File: 00001.mpls_snapshot_01.42.34_[2016.07.09_03.52.30].png (3 MB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1920x1080

>>71784185

>>71784185
you should try watching the theatrical 1977 version which was released on dvd in 2006.

The ratio is a black box with the movie right in the middle forcing you to zoom in when watching on tv

>>71784258
But this IS the theatrical 35mm print from 1977.
This is pretty much the closest you can get to watching it in cinema in 1977.

And it looks genuinely disappointing. Despecialized looks much better than this.

>>71784185
pleb, not joking

>>71784351
How could you possibly say it looks better than Despecialized?

File: StarWars.png (336 KB, 1333x721) Image search: [Google]

336 KB, 1333x721

>>71784258
well technically the version which was put on the 2006 dvd is from an early 90's laserdisc BUT it is identical to the 1977 version with no 'Episode 4' in the opening crawl.

File: StarWars.png (1 MB, 1347x755) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1347x755

>>71784383
woo no giant CGI beast in the way of the screen

>>71784283
>But this IS the theatrical 35mm print from 1977.
impossible. all theatrical 1977 prints don't exist anymore as Lucasfilm has stated in the past with them over-writing the original negatives when they made the special edition remasters

File: 00001.mpls_snapshot_00.42.42_[2016.07.09_04.01.41].jpg (885 KB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

885 KB, 1920x1080

>>71784436
35mm for comparison

>>71784470
And yet it exists

>>71784492
damm that version has slightly more frame than my dvd version. where did you download it? do you just type in 35mm version?

>>71784492
>And yet it exists
well LUCASFILM then are strange to write letters to those wanting to see these put on a blu ray to say to them "sorry it doesn't exist anymore so we can't"

>>71784535
MySpleen

Star Wars 1977 Silver Screen Edition 35mm v1.6

>>71784560
It probably means that THEY don't have it anymore, but the originals are clearly circulating among collectors, as this one was made from such.

>>71784470
Absolute fucking horseshit. You can't 'write over' the negative.

The first thing Lucas would have done was convert the original print to digital for clean-up and composition of all that CGi shit.

The original prints still exist.

Lucas is just a cucked fucking moron who cannot handle the fact the only oscar these movies achieved was for his cheating whore of a wife.

File: 00001.mpls_snapshot_00.46.16_[2016.07.09_04.06.48].png (4 MB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

4 MB, 1920x1080

>>71784600
lel

>>71784382
enjoy your fluctuating colors and color correction based on photos of the cinema screen

>>71784600
>You can't 'write over' the negative.
I am only repeating what I read from a lucasfilm email when fans asked for them to be put on blu ray a few years ago

>>71784689
Thanks, I'll take that over the shitty grainy turd that is this.

Also Despecialized stopped using photos of cinema screen as reference years ago but a retard like you that doesn't even keep up with the project wouldn't know that.

>>71784492
this doesn't look bad at all. crisp quality image with not too much old mm film grain

Also fyi they're currently working on 35mm ESB

http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Team-Negative1-The-Empire-Strikes-Back-1980-35mm-Theatrical-Version-Release-Details-and-Updates/id/16108/page/1

>>71784470
>impossible. all theatrical 1977 prints don't exist anymore as Lucasfilm has stated in the past with them over-writing the original negatives when they made the special edition remasters
Horseshit. They cut up the original 70mm negative, but it's quite easy to restore by throwing away parts added in 1996 and replacing them with second best source (and there are plenty).

So it is better to just download the despecialized editions then?

Man, I have the shitty special edition on my pc. I will never get over the dinosaur that walks across the screen. At least empire strikes back was mostly left alone

>>71784628
>he was a good friend
How did benkenobiposting die /tv/?

>>71784807
If you don't like blurry and grainy image, yes.
If you're a nostalgia purist, this is the best thing.

>>71784185
>downloading a print

>>71784185
It's sourced from a theatrical print, not a negative or interpositive, so of course it's going to look a little dupe-y and worn.

Wtf is the source of this?

File: 00001.mpls_snapshot_01.29.52_[2016.07.09_04.15.33].png (4 MB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

4 MB, 1920x1080

>>71784821
Like this?

File: HanShotFirst.webm (3 MB, 1280x720) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1280x720

This is from my 2006 DVD which comes with the 1977 version.
(Had to crop the image to get rid of the black bars all around like I said the ratio with this release wasn't good).

>>71784877
ah damnit the cropping didn't work.. oh well anyway here is the original han shoots first scene

File: 00001.mpls_snapshot_00.56.38_[2016.07.09_04.17.51].png (3 MB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1920x1080

>>71784862
http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/team-negative1-star-wars-1977-35mm-theatrical-version-release-details-and-updates/id/14590/page/1

No download links here however.

>>71784850
>complaining about semantics

>>71784852
I just don't think this is all that much worth it compared to Despecialized.

>>71784910
Also the OP of that thread is outdated, you'd need to check latest pages for info on current version obviously.
You can download it on MySpleen.

>>71784910
if there is no download links how did op download it?

>>71784600
This is actually true.

Lucas wants to bury the original version. Which is why he always talks about it being "half finished". He wants the Special Edition to be the only cut so he can say "This is MY movie. Noone else gets credit. That other version my ex wife won an oscar for doesn't count."

I showed this to my father who saw Star wars 6 times in theaters in 1977 and he said it looks like shit and nothing like how it was in theaters.

File: 00001.mpls_snapshot_01.56.16_[2016.07.09_04.21.54].png (3 MB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1920x1080

>>71784994
Private trackers, how about you read the thread?

File: 291918118.jpg (3 MB, 2986x1675) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 2986x1675

>>71784877
Here is my dvd cover to show it does say 1977

>>71785027
Your father has massive nostalgia then because this is a 1:1 restoration from original 35mm print from 1977.

File: 154513c7_predator_waxfest.jpg (53 KB, 900x602) Image search: [Google]

53 KB, 900x602

>>71784720
>grainy
that's how films are supposed to look you imbecile
>Despecialized stopped using photos of cinema screen
No they didn't. They just added a bunch of other dubious sources (including fucking book scans) and made even bigger mess of a color correction

>>71785095
>that's how films are supposed to look you imbecile
Protip you memeing cancerous fag, Despecialized is grainy as well but not as retarded broken basement ancient egypt relic tier grainy as this.

>>71785095
i wanna scrape little chunks out of his face and make a candle out of them

>>71784258
That was a Laserdisc scan, idiot.

I downloaded the 35mm print a few months ago out of curiosity.

I was actually disappointed at the shit quality of it.

The Despecialised Edition is still the best.

At least until an offical re-release happens. Which will probably happen in 2020 when the rights for ESB and ROTJ revert back to LucasFilm.

20th Century Fox will always own Star Wars though, so Disney will need to strike a deal.

If it can happen for the 60's Batman TV show, it can sure as fuck happen for Star Wars.

>>71785182
FOX and Disney coming to a deal is gonna be pain, since Disney tried getting X-Men from them and Fox basically said no fuck you. They didn't even ask for an outrageous sum of money or anything, they flat out told Disney to fuck off.

>Private trackers
what do private trackers even mean? sorry i dont get it

>>71785123
Despecialized is based on official Blu Rays which are sourced from print restored by Lowry Digital who are notorious for their aggressive DNR.

Silver Screen edition has tons of excessive grain, but at least it is natural to the print.

File: 1977_1.webm (2 MB, 1280x720) Image search: [Google]

2 MB, 1280x720

>>71785167
and the laserdisc scan looks identical to the 1977 version

File: 00001.mpls_snapshot_00.30.45_[2016.07.09_04.31.29].png (3 MB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1920x1080

>>71785249
Google

>>71785266
I know it's natural and everything, I'm just saying that in my personal subjective opinion it looks overall worse than Despecialized.
I'm still going to keep it though.
Waiting for ESB 35mm now.

>>71785278
Except for resolution and many other things, stop embarassing yourself, OP has the real deal, you have what is essentially an official bootleg

>>71785182
You're vastly overestimating the worth of the 60s Batman series

>>71784694
Yeah, I'm not blaming you bub, I've read that same statement as well. But it's absolute fucking nonsense.

For a start, a copy of the original was inducted into the national film archives for preservation long, long ago.

>>71785326
I'm not and thats the point.

Re-releasing an unfucked original trilogy would bank serious money. And where theres money, comprises can be made.

What else would Fox do, just sit on it and make nothing?

>>71785405
>copy of the original was inducted into the national film archives
that was 1996 edition, I'm not even memeing. NA asked Lucas for originals and he told them to fuck off.

>>71785457
>Comprises = compromises

I hate trying to type on a fucking fone

File: 00001.mpls_snapshot_00.35.25_[2016.07.09_04.42.32].png (4 MB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

4 MB, 1920x1080

>>71785457
They clearly decided to make nothing rather than give Disney access to Daredevil and X-Men.

>>71785465
Because he's a cucked child whose wife was sliding up and down cock of their painter & decorator.

Why do manchildren get so bent out of shape over Star Wars?
I don't get it. The movies were pretty good when I was a kid but that's about it.

>>71785516
Fox can still do whatever they want with FF4 and X-Men so I'm not surprised they want to hold those franchises close.

But they can't do fuck all with Star Wars except make a deal with Disey.

File: 00001.mpls_snapshot_00.57.04_[2016.07.09_04.46.17].png (4 MB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

4 MB, 1920x1080

>>71785561
You've got a point.

>>71785539
>Why do manchildren get so bent out of shape over Star Wars?
Autism

>>71785674
>replying to yourself

>>71784877
Say, the furry bloke with the four eyes shows up as a race in TCW. Probably one of the only backstories to the various aliens that is still canon.

>>71786465
Bluray releases of Tartakovsky's CW when?
Fuck the shitty 3D ones.

if harrison ford and mark hamill both got old , what makes you think you wont?

>>71786507
But I already am.

>>71786525
whoa.

>>71785322
It's not a bootleg it was released in 2006 on dvd for $15.

I was an idiot for not picking up copies then cos they go for $50 each on ebay now but I have a copy anyway

>>71786583
Which part of "official bootleg" do you not understand? It's just a shitty DVD transfer from the Laserdisc, it doesn't even compare to 35mm original.

>>71786583
He means that what was on those releases is a poor quality release, which it is.
I still with that I had ANH, I only have ESB and RotJ.
It's like calling the Laserdisc scan of Ghost in the Shell on the 2.0 'just fuck my aesthetic up' edition a proper BD release of the original.

>>71786618
GitS 2.0 is indeed a JUST version of the original.

>tfw BakaBT has proper rip of 95 original

>>71786650
I only have it because of the aforementioned LD scan, I need to get around to ordering the actual BD edition.

>>71786668
I'm not a physicalfag unfortunately so I don't have much desire to buy that, besides that BakaBT rip is pretty much perfect anyway. They even have a HDTV restoration of the original, since BD actually cropped top and bottom of the image to hide cel edges that are visibile in some shots.

>>71784470
Except the THX edition was released specifically because the original masters were falling apart and they wanted to preserve the trilogy for posterity and loadsamuny.

>>71786689
I'm not usually but there are just some things that I would like to have a physical copy of. I plan on picking up the Patlabor movies on BD if Maiden Japan ever picks up the movie rights as well.

>>71784185
Despecialized, go download it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXifjbxZDAM

>>71786734
Fair enough. I guess I'd be more of a physicalfag if I actually had disposable income but alas I don't.

>>71786767
2.5 is outdated, 2.7 is current version of SW Despecialized and it has considerably better colors than 2.5

>>71786829
Well is there a breakdown for 2.7? I'm also sad, stuck on 2.5 due to my ISP tracking my P2P downloads

>>71786922
http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Harmys-Despecialized-Star-Wars-1977-Color-Adjustment-Project/id/48257

It's basically 2.5 with much better colors.

File: HanShotFirstDE.webm (3 MB, 995x420) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 995x420

>>71784877
>>71784901
https://video.stackexchange.com/questions/4563/how-can-i-crop-a-video-with-ffmpeg

also here's the despecialized version (2.5)

>>71784185
The worst thing about it is that it has a fair amount of discoloration where something will go briefly from orange to green tinted, but it's my favorite looking version available. I want to download the Special Edition Blurays though just to compare.

>>71784600
>The original prints still exist.

Not if they destroyed them. You're right, you can't "write over" the old prints, but you can burn them.

>>71785405

No, the National Film Archive inducted the film, but Lucas sent the Special Edition as the archival copy, which they rejected.