Original/Unaltered "Star Wars" Trilogy on Blu-Ray in 2017

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Bowie Fett, Feb 23, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    To all members:

    If I am wrong. Please point that out. Hey, I might be. But please don't insult me or degrade this Forum by using insults and name calling. Most of you are cool. Those who call me: stupid, arrogant, foolish, etc will be blocked out.

    Say whatever you have to say but let's leave the personal attacks out. I brag to people that our forum is the best. Why? Because we are civilized. Let's keep it that way.
     
  2. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    Ahhh, the perfect post. I like your honesty. :righton:
     
  3. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    I must say thank you again. Apparently all the members have not read this. I wish they would before they would post.

    3 years in special education. And an IQ of 70.
    I couldn't tie my shoes until I was 8.

    But I never let that stop me. Except for my older brother who kept calling me lazy and stupid. He still does.
     
  4. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    Thank you for sharing that with us. What a story!
     
  5. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    Yep. The GCI are 1080p. The colour negative can be anywhere between 3.2 and 3.8 k. Colour negatives might be as high as 6k but there are losses in the scanning process. Same as there is with projecting. If film negatives were all 4k or slightly higher they would scan at 5k. You always scan higher than you need. Better scanners interact future might yield that 6k. Who knows?

    If you like please read......It will answer many questions. I can get you the full PDF this was form if you wish.


    Taken from a known 35 mm film resolution test:

    "...The best 35 mm release print was also projected in six selected movie theaters in various countries, and an international panel of experts assessed the resolution of the projected images, using a well-defined formal assessment procedure. The MTF measurements performed on the films have shown that the MTF on the negative film drops to 10% of its peak value at about 2100 lines/PH (lines per picture height). It gradually continues to drop along the film chain from negative to interpositive to internegative and to release print, and it reaches 10% of its peak value at about 1000 lines/PH when measured on the release print. When measured on the answer print, it reaches 10 % of its peak value at about 1400 lines/PH. The MTF measured on the 35 mm answer print film quite closely matches the one measured on the 35 mm interpositive film. This is not surprising, since a 35 mm interpositive is a positive film printed from the original 35 mm negative, as a 35 mm answer print is. Obviously, it must be expected that the resolution measured on the 35 mm release print (or on the answer print) will suffer some reduction when the print is projected in a movie theater, due to the passage of the image through the projector mechanism and lens Indeed, this was confirmed by the subjective assessment tests. They have shown the following. • There was quite a spread in the resolution performance of the six selected movie theaters where the assessment tests were performed. • There was also some spread in the resolution performance of each selected movie theater, when measured at various points of the screen. • The highest resolution that the expert assessors could still discern in the sharpest part of the screen (not necessarily in its center) in the most performing movie theater was about 875 lines/PH. • The average resolution in the sharpest part of their screen of the six movie theaters was about 750 lines/PH. • The highest resolution averaged over the eight multiburst groups measured on the screens of the six selected movie theaters was about 685 lines/PH. • A wide range of resolution values will be obtained, depending on the stocks, the laboratory, the type of printer, etc. Note: The matters covered in this report are more fully treated in the following ITU-R documents. 6/149 9.20.01 35mm Cinema Film Resolution Test Report. 6-9/3Rev.13.5.02 35mm Cinema Film Resolution Test Report. Update of Part 4 of 6-9/3. 6-9/47 (Rev.2) 9.20.02. Revised Report on the status of the 35mm Answer Print Resolution Test....."
     
  6. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    The negative is best. The release print is what most theatres got. An Answer Print would be struck from the negative. That would be 1400 lines projected. All those Star Wars prints were Relase prints which are 4 stages from the negative. Those won't yield anymore that 800 lines projected. Scanned? Your guess is as good as mine. They could be 2k. But losses happen happen during scanning. Again who knows....

    Question? Could 4k77 be more than 2k. If it is an Answer Print than it would kick ass at over 1400 lines. But more than likely it is a Release Print. But no one here will provide details on what kind of a print it is.

    Yes, film can deliver up to 4k - BUT ONLY THOUGH THE NEGATIVE.


    I have posted this already. Please read.


