What's new

Star Wars Episode II DVD... (1 Viewer)

greg_t

Screenwriter
Joined
Jan 18, 2001
Messages
1,654
I've seen it in three different theaters, one was DD, one was DTS, and I don't know what the other one was showing it in, but all three were WAY too low. The "star wars" theme came out with a whimper. The surround activity seemed good, but the bass and front soundstage were seriously lacking. Hope the dvd isn't like this.
 

Jeff Kleist

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 4, 1999
Messages
11,267
It's because some people complain that things are too loud. I as well have found it too low in every theater I've been to
It was a good 10-15 decibles below what I would consider a happy level
If you're not deaf from the opening note, it's just not loud enough :)
 

Dave H

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2000
Messages
6,001
I have noticed that the opening Star Wars theme seemed TOO LOW in comparison to the rest of the movie. I also noticed this on TPM DVD.

I guess it's just how the source is being recorded.
 

JenaroM

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Feb 18, 2001
Messages
69
I was a little upset we didn't get a direct digital transfer with TPM. I don't buy that they were trying to maintain a look. It was the first Star Wars DVD released, if anything it should have been trendsetting for the series on DVD.
My feeling is that they did this on purpose (film transfer, edge enhancement), so that when the Episode 2 DVD comes out with a direct digital transfer you'll really see the difference. It's called "marketing the digital future of cinema".
 

Norm

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 1, 1998
Messages
2,017
Real Name
Norm
Episode 1 wasn't shot with Digital Camera's, Episode 2 was.
 

SvenS

Second Unit
Joined
May 5, 2002
Messages
257
Getting back to the discussion as to whether the AOTC's DVD will be direct from Digital, I think it would go against all that Lucas is pushing if they do a transfer to film then to DVD! Lucas is trying to impress upon everyone that Digital (start to finish)is they way to go now and for him to NOT do a direct from Digital transfer would defeat his whole argument.
 
Joined
Nov 18, 1999
Messages
20
If they go the digital to film and telecine a master for DVD, I believe it is because they don't want the home user to have high quality although low resolution copy of the film.
Someone feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken, but last time I checked, 35mm film was capable of much higher resolution than the DV format they shot AOTC on.

Film also should theoretically have a better contrast range, though obviously the way DV reacts to "too dark" or "too light" is completely different to the way film does.

A lot of people seem to be writing film off prematurely.

As for the transfer for DVD, I'm not at all surprised they used a film source; great lenses notwithstanding, it may otherwise have looked like a high-budget SF soap opera in the harsh light of a home CRT television :)

Oh, and as for the question "why did he BOTHER to shoot it digitally?"... well, because it was cheaper, quicker and easier to deal with in conjunction with the continuous computer effects.

- Anthony
 

Terrell

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Messages
3,216
Anthony, that may be true if AOTC had been shot on film. But it wasn't. It was shot in digital. And because of that, the best way to do the DVD is to do a direct digital to digital transfer, as that will give you the best picture. Even on DVD, it doesn't begin to show the entire resolution of the film. In fact, DVD can't even show the full resolution of the digital the film was shot it.

I think if they transferred it from film, the picture would look fuzzy and soft in comparison to a digital transfer. I don't want to see that on the DVD.

Yes, but they could have done a direct digital transfer for TPM DVD and they didn’t.
Again, because it wasn't shot digitally. It was shot on film. And since it was a new film, with pristine picture, there was no reason to create a newly mastered digital source. That digital source should already exist with AOTC. Let's just hope they lay off the EE.
 
Joined
Nov 18, 1999
Messages
20
Terrell, I understand your point, and in an ideal world DVD customers would have a choice of both (now THAT would be an interesting multi-disc set!)

What I was saying though is that I'm not surprised that the producers and Lucas wanted the "film look" with its distinctive characteristics, because on DVD (as opposed to on a big projection screen) a direct-digital transfer would look VERY noticeably "video".

One good example is the low-budget Jennifer Jason Leigh / Alan Cumming movie The Anniversary Party which was shot on DV (using pro Sony DV cameras, but nowhere near as high-end as the ones Lucas has been playing with!); when the time came to transfer to DVD it appears they opted for a film source rather than a direct digital video transfer; if you look at the clips in the documentary that's included on the disc, you can see how rough it could have looked by comparison when transferred direct from video. (Of course, they might have just run it through a "film look" filter, but it looks like real film to me).

And no, I don't believe I actually managed to mention The Anniversary Party in a Star Wars thread either. I should get some kind of award for it. :)

- Anthony
 
Joined
Nov 18, 1999
Messages
20
It might not be called DV, but is still is DV - as in "digital video".
(My mistake - I wasn't referring to DV-the-format :) )
- Anthony
 

Sam Davatchi

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Sep 15, 1999
Messages
3,150
Real Name
SamD
Again, because it wasn't shot digitally. It was shot on film. And since it was a new film, with pristine picture, there was no reason to create a newly mastered digital source.
I’m not sure if I understand you Terrell! My point is that TPM, the whole movie was transferred to the digital realm and then burned back into the film. Meaning that even the very few scenes that had no effects at all were also scanned and thus going down to the digital resolution.

There is no one 35mm shot of TPM that you have seen in 35mm resolution in the theaters. All were at the digital resolution and medium. So it was not necessary to burn back to 35mm film and Telecine that.
 

Larry Sutliff

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2000
Messages
2,861
I read on the Force.net message boards that there are rumors that AOTC is going to be released to IMAX theaters in September, and the DVD is going to be postponed as a result. Has anyone else heard anything like this, or is it (hopefully) a rumor?
 

Adam Lenhardt

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2001
Messages
26,057
Location
Albany, NY
Take anything you read in the TF.N boards with a grain of salt. If it shows up on their front page, that's another matter. I believe (but can't confirm) that it played on some IMAX screens during it's initial run. (now)
What I was saying though is that I'm not surprised that the producers and Lucas wanted the "film look" with its distinctive characteristics, because on DVD (as opposed to on a big projection screen) a direct-digital transfer would look VERY noticeably "video".
Why? If anything, the differences would be less discernible. The resolution has to be dumbed down for DVD, so you don't get the resolution difference. The colors were calibrated to the computer version... any film version is simply a close approximation of those colors. And the picture is essentially video anyway, so what's the bother? I don't see what's to be gained for an all digital film by printing it to film (with all the lossy-ness associated with the printing) and then transferred back to digital. Some film grain maybe. But not much else.

In the end the differences will probably be neligible at best anyway, but it seems rather pointless to me.
 

Larry Sutliff

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2000
Messages
2,861
I believe (but can't confirm) that it played on some IMAX screens during it's initial run.
I've heard that too, Adam. I think that this is just a bogus rumor, but the thing that adds fuel to the fire is the fact that ICE AGE is coming out on November 26th, the day AOTC has been rumored to be released(and supposedly several chains are already taking pre-orders for this date).

I just would hate to see this held up for any reason.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
353,178
Messages
5,010,532
Members
143,414
Latest member
laptiva
Recent bookmarks
0
Top