or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Star Wars Blu-Ray Release Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Star Wars Blu-Ray Release Thread - Page 75

post #2221 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by tokerblue View Post

- Lucas is simply using technology that is available today to create the movies he always wished for. Lucas didn't have the technology back then to make Greedo shoot first.

Technology? How about shooting the scene that way in the first place?
post #2222 of 2403
The version I saw looked like an evil hybrid of the 2001 dvd and the Blu Ray version, DNR'ed apple smooth skin and horrid haloing on every edge.
I saw it in Real3D at with either a Christie or a Barco...
post #2223 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by tokerblue View Post

- Lucas is simply using technology that is available today to create the movies he always wished for. Lucas didn't have the technology back then to make Greedo shoot first.

Remember Lucas's initial *Director's Cut of Star Wars was edited horribly and probably had Greedo shooting first.

My guess is Marcia and Chew removed the wide shot, as they were the first to realizes how bad it would be.

*I mean the first cut the Director turns in, not the marketing word.
post #2224 of 2403
I have a question. Is it possible that Lucas added the stone in front of R2 in ANH for the 3D version to maybe add some dimension to that scene? If that is the case it is a shame it carried over to the BR version. If this was brought up already my apologies.
post #2225 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

is the dnr confirmed to be there still?

yes (with obvious EE too)
post #2226 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexInVA View Post

RealD3D with Barco digital projector if I remember correctly. Rave Xtreme if you want to get all half-chubbed about it. The pre-film 3D trailer and promo content was flawless to my eyes and I had no problems seeing the full 3D effect with that, so I knew going into it that everything was working fine with the hardware setup.

3D tech matters. I saw Avatar 5 times on 4 different 3D technologies: RealD, IMAX 3D, XpanD, and Dolby 3D.

These were all premiere-class venues around Los Angeles.

Dolby 3D was clearly the best of the lot by far. I'm not saying this will be the case for all movies, but to my eyes, the Dolby 3D was no much better than the others that I actually went back and saw it there again, after watching it in the other locations, and confirmed my first impression.
post #2227 of 2403
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post

yes (with obvious EE too)

well I won't hurry out then!
Seen them all 35mm and new hope 70mm so bad 3d I can Live without, more so with the additions and appalling transfer issues.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalani View Post


3D tech matters. I saw Avatar 5 times on 4 different 3D technologies: RealD, IMAX 3D, XpanD, and Dolby 3D.

These were all premiere-class venues around Los Angeles.

Dolby 3D was clearly the best of the lot by far. I'm not saying this will be the case for all movies, but to my eyes, the Dolby 3D was no much better than the others that I actually went back and saw it there again, after watching it in the other locations, and confirmed my first impression.

I saw avatar and the SE re-release on the same screen and got wildly different results!


Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianSallot View Post

I have a question. Is it possible that Lucas added the stone in front of R2 in ANH for the 3D version to maybe add some dimension to that scene? If that is the case it is a shame it carried over to the BR version. If this was brought up already my apologies.

was brought up in the old dead thread, guesswork is all we had then and now.
post #2228 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

I saw avatar and the SE re-release on the same screen and got wildly different results!

Do you mean the Avatar SE re-release?
post #2229 of 2403
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post


Do you mean the Avatar SE re-release?

Yes
post #2230 of 2403
Let's hope that by the time they get to Episode 3 they will spend the money and make it look awesome.

I still think the way to watch these is Episode 3, 5, 6. Everything else seems like filler.

While I liked 4, it's just showing it's age far to much now.
post #2231 of 2403
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

Let's hope that by the time they get to Episode 3 they will spend the money and make it look awesome.

I still think the way to watch these is Episode 3, 5, 6. Everything else seems like filler.

While I liked 4, it's just showing it's age far to much now.

its nice to want things
post #2232 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

I don't expect Titanic (which I will see) to have much of these gimmicks either.

They showed the Titanic 3D trailer before Journey 2. It was pretty decent. I haven't seen TPM in 3D so I can't say how it stacks up. As appealing as seeing Leo sink into the abyss in 3D is, I'm not a fan of the movie.
post #2233 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

well I won't hurry out then!
Seen them all 35mm and new hope 70mm so bad 3d I can Live without, more so with the additions and appalling transfer issues.

It's not so much 'bad 3D' as non-existant 3D. When it works it adds a palpable sense of dimensionality, like Darth Sidious' cowl with his face set further back, but it's surprising how many scenes appear to be utterly flat.

Still, as people have said you can get different results in different cinemas, not to mention home viewing. I just got done watching TF3 3D and that was way more '3D' than the two theatrical showings I saw, so in Phantom Menace's case I'd buy the 3D BD just to see if it gained any dimensionality lost in the theatrical presentation.
post #2234 of 2403
Are you saying they are showing a 2K print?

Quote:
Originally Posted by reanimator View Post

Watched the 3D PHANTOM MENACE earlier today, and would agree that the digital source is the same as the bluray. The DNR on the bluray is present in this 3D version. I don't object to it as badly as some of you, but on a 60ft wide screen it was clearly apparent.

CGI Yoda looked very good to me, much better than the stoner Yoda puppet.

Was a new scene added? After they talk to Terrance Stamp when they arrive on the capital planet, Jar Jar and the kid go flying away, and Jar Jar makes a comment that Padme is hot. I don't remember this in the original release.

Sound was extremely good. John Williams is a borderline deity.

The 3D conversion: I disagree with some of the comments here. I would rate this 3D about on par with TRON: LEGACY, which is to say much of the film doesn't have any 3D pop. This has nothing to do with the quality of the post-conversion, which is really quite good.