    Taken from a known 35 mm film resolution test:

    "...The best 35 mm release print was also projected in six selected movie theaters in various countries, and an international panel of experts assessed the resolution of the projected images, using a well-defined formal assessment procedure. The MTF measurements performed on the films have shown that the MTF on the negative film drops to 10% of its peak value at about 2100 lines/PH (lines per picture height). It gradually continues to drop along the film chain from negative to interpositive to internegative and to release print, and it reaches 10% of its peak value at about 1000 lines/PH when measured on the release print. When measured on the answer print, it reaches 10 % of its peak value at about 1400 lines/PH. The MTF measured on the 35 mm answer print film quite closely matches the one measured on the 35 mm interpositive film. This is not surprising, since a 35 mm interpositive is a positive film printed from the original 35 mm negative, as a 35 mm answer print is. Obviously, it must be expected that the resolution measured on the 35 mm release print (or on the answer print) will suffer some reduction when the print is projected in a movie theater, due to the passage of the image through the projector mechanism and lens Indeed, this was confirmed by the subjective assessment tests. They have shown the following. • There was quite a spread in the resolution performance of the six selected movie theaters where the assessment tests were performed. • There was also some spread in the resolution performance of each selected movie theater, when measured at various points of the screen. • The highest resolution that the expert assessors could still discern in the sharpest part of the screen (not necessarily in its center) in the most performing movie theater was about 875 lines/PH. • The average resolution in the sharpest part of their screen of the six movie theaters was about 750 lines/PH. • The highest resolution averaged over the eight multiburst groups measured on the screens of the six selected movie theaters was about 685 lines/PH. • A wide range of resolution values will be obtained, depending on the stocks, the laboratory, the type of printer, etc. Note: The matters covered in this report are more fully treated in the following ITU-R documents. 6/149 9.20.01 35mm Cinema Film Resolution Test Report. 6-9/3Rev.13.5.02 35mm Cinema Film Resolution Test Report. Update of Part 4 of 6-9/3. 6-9/47 (Rev.2) 9.20.02. Revised Report on the status of the 35mm Answer Print Resolution Test....."


    That fresh print in Mexixo sounds good. But yes, Disney has already released a 4k of the 1997 versions. I hear 4k77 is pretty good. But I can't buy it on Amazon so.....
     
  7. CraigBic

    CraigBic Forum Resident

    Location:
    New Zealand
    I said arrogant because your tone is arrogant You are talking down to people and I can see quite clearly that you are playing loose with the facts. Particularly since you looked at the screenshot and completely missed the point which was that 4k77 contained detail that the blu-ray did not have. Detail it didn't have because it was scrubbed out by the DNR process. Never mind that you are now spamming the thread. Instead of grandstanding why don't you check your ego instead of ranting and raving and posting this quote over and over again as though it's the be all end all of knowledge it isn't.

    Also I didn't say that you can get 4k out of 2k CGI, What I said was 2k was the standard back then and that 35mm film has a lot of detail in it. Detail in film isn't limited to line pairs, but rather the grain size and structure of the film.

    The 1997 restoration of Star Wars is not an entirely digital restoration. Only sections of the film which were re composited digitally or have added CGI will have been mastered in 2k. Everything else would have been rescanned at 4k.

    Star Wars - Legacy Edition 4K Restoration

     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2021
    budwhite and superstar19 like this.
  8. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario

    Good question. But no director would want 2 cuts out at the same time. Lawrence Of Arabia had 15 minutes cut out right after premier night.. So who knows.....

    The release prints (movie house prints).are made from the Answer Prints, which are all made the negatives. So, they would have to be 2 negatives back in 1977. To my knowledge this never happened..
     
  9. SamS

    SamS Forum Legend

    Location:
    Texas
    You're wrong. On practically everything. Not calling you any names.

    But here's a tip:
    You regularly post very "absolute" statements, i.e. "avoid xxx" or "you can't get" or "only xxx is xxx". When you make comments like this, you're opening yourself up to lots of people who have more hands-on experience with the subject matter you're opining on. Stick with prefacing things as your opinion, unless you have professional insight and/or hands on experience to back up all of these super broad, absolute comments. And even if you have professional insight or hands-on experience, be prepared to back that up, too!
     
    superstar19, FACE OF BOE and CraigBic like this.
  10. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario

    Correction:

    Optical Negative
    3.2 to 3.8 k scanned.

    Many Answer Prints cut from Negative..
    Answer Print 1400 lines projected.

    Release Prints made from Answer Prints.
    RP 800 lines projected.


    Movie houses get the Release Prints and not the Answer Prints which are cut from the negative.
     
  11. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    That is your interpretation. It is just the way I post. These are known facts about film. Stop taking offence where no offence is given.

    How am I wrong on practically everthing?
    This is basic film knowledge. It is nothing fantastic. I have backed up what I have said.


    I have posted this already. Please read. This is the 5th time I have posted this yet most of you have not read it..



