the truth. He views the originals as incomplete.

How do you like working for Lucasfilm?

[miniroll32]

Originally Posted by georgec

The Lowry job was not flawless. It had many flaws - crushed blacks, red appearing pink, green instead of blue lightsabers, etc

I wasn't referring to the colours - I was talking of the print quality, and how clean it was.

Originally Posted by georgec

How do you like working for Lucasfilm?

Cute.

[miniroll32]

Originally Posted by adywan

But this was filmed using a video camera in a cinema.

The Comic-con footage has been filmed with a video camera against large TV's. Yet many are jumping to conclusions and analysing it

[earmullet]

Originally Posted by miniroll32

The Comic-con footage has been filmed with a video camera against large TV's. Yet many are jumping to conclusions and analysing it

Agreed.

[adywan]

Originally Posted by earmullet

2006 Bonus Disc Port:

Blu Ray Page Still:

Those are exactly the same images. Here's the capture from the 2006 bonus discs:

Originally Posted by miniroll32

The Comic-con footage has been filmed with a video camera against large TV's. Yet many are jumping to conclusions and analysing it

Only those who are convinced that the colours have been fixed and that they are a new transfers because of what they saw in the video was using the way it looked to back up their argument. I used the comic con footage to prove that it was in fact the 2004 transfer, not by how it looked, but by the video glitch, which was never present in any other home video or cinematic version and could only be there in the exact same spot unless it was in fact the same transfer.

[earmullet]

Blu Ray Page Still:

2006 Bonus Disc:

[miniroll32]

My stance at the moment is that we'll see the 2004 'transfers', and thats purely because of the cost and time it would have originally taken to restore the print quality for the 2004 releases. I'm not counting the colour timing there - that was obviously a different issue, and I really can't see Lowry restoring these films in the supposed '1080p' that many have said. They would have been treated just like any restoration before them - 4K transfers.

The only difference this time round, it seems so far, is that the gamma and brightness have been altered. If these brighten the images then i'll be happy, because some of those X-Wing cockpit scenes on the DVDs were badly dark.