Originally Posted by wuther
According to a New York Times article Lucas said the SW masters you were writing about was done in 2004 not two years ago and I suspect the other masters Lowry did were not much younger. But I digress.
I agree, you do. The work I did for ILM was in the first half of 2004, and then the last time I walked through Lowry to say hello to some old friends (who are no longer there) was in 2012. No confusion. I had no contact with Lowry when I was working on Star Wars
-- the new files just showed up, we'd load them in, show them to George and Rick, and move on.
As the proverb goes victory has a thousand fathers, defeat is a orphan. In articles with Lowry himself he expressed a disdain for film grain and then backtracks somewhat.
The Lowry Process won an Oscar in the last couple of years, unfortunately right as John Lowry himself passed away, but I think his idea was a good one. The problem with film grain is more a problem with grain management
: keeping the level of grain consistent and reasonable throughout the project. Completely taking the grain out to zero is not an option. There always has to be some grain in there, or else the image becomes a little too artificial looking (particularly from film-based projects).
Every D.I. I've been part of in the last 10-12 years has always employed grain management, just so that certain multi-generation shots don't jump out as being excessively grainy, and also digitally-derived shots don't jump out as having zero grain at all. There's a happy medium between the two where you have a little
grain throughout the whole thing.
I know of some recent digitally-sourced productions where they chose to render a subtle layer of film grain throughout the entire movie, just to give it a little more texture. You'd be surprised how often this is done, and it's neither expensive nor is it time-consuming.