    Taken from a known 35 mm film resolution test:

    "...The best 35 mm release print was also projected in six selected movie theaters in various countries, and an international panel of experts assessed the resolution of the projected images, using a well-defined formal assessment procedure. The MTF measurements performed on the films have shown that the MTF on the negative film drops to 10% of its peak value at about 2100 lines/PH (lines per picture height). It gradually continues to drop along the film chain from negative to interpositive to internegative and to release print, and it reaches 10% of its peak value at about 1000 lines/PH when measured on the release print. When measured on the answer print, it reaches 10 % of its peak value at about 1400 lines/PH. The MTF measured on the 35 mm answer print film quite closely matches the one measured on the 35 mm interpositive film. This is not surprising, since a 35 mm interpositive is a positive film printed from the original 35 mm negative, as a 35 mm answer print is. Obviously, it must be expected that the resolution measured on the 35 mm release print (or on the answer print) will suffer some reduction when the print is projected in a movie theater, due to the passage of the image through the projector mechanism and lens Indeed, this was confirmed by the subjective assessment tests. They have shown the following. • There was quite a spread in the resolution performance of the six selected movie theaters where the assessment tests were performed. • There was also some spread in the resolution performance of each selected movie theater, when measured at various points of the screen. • The highest resolution that the expert assessors could still discern in the sharpest part of the screen (not necessarily in its center) in the most performing movie theater was about 875 lines/PH. • The average resolution in the sharpest part of their screen of the six movie theaters was about 750 lines/PH. • The highest resolution averaged over the eight multiburst groups measured on the screens of the six selected movie theaters was about 685 lines/PH. • A wide range of resolution values will be obtained, depending on the stocks, the laboratory, the type of printer, etc. Note: The matters covered in this report are more fully treated in the following ITU-R documents. 6/149 9.20.01 35mm Cinema Film Resolution Test Report. 6-9/3Rev.13.5.02 35mm Cinema Film Resolution Test Report. Update of Part 4 of 6-9/3. 6-9/47 (Rev.2) 9.20.02. Revised Report on the status of the 35mm Answer Print Resolution Test....."
    .
     
  12. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    No, you are just trying to make trouble.
     
  13. CraigBic

    CraigBic Forum Resident

    Location:
    New Zealand
    The study is an evaluation of quality during projection, not a measurement of actual detail that can be found on the film itself when scanned. Mike Verta if anything has shown that detail and sharpness can vary from print to print and that when combining prints together all sorts of detail can be recovered. Particularly when the focus is on restoration as is the main focus of this thread I would have thought.

    The current 4k release of Star Wars so far as we know was created from the 1997 restoration where they would have gone back to the negative. Any CGI effects would be upscaled 2k footage and that would have been the work done for the 2004 DVD presumably not the work done in 1997. Though I am not familiar with the details behind the effects work done in 2004.

    4k77 comprises of a few prints "spliced" together digitally in order to create one complete copy of the film. They were scanned at 4k and restored at 4k. What matters isn't measurements of line pairs but rather the detail in the image. The clarity, colour information etc.

    We aren't watching test patterns, we're watching Star Wars.

     
    rnranimal likes this.
  14. SamS

    SamS Forum Legend

    Location:
    Texas
    You asked members here to point out if you were wrong. So we did. That's not making trouble.

    So what you found some (nonsensical) post on the interwebs to paste here.

    Have you ever made a living from proving out this knowledge, or have professional test equipment to verify/validate some of the text you posted? Of course not. But some of us have/do. Which is why you're being called out.
     
    superstar19, FACE OF BOE and CraigBic like this.
  15. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    Since I get my information from interviews from people in the film industry, film experts like Vidiot and well known studies I can't say, "My opinion" because that would be a lie. I am not going to put "my opinion" in front of everthing.


    I learned a lot from Vidiot, whose knowledge on the film industry could fill a shopping mall.. I thought the negative was 4k max, but Vidiot said otherwise. That it is 5.6 almost 6 k.
    But that the scanner can't capture all the details.. it losses information on the scan. Hence the 4k. Again, not my opinion.


    The interview in MIX magazine with George Lucas's team is where I found out about the 3.2 to 3.8 k for the negative scan. That's a range. No where did I say it was set in stone..it is an average. Some might be 4k or even higher if they were scanning 35 mm negatives at 6k. Some might even be as low as 3k. And because it analog it is range. It is also where I found about the 800 lines of resolution of a Release Print. (The study below). Now that number is from the study (not my opinion).but it is 800 lines projected. Scanned I suppose it could be higher.

    A 70 mm optical is easily 8 k or higher. Twice the film size so double The resolution. For example, Lawrence Of Arabia was scanned at 12 k.