PHANTOM MENACE has a lot of what cinematographers would call flat space imagery, meaning that many of the angles don't create any significant depth. For example: Darth Maul firing up his dual blade lightsaber while standing in front of a wall - there is no depth to that image, so the 3D conversion still remains flat.

On the other hand, shots where people stand in front of windows overlooking the city, or windows out into space show clear depth. There's a shot of Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor overlooking the city at sunset from a balcony that has nice depth.

Anyway, I'd say there's only a few wow 3D moments - but that's more of a product of the original cinematography.

Apparently 3D PHANTOM MENACE did over $1m in midnight shows and is on the way to grossing over $20m for the weekend. Not the failure some were hoping for.

Lucas knows how to milk this cow.
post #2235 of 2403
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio/videoman View Post

Are you saying they are showing a 2K print?

The master was 2k
post #2236 of 2403
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post

It's not so much 'bad 3D' as non-existant 3D. When it works it adds a palpable sense of dimensionality, like Darth Sidious' cowl with his face set further back, but it's surprising how many scenes appear to be utterly flat.

Still, as people have said you can get different results in different cinemas, not to mention home viewing. I just got done watching TF3 3D and that was way more '3D' than the two theatrical showings I saw, so in Phantom Menace's case I'd buy the 3D BD just to see if it gained any dimensionality lost in the theatrical presentation.

That's what I meant, it's not ripe for conversion, unless they rerender everything (they could have done it at the same time as star tours)
post #2237 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

Let's hope that by the time they get to Episode 3 they will spend the money and make it look awesome.

I still think the way to watch these is Episode 3, 5, 6. Everything else seems like filler.

While I liked 4, it's just showing it's age far to much now.

"Everyone's entitled to their own opinion..."

I just keep repeating that to myself over and over as I rock back and forth like RAIN MAN in my chair.

Wow, for anyone in the world to leave off the original STAR WARS in their personal list of "how STAR WARS should be watched"...

"Everyone's entitled to their own opinion... everyone's entitled to their own opinion..."

post #2238 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post

I'd buy the 3D BD just to see if it gained any dimensionality lost in the theatrical presentation.

I guess hope springs eternal that Lucas gets it right....
post #2239 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post

Still, as people have said you can get different results in different cinemas, not to mention home viewing. I just got done watching TF3 3D and that was way more '3D' than the two theatrical showings I saw, so in Phantom Menace's case I'd buy the 3D BD just to see if it gained any dimensionality lost in the theatrical presentation.

It will not be the same stereovision effect on the BD, different technology and in some ways the stereo displays are inferior.

Quote:
Originally Posted by audio/videoman View Post

PHANTOM MENACE has a lot of what cinematographers would call flat space imagery, meaning that many of the angles don't create any significant depth. For example: Darth Maul firing up his dual blade lightsaber while standing in front of a wall - there is no depth to that image, so the 3D conversion still remains flat.

They could of forced as much depth distance as they wanted too it's just walls are usaully flat, what you really are writing about is multiple objects between the background and the foreground, in other words stereo eye candy that was unnecessary at the time of the original mono production.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Waboman View Post

They showed the Titanic 3D trailer before Journey 2. It was pretty decent. I haven't seen TPM in 3D so I can't say how it stacks up. As appealing as seeing Leo sink into the abyss in 3D is, I'm not a fan of the movie.

I recall that scene being very dim with lots of black in it, bad elements for a stereo effect anyway.
post #2240 of 2403
That's an abomination: it's official, George Lucas is now an idiot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

The master was 2k
post #2241 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio/videoman View Post

That's an abomination: it's official, George Lucas is now an idiot.

It's official you don't know squat.

A huge amount of films out there are mastered in 2K, and that's for theatrical consumption.

4K workflows are still the exception, not the rule.
post #2242 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio/videoman View Post

Instead, now we're all stuck with blu ray quality on movie screens that are 30 feet wide, not 3 to 5 feet wide like a home tv.

EXACTLY.

To make matters worse, the BD scans are nothing to rave about anyway.
post #2243 of 2403
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

EXACTLY.

To make matters worse, the BD scans are nothing to rave about anyway.

That's a nice way of putting it, they are crap!

We all watched laserdiscs projected, moods change
post #2244 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

EXACTLY. To make matters worse, the BD scans are nothing to rave about anyway.

If there are more converted productions of old films you will see more of that method.
post #2245 of 2403
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post

If there are more converted productions of old films you will see more of that method.

What? you mean 3D?
post #2246 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

What? you mean 3D?

A flood of old mono films converted into stereovision. I hope it never happens. Imagine Universal doing it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

EXACTLY. To make matters worse, the BD scans are nothing to rave about anyway.

I like to point out it's really DVD master 'scans' were are talking about here.
post #2247 of 2403
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post

A flood of old mono films converted into stereovision. I hope it never happens. Imagine Universal doing it.



I like to point out it's really DVD master 'scans' were are talking about here.

I thought we were all talking about the lowrey botch on the BD
post #2248 of 2403
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

I thought we were all talking about the lowrey botch on the BD

Done in 2004 although TPM's master might of been done in 2001 unless there was a SE version in 2004.
post #2249 of 2403
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuther View Post


Done in 2004 although TPM's master might of been done in 2001 unless there was a SE version in 2004.

It was done about the time of episode 3
post #2250 of 2403
Um, FWIW, last I checked BR is not 2k. It's not far off in pure resolution terms (2048 horizontal pixels in 2k is not far off from 1920 hor. pixels in BR), but it's also 12 bit color per pixel and a higher gamut than is stored on BR.

So it ain't the 4k these films deserve, but it's NOT a BR projected 30 feet wide. That's just whining.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Software
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Software › Star Wars Blu-Ray Release Thread