Episode 1 was shot on 35mm film.

I'm pretty sure you're mistaken, Thomas. Episode I was shown on digital projectors, and Lucas was originally contemplating ONLY showing it digitally until most theaters bascially said, "fine then we won't be showing it."

from: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120915/technical

Technical Specifications for
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
Camera
Arriflex Cameras, Hawk Anamorphic Lenses

Laboratory
DeLuxe

Film negative format (mm/video inches)
35 mm

Cinematographic process
Arriscope

Printed film format
35 mm
Digital (Texas Instruments DLP 1280 x 1024, 1.9 : 1 anamorphic)

Aspect ratio
2.35 : 1

Doesn't matter what they were shot with, the first three were still better ;)

Episode I and II were shot with Sony HD cameras @1080 24p, and THEN transferred to 35mm film. The VariCam was NOT used in any of the Star Wars movies.

I believe IMDB is wrong and Glenn is correct.

uh... it's very widely known that phantom menace was shot on film:

you don't have to take my word for it:
http://jkor.com/peter/lucas.html

http://www.dvdfile.com/software/review/dvd-video_4/starwars_episode_i.html

if you google phantom menace and 35mm or film or any of those combo you will see.

if you look here
http://www.starwars.com/episode-iii/bts/production/f20030516/index.html

scroll down a bit you read that ep2 is the first major motion picture recorded ENTIRELY with a digital cam. recorded but not released... i think there were other movies relesed that were recorded in HD.

now even though ep1 was filmed in 35mm, rick mccallum (the producer) has said in an interview (search theforce.net for ep1 news) that lucas did insert a HD shot into ep1. i think it was the ob1/quigon/maul fight somewhere for testing purposes.

click here:
http://www.starwars.com/episode-ii/news/2000/04/news20000409.html
about when the cams were tested. it was waaay after phantom was filmed in the late 90s.

oops, i was just @trekweb.com, i got my ricks messed up. both trek and wars have rick as producers!!!

it's been corrected. it's rick mccallum. as for validity, prove me otherwise =^). it's such an obvious fact ep1 was 35mm film but projected via DLP whereas ep2 &3 will be HD.

as for getting back on topic... the thread title sounds like a martin lawrence movie... what's the worse that can happen?

Are you sure at least some of it wasn't filmed digitally? In which case I don't think any differences were noticeable.

I've split this thread from this thread (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30184).

There's only one scene in Ep. I that was filmed in HD. It's about halfway, at night, Qui-Gon is testing Anakin's blood for infection. It was filmed about a year after principle photography, during pickups in 1998. It was the only scene shot digital - Lucas was using it as a test to see where digital was and if he could shoot Ep. II in HD. It was shot with an early prototype of the Sony CineAlta.

The rest of Ep. I, including various effects shoots, was shot with a variety of Panaflex, Arriflex, and Vista Vision 35mm cameras and some Panaflex and Arriflex 65mm cameras.

Ep. II an III used CineAlta's for principle photography (F-900 for Ep. II, F-950 for Ep. III) and some effects photography. They also used some highspeed 35mm cameras for miniatures photography in Ep. II. Don't know about Ep. III yet.