    But some members were making crazy claims.
    That a 4k scan of a Release Print is somehow better than 4k scan of the Negative. This could be possible if the negative was really fudged and wrecked. This was not the case here.. Sorry, but to make a decision about film Release Print / negative resolution based on one still frame off of the web. Please! Not even as a joke.


    I am wrong all the time.. if someone has another study. Paste it up here. I don't personally believe a Release Print is 800 lines. I remember seeing Aliens, Total Recall (1990) and Termniator 2 back in the day. That was way more than 800 lines. Now that....Is just my opinion.


    Taken from a known 35 mm film resolution test:

    "...The best 35 mm release print was also projected in six selected movie theaters in various countries, and an international panel of experts assessed the resolution of the projected images, using a well-defined formal assessment procedure. The MTF measurements performed on the films have shown that the MTF on the negative film drops to 10% of its peak value at about 2100 lines/PH (lines per picture height). It gradually continues to drop along the film chain from negative to interpositive to internegative and to release print, and it reaches 10% of its peak value at about 1000 lines/PH when measured on the release print. When measured on the answer print, it reaches 10 % of its peak value at about 1400 lines/PH. The MTF measured on the 35 mm answer print film quite closely matches the one measured on the 35 mm interpositive film. This is not surprising, since a 35 mm interpositive is a positive film printed from the original 35 mm negative, as a 35 mm answer print is. Obviously, it must be expected that the resolution measured on the 35 mm release print (or on the answer print) will suffer some reduction when the print is projected in a movie theater, due to the passage of the image through the projector mechanism and lens Indeed, this was confirmed by the subjective assessment tests. They have shown the following. • There was quite a spread in the resolution performance of the six selected movie theaters where the assessment tests were performed. • There was also some spread in the resolution performance of each selected movie theater, when measured at various points of the screen. • The highest resolution that the expert assessors could still discern in the sharpest part of the screen (not necessarily in its center) in the most performing movie theater was about 875 lines/PH. • The average resolution in the sharpest part of their screen of the six movie theaters was about 750 lines/PH. • The highest resolution averaged over the eight multiburst groups measured on the screens of the six selected movie theaters was about 685 lines/PH. • A wide range of resolution values will be obtained, depending on the stocks, the laboratory, the type of printer, etc. Note: The matters covered in this report are more fully treated in the following ITU-R documents. 6/149 9.20.01 35mm Cinema Film Resolution Test Report. 6-9/3Rev.13.5.02 35mm Cinema Film Resolution Test Report. Update of Part 4 of 6-9/3. 6-9/47 (Rev.2) 9.20.02. Revised Report on the status of the 35mm Answer Print Resolution Test....."
     
  16. CraigBic

    CraigBic Forum Resident

    Location:
    New Zealand
    Lawrence of Arabia was scanned at 8k, not 12k.

    The comparison was made between the 2011 Blu-ray and 4k77 not the latest 4k release, and it is not by any means a "crazy claim".

    A lot of this discussion goes back to the original 2011 Blu-ray disc, I am not actually sure how much discussion there is about the quality of the current 4k versions however the consensus seems to be that it is heavily scrubbed with DNR where as 4k77 allows you to choose between a lightly cleaned up version and a DNR version. Mike Verta's release is something else all together.
     
    rnranimal likes this.
  17. budwhite

    budwhite Climb the mountains and get their good tidings.

    Location:
    Götaland, Sverige
    Ignore button is handy.
    That was the last time I've read that 35mm resolution quote.
     
    Hammerhead, CraigBic and superstar19 like this.
  18. DrDre

    DrDre Forum Resident

    Location:
    Amsterdam
    This comes from a film restoration professional over on ot.com:

    "There are many details in the IB Tech prints from 1977 that exceed the 2160 lines of UHD, there is no way to scale them down to 4K BD and not lose some of that detail.

    The area around the Tantive door is an easy place to see this, at 2K the doorframe is a uniform grey, with a 6K scan, you can see it is ribbed, rather like a vacuum cleaner tube.

    Some prints are terrible and struggle to have much in the way of resolution, others have far in excess of 2K, and many, many negatives we have scanned exceed 4K and need to be scanned at 6K or even 10K to keep the resolution evident in the negatives.

    We have studied all sorts of theories on this, but it comes down to actual practice, 35mm prints and negs often have details that are lost if you dip below 4K.

    I work with negs that far exceed 4K resolution on a daily basis, we can and do measure it. The ITU did tests back in 2000 that gave a vertical resolution of around 2700 lines for a scope print, and considerably higher for a negative.

