my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » The Afterlife   » Lucasfilm announces original, unaltered Star Wars trilogy on DVD (Page 6)

This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7

Author Topic: Lucasfilm announces original, unaltered Star Wars trilogy on DVD Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 09-16-2006 10:48 AM                        The reason the transfers are so crappy is because they are included with the Special Edition discs. That way you'll be able to contrast and compare the two versions. Then you'll see how much Lucas and that Rick McCallum guy "improved" the movies. You will shit your pants, be blown away by the difference, see that the Special Edition versions are truly better and that Lucas was right all along. This plan cannot fail!  |  IP: Logged Mathew Molloy Master Film Handler Posts: 357 From: The Santa Cruz Mountains Registered: Nov 2000 posted 09-16-2006 07:41 PM                     I just got the trilogy discs in from Netflix and I'm watching Star Wars now. I also have the Laserdisc running to swap back and forth to compare the picture/sound. The laserdisc is the 1989 Special Widescreen Edition. Here's how I'm viewing this... DVD: Sony DVP NS-75H HDMI & Optical digital audio LASERDISC: Pioneer CLD-D501 S-Video & Optical digital audio PROCESSOR: Sony STR DG-800 HDMI in/out, S-video in/Component out PROJECTOR: Optoma H78DC3 DVI in via HDMI to DVI converter, RCA Component in. SCREEN: 4'x7' Gatorboard Note the processor converts the S-Video in to Component out. I'm listening to both in Dolby ProLogic IIx I'm not hearing much difference in the audio and I can't yet explain the differences I am hearing. PROS: The difference in video is enormous. It's like the jump from a home-recorded vhs tape to CAV Laserdisc. The dvd shows more stars, blacks are more deep & rich, colors are closer to being correct, whites are whiter, edges are much more sharp. I'm pretty sure this is a different source than the 1989 Laserdisc as there's less dirt and scratches in the dvd source material. The DVD is slightly underscanned compared to the LD but this has removed the annoying, visible splices of the LD. The dvd has the "Star Wars" title and the LD has the "Star Wars Episode IV A New Hope" title. Two more pro's over the laserdisc is 1) the lack of dropouts - of which there are a lot of on my disc... and 2) I don't have to change sides and swap discs! Cons: Despite the obvious lack of an anamorphic image and discrete audio - Greedo's subtitles are in the letterbox area and the lower half of his subtitles go missing on a 16x9 screen. Jaggies - although not as bad as the LD they're still pretty bad - sharpness leaves much to be desired. There's some weave but not near as bad as the LD. The layer change happens after "Terminate her, immediately!" and is pretty bad. Most layer changes on this dvd player are practically unnoticeable but this one - it's like a changeover done wrong. After watching this dvd I decided I will be buying the dvd's even though I ALREADY HAVE the other versions on dvd. Oh well, I'll give those away. Later tonight, when there's no ambient light in this room, I'll edit this to add some photos and perhaps comment further.  |  IP: Logged Frank Dubrois Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 896 From: Cleveland, OH Registered: Mar 2005 posted 09-16-2006 08:48 PM                    quote: Mathew Molloy The difference in video is enormous. It's like the jump from a home-recorded vhs tape to CAV Laserdisc. Well, the difference your seeing COULD be the fact that your using an HDMI cable for the DVD's and an S-VIDEO cable for the laser disc. Thats not exactly comparing apples with apples is it? HDMI gives a pure digital signal, while your S-VIDEO gets converted to analog. It is the same exact transfer as the laserdisc, they did nothing to it.....  |  IP: Logged Mathew Molloy Master Film Handler Posts: 357 From: The Santa Cruz Mountains Registered: Nov 2000 posted 09-16-2006 09:45 PM                     Frank- why so negative? Should I not have bothered? S-Video is as high resolution one can get out of a laserdisc (afaik) and that's why I'm comparing the two the way I am. People keep saying "I may as well stick with the laserdisc if the image isn't any better". In fact, when I previously stated the DVD "...has to be better than LD through a crappy S video output" you replied "Don't count on it." Really, I am comparing apples to apples it's just the one apple is 15 years older than the other. I'm just trying to state some facts which seem to be missing in reviews of these dvds no matter where I search online. Everyone has their panties in a wad over these dvds but nobody is giving any first-hand experience. NOTE: I just swapped the S-Video cable from the LD and into the DVD. The difference is still much, much, much better than I expected. I'd say again it's like going from a homemade videotape to, let's say, SVHS. Don't get me wrong. I'm pissed these weren't released as they SHOULD have been but they're not as bad as everyone's saying.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 09-16-2006 10:31 PM                        LaserDiscs aren't capable of true s-video. The video is stored on the disc in the horrible and unacceptable COMPOSITE format which everyone on the planet hates. The composite is split by the player into s-video which is then split again by your processor into component. The best test would be composite from both players (LD and DVD) straight into the TV.  |  IP: Logged Mathew Molloy Master Film Handler Posts: 357 From: The Santa Cruz Mountains Registered: Nov 2000 posted 09-16-2006 11:31 PM                     Thanks for the info. Joe. I remember you posted that elsewhere at one time and I forgot all about that. No wonder the DVD through S-Video looks so much better. But honestly, I don't care to compare the DVD to the LD via the same output - that wasn't my goal or intention. My point was to compare the newly released dvd, and the best quality I can expect from that format - to the previously released version on LD and the best quality I can expect from that format. Again, people are writing that the dvd won't look any better than the laserdisc and of course it does. Now if I can only figure out how to reduce the pixel size of the shots I took I could post the pictures. Silly macs.  |  IP: Logged Greg Anderson Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 766 From: Ogden Valley, Utah Registered: Nov 1999 posted 09-17-2006 12:24 AM                        The 1989 laserdiscs are too old. For a real "apples to apples" comparison you need the THX-edition laserdiscs from 1993 or the CLV versions which were released after that.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 09-17-2006 12:38 AM                        Aren't those the Special Edition LaserDiscs? Macs, as with PCs, need software to shrink an image down to 550 pixels wide. Try illegally downloading Photoshop. Macs have some free bullshit that comes with them called iPhoto or something like that. Try illegally using that.  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 09-17-2006 12:53 AM                  Many "Special Edition" LaserDisc(s) are in the CAV format. A CAV LaserDisc has better resolution than a CLV disc. But what everyone seems to overlook is ALL LaserDiscs are recorded and played back in composite video. The S-Video output is derived from the recorded (and played-back) composite video after being decoded. It will never be as good as a DVD which is all digital until the final A/D converter.  |  IP: Logged Frank Dubrois Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 896 From: Cleveland, OH Registered: Mar 2005 posted 09-17-2006 12:59 AM                    quote: Mathew Molloy I don't care to compare the DVD to the LD via the same output - that wasn't my goal or intention. Then the comparison was a waste of time. I'm not being negative, but if you truely wanted to compare the video quality between the original laserdisc to the "new" DVD original, you have to be fair about it. As Joe said, composite video out on both would be the best route to take. Even going the composite route, I'm sure the DVD player has a more superior D/A converter than the laserdisc player does, so its still not going to be completely conclusive. All Lucas wanted to do was transfer this movie over and say "see, without my enhancements, the originals are crap, I told you its crap, now shut up and like the special edition". Do you really think Lucas would go through the trouble of partially remastering a movie? Even a half-assed job costs money. He'd go all out, or nothing at all...unfortunately, we got the "nothing at all" version.  |  IP: Logged Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 09-17-2006 01:01 AM                     "Star Wars" Domestic Widescreen-Format Laserdisc Releases Catalog # 1130-85 = 1989 CBS-Fox CLV Catalog # 0693-84 = 1993 Fox Video 9-Disc CAV (all three movies) Catalog # 8763-85 = 1995 Fox Video CLV Catalog # 410298501 = 1997 Fox Video 5-Disc CLV "Special Edition" (all three movies) Mathew appears to be comparing the new DVD to the '89 disc which, as Greg pointed out, is a totally different transfer compared to what's on the new DVD, and the DVD rightfully smokes it in quality (though I was a happy camper to have that now-crappy LD when it was new). Greg referred to the '93 and '95 releases. Joe, I think, is asking about the '97 edition.  |  IP: Logged Mathew Molloy Master Film Handler Posts: 357 From: The Santa Cruz Mountains Registered: Nov 2000 posted 09-17-2006 01:33 AM                     Ah nuts. Well at least I answered my own questions so the comparison was not waste of time. Posting my notes here was. Wish some of ya would've understood my intentions... Honestly, I thought I would get a "thanks" out of it. No matter. Tho', to be fair, I didn't know there were LD releases after the '89 "special widescreen edition". And Mr. Dubrois, if you are not being negative you must be a real kill-joy to be around.  |  IP: Logged Frank Dubrois Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 896 From: Cleveland, OH Registered: Mar 2005 posted 09-17-2006 01:45 AM                    Well, as you said, quote: Mathew Molloy Wish some of ya would've understood my intentions.. I just pointed out that your dvd to laserdisc comparison was faulted in several ways. Sorry it brought you down, but cmon, did you read your post on your first comparison? DVD with HDMI compared to laserdisc S-Video. It wasnt even close.  |  IP: Logged Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 09-17-2006 03:23 AM                     quote: Mathew Molloy Ah nuts. Well at least I answered my own questions so the comparison was not waste of time. Posting my notes here was. Wish some of ya would've understood my intentions... I think your intentions were understood by everyone...and I think everyone appreciated your effort. I see no reason to believe you wasted your time. I can't comment on behalf of the others, but I suspect everyone who "criticized" your comparison was doing so only to offer additional information thought to be relevant to the comparison or to point out that you were not approaching it from an "apples to apples" standpoint. By the way, at what theatre in Monterey do you work, if I may ask? I used to reside in Monterey. (I grew up an Army Brat; parents stationed at Fort Ord.) In fact, I saw the movie that is the subject of this discussion at the UA Regency during its summer 1978 re-release.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 09-17-2006 04:44 AM                        Michael, you cited catalog numbers in a previous post. What catalog is this? Dillards? JC Penny? Why are the numbers so inconsistent? If they are not consistent, what is the point of the catalog? Two discs could theoretically have the same number. And yes, I was talking about the 1997 version. The whole 90's decade was a blur for me. Someday after I replace all of my dozen or so LaserDiscs with something better, I will catapult it away as far as I can. It's one of those with AC-3 "RF", switches sides on its own, plays DVDs, and is overall very annoying. You have 1 guess what company it is made by. I think it would be impossible to guess wrong.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.