SWNZ Forums

There are rumblings that 20th Century Fox and Disney have come to an agreement about releasing THE HOLY TRILOGY (caps locked for emphasis) in 4K, which will be the originals – pre-Special Edition, that is – and is currently being worked on, again, by Reliance MediaWorks.

It makes sense, but take it with a grain o’ salt.

In the meantime, take a look at this:

http://vimeo.com/95919913

Just like the 3D-erised versions, there's no point. The originals were not filmed in 3D nor "4K", and no amount of computer trickery can add such things properly. All you end up with is blurry and/or messy results that look horrible.

Actually, you're completely wrong on that, Buzz.

Anamorphic 35mm can be scanned at 8K and look amazing… like most, I think you aren't aware at just how amazing film is as a format.

Harvey Mushman wrote:There are rumblings that 20th Century Fox and Disney have come to an agreement about releasing THE HOLY TRILOGY (caps locked for emphasis) in 4K, which will be the originals – pre-Special Edition, that is – and is currently being worked on, again, by Reliance MediaWorks.

This really is incredibly exciting. While the modifications to the OT don't bother me immensely, I've always hoped to see the original original trilogy released in an HD format for posterity's sake. Here's hoping this goes ahead!

I approve of this idea.

Harvey Mushman wrote:...Anamorphic 35mm can be scanned at 8K and look amazing… like most, I think you aren't aware at just how amazing film is as a format.

I don't doubt it. I've seen affordable consumer level slide scanners with an optical resolution of 7200dpi (and less-than-affordable devices, from the likes of Hasselblad, that'll do 8000dpi), and am sure the industry-spec stuff is pretty impressive.

Watching the Trilogy in 4K at Sylvia Park was pretty impressive and it lifts the quality 10 fold.

Time I started saving for a 4k TV/Projector

For May the Fourth?

Like most cinemas, that was a rip of the Blu-rays!

(So definitely not 4K!)

Harvey Mushman wrote:... like most, I think you aren't aware at just how amazing film is as a format.

Nope. I know most digital formats are rubbish compared to their analogue predecessors - film, vinyl records, etc. are still much better than anything digital (so far) ... but there's only so much detail that can be captured, whether you scan it at 5000dpi or a bazillion dpi, you simply can't capture detail that isn't there, and no amount of computer trickery can add that detail.

Buzz Bumble wrote:Nope. I know most digital formats are rubbish compared to their analogue predecessors - film, vinyl records, etc. are still much better than anything digital (so far) ... but there's only so much detail that can be captured, whether you scan it at 5000dpi or a bazillion dpi, you simply can't capture detail that isn't there, and no amount of computer trickery can add that detail.

You seem to be contradicting yourself here. You say "...can't capture detail that isn't there, and no amount of computer trickery can add that detail" implying that the analogue film source is lacking detail, but also say that analogue predecessors are superior to the rubbish digital descendants.

I hope this isn't turning in to an argument just for the sake of arguing.

But, Buzz, it is there... as I stated: it's anamorphic 35mm that was shot by a crew who knew what they were doing.

Case in point, take a look at the most recent Blade Runner release.

There's no need to put a negative spin on everything.