    Plenty of films, especially release prints look little different at 2K, but others have striking differences, text that is not readable below 3K, but is clear at 5K, the details like those in the doorframe, there is actually no way to keep that detail at 2K, even if you were rendering it directly from a computer model, there just isn’t enough pixels, and again, those are in the release print, not the neg. The neg would have superior resolution again."

    To be clear this is for what's actually on the frame, not what is seen on a projection screen. So, release prints can have a resolution up to 2700 lines, although it clearly depends on the source. The resolution of the 4K77 scan is probably ~2,5 - 3K. The ribbing on the door frame of the Tantive IV, that cannot be resolved at 2K is visible at 2160p, but it is based on an older scan from around 2012, and was done on a professional, but less modern scanner.

    Finally, the loss of detail going from one generation to the next is not a linear process like for a digital medium. Contrast generally increases with each generation, and so most detail is lost in the highlights, and the shadows. So, while for a release print detail in the mid tones may still exceed 4K, it may be 2K or less for the highs and lows.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2021
  19. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    Thank you. Very informative. So you often need to scan very high just to get even just 2k resolution.


    The study I quote is for projected not what is on the frame. But I didn't see how a Release Print could be 4k. Or can it be?

    How many films have you transfers where they you only had a Release Print to work with? What resoution were you able to get on average?

    Funny how projected the frames could cause so much loss. 2700 done to 900. Projected of course.

    Question. How much resolution on average can you get from a 16 mm negative?
     
  20. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario

    Yes, unfortunately many members never read it. Many members kept asking for proof when the test study was the proof. (For the projected image.)

    Yes, it handy.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2021
  21. DrDre

    DrDre Forum Resident

    Location:
    Amsterdam
    The quoted text is from a friend who has worked in the film restoration business for decades. I personally am an image processing professional. So, although I have worked with film, particulary in the automated transfer of a color grading, or color restoration, I trust the film restoration experts for what the limitations of film are. However like I said, I'm very familiar with the 4K77 scan, and can tell you there are details visible on the scan, that cannot be resolved at 2K resolution, but can be seen at 4K resolution. With regards to 16mm I believe the maximum resolution is roughly 2K, although you should also consider, that many feature length 16mm films are dupes of 35mm release prints of varying quality, so there's more generational loss to consider.
     
  22. Rocker

    Rocker Senior Member

    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    The line is actually "That's what you said when Biggs and Tank left." :)

    Tank
     
  23. john morris

    john morris Everybody's Favorite Quadron

    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario

    Yes, from what I have read so far it would appear that 4k77 is somewhere between 2.5 and 3k. From what I have read here this is what is on the frame from a scan. If you projected the film you would not get even 2k. Which was proven by the film resolution test which I have already posted. The scans have shown us how good film really is.

    It is unfortunate that so much was on the actual frames we never got to see. Thanks to 2k and 4k disks now we can.

    In regards to 16 mm I am not referring to dupes made from 35 mm. The first two seasons of BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER were shot on 16mm. Another example is the 1970 classic Doctor Who story - SPEARHEAD FROM SPACE which was shot all on 16 mm film. I assume that you can get 2k from a scan of these negatives. But if you were to strike print from a 16 mm negative what would be the resoution range?
     
  24. CraigBic

    CraigBic Forum Resident

    Location:
    New Zealand
    If anyone in here is fortunate enough to be projecting 4k77 rather than viewing it on a flat panel display, I am quite confident that it is through digital projection and not through 35mm projection.

    So 4k77 aside, I was looking at Mike Verta's work again and this shot in particular from the "Theatrical version" sort of stands out to me. It stands out to me because when Disney bought Lucasfilm, Lucasfilm put out some new BHS content with the iTunes release of the movie.
    One of the mini documentaries was a fascinating look at matte paintings, and they found the piece of glass that this particular matte painting was done on. They describe it as an iconic matte painting, an iconic matte painting which George Lucas took out of the movie.

    [​IMG]


     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2021
    S. P. Honeybunch and BeatleJWOL like this.
  25. BeatleJWOL

    BeatleJWOL Senior Member

    For anyone curious, Harmy has uploaded a breakdown of his sources for the Despecialized edition:


    (dicussion of sources starts just prior to the 10 minute mark)

    Supposedly his version 3.0 is going to work off the UHD disc versions of the final "Special Editions" (as also presented on Disney+) and basically going to do all of his previous work from scratch (edit: apparently he's also going to use the 4k77 and related projects as well).
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2021
    AlmanacZinger, budwhite and wolfram like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine