Restoring the Star Wars Trilogy at DVinfo.net

Ken Tanaka · September 20th, 2004, 02:14 PM

With its release on DVD this week comes the remarkable story of what its restoration required. Would you believe 600 dual-processor Mac G5's and 478 terabytes of disk space?

See the article on the Star Wars site.

Jesse Bekas · September 20th, 2004, 08:13 PM

I think it's interesting that when they rescanned the original negative into the computer, they only did so as a 10-bit RGB HD scan. Wouldn't they want to go higher (12 or 14 bits) for better results?

Ken Tanaka · September 20th, 2004, 09:07 PM

That struck me, too. There must be something about the process that we don't know because they sure didn't seem to be trying to economize.

Jesse Bekas · September 20th, 2004, 10:35 PM

Yeah, I guess if they were already using 600+ maxed out Macs, 10-bit had to be their limit, otherwise there's no reason not to go higher.

Rob Lohman · September 21st, 2004, 03:57 AM

I would just like to let everyone know that there might be some
audio issues with the DVD set:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents

It's a nice little article, but what would've been really cool is if
they had included some before and after shots. Like the blue
scratches they where talking about or the large grain amounts
in the light-saber and tatooine shots. Too bad.

Daniel Broadway · September 21st, 2004, 04:36 PM

I got my trilogy last night at midnight. I haven't noticed any audio issues yet. But I haven't watched all three movies all the way through.

Aaron Koolen · September 21st, 2004, 04:38 PM

A little OT, but is this new DVD release the actual original, untouched versions? I thought they've still modified it since the original.

Aaron

Daniel Broadway · September 21st, 2004, 06:06 PM

No, these are the special editions that were released in 1997. Actually, they have even added new footage/dialogue. So I guess you can call them the second Special Editions.

Boyd Ostroff · September 22nd, 2004, 01:57 PM

Just read an article on the restoration in Sound and Video magazine where they interviewed the guy who did the work. They asked why he didn't go to 4k and he said there were concerns over the quality of the optical effects in the original movie. Since they are made from multiple generations of film the grain, etc. is different and doesn't match the other sections and higher resolution would make this more obvious, thereby requiring more work to make the digital version consistent. Maybe the color depth issue is similar?

Evidently there is a more in-depth article on their website.

Boyd Ostroff · September 22nd, 2004, 01:59 PM

Sorry, it's really Sound and Vision magazine. Here's the article:

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/art...article_id=671

September 20th, 2004, 02:14 PM	#1
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	Restoring the Star Wars Trilogy With its release on DVD this week comes the remarkable story of what its restoration required. Would you believe 600 dual-processor Mac G5's and 478 terabytes of disk space? See the article on the Star Wars site. __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

September 20th, 2004, 09:07 PM	#3
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	That struck me, too. There must be something about the process that we don't know because they sure didn't seem to be trying to economize. __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

September 21st, 2004, 03:57 AM	#5
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	I would just like to let everyone know that there might be some audio issues with the DVD set: http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#mytwocents It's a nice little article, but what would've been really cool is if they had included some before and after shots. Like the blue scratches they where talking about or the large grain amounts in the light-saber and tatooine shots. Too bad. __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

September 21st, 2004, 04:38 PM	#7
Aaron Koolen Trustee Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 1,727	A little OT, but is this new DVD release the actual original, untouched versions? I thought they've still modified it since the original. Aaron __________________ My Website Meat Free Media

September 20th, 2004, 08:13 PM	#2
Jesse Bekas Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, USA Posts: 572	I think it's interesting that when they rescanned the original negative into the computer, they only did so as a 10-bit RGB HD scan. Wouldn't they want to go higher (12 or 14 bits) for better results?

September 20th, 2004, 10:35 PM	#4
Jesse Bekas Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, USA Posts: 572	Yeah, I guess if they were already using 600+ maxed out Macs, 10-bit had to be their limit, otherwise there's no reason not to go higher.

September 21st, 2004, 04:36 PM	#6
Daniel Broadway Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Alabama Posts: 165	I got my trilogy last night at midnight. I haven't noticed any audio issues yet. But I haven't watched all three movies all the way through.

September 21st, 2004, 06:06 PM	#8
Daniel Broadway Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Alabama Posts: 165	No, these are the special editions that were released in 1997. Actually, they have even added new footage/dialogue. So I guess you can call them the second Special Editions.

September 22nd, 2004, 01:57 PM	#9
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	Just read an article on the restoration in Sound and Video magazine where they interviewed the guy who did the work. They asked why he didn't go to 4k and he said there were concerns over the quality of the optical effects in the original movie. Since they are made from multiple generations of film the grain, etc. is different and doesn't match the other sections and higher resolution would make this more obvious, thereby requiring more work to make the digital version consistent. Maybe the color depth issue is similar? Evidently there is a more in-depth article on their website.

September 22nd, 2004, 01:59 PM	#10
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	Sorry, it's really Sound and Vision magazine. Here's the article: http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/art...article_id=671