Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > DVD Video > May 25, 1977: Star Wars released

Reply
Thread Tools

May 25, 1977: Star Wars released

 
 
Jeff Rife
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2006
Subject: Re: May 25, 1977: Star Wars released
From: Jeff Rife <(E-Mail Removed)>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.starwars

J. Clarke ((E-Mail Removed)) wrote in alt.video.dvd:
> > I hate to bring this up, but the laserdiscs from which the masters were
> > made were THX-certified. It was a requirement for THX-certification for
> > laserdiscs that the original telecine be done in high-def, and then the
> > laserdisc master be created from a down-conversion of that telecine.

>
> There was not even a _standard_ for high definition television when the THX
> Laserdisc requirements were established.


Actually, the first THX laserdisc showed up in 1993, and Japan already
had HDTV at that time, *and* Hi-Vision laserdiscs had already been
released. Then, by 1995 when the "Faces" THX-certified discs came
along, HDTV *was* firmly established, and the THX laserdisc certification
program required the use of high-definition masters.

Just because HDTV is just beginning to really take off with the consumer
in the US doesn't mean it hasn't been around for a *long* time. Heck,
it's nine years old in the US.

> There might be "good quality"
> masters somewhere but that doesn't mean that they contain 1920x1080
> recordings.


It doesn't really matter. If they are at least 853x480 (in the 16x9
area), they can be used for full-resolution creation of anamorphic DVDs.
It may not be as good as a full HD source, but it will be 25% more
vertical resolution, and somewhat more horizontal.

> > This is also true for THX-certifed DVDs, so if the DVDs released this
> > fall are THX-certified, then there *must* be high-def masters somewhere.

>
> Would you be kind enough to state a source for that. What I'm seeing is
> that high definition masters can be certified but there is no requirement
> that they be used for SD DVD production.


Now that I read current requirements, there may not be any more, with
the continued slacking off of the THX standard. There was at the
inception of the program, to keep it in line with the laserdisc standard.

But, the wording of even the current standard would require Lucas to
go get some of those prints that are out there and clean them up and
do a new telecine, if he wants them THX-certified:

"THX's parameters define that film transfers used must come from the
highest possible resolution digital medium available to the client,
and stresses that high definition transfers should be used
throughout"
-- http://www.dvdreview.com/html/how_dv...certified.html

--
Jeff Rife | "Ahhh, what an awful dream! Ones and zeroes
| everywhere...and I thought I saw a two!"
| -- Bender, "Futurama"
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Derek Janssen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2006
Harkness wrote:

> ah the cutting wit of the Star Wars geek.
>
> still spanking to princess leia in the slave girl outfit?
>
> John Harkness


(Reporting, ladies and gentlemen, live from the Cannes film festival.)

Derek Janssen (John?...this is officially now Too Weird.)
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
fgoodwin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2006
Loretty wrote:
>
> Whhhooopp dee freekin' dooo.


Yep, Karrde was right . . .

 
Reply With Quote
 
Rich Handley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2006
"Pek Jerkins" <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>Gee, really? Why don't you just **** off then.



<<plonk>>

 
Reply With Quote
 
J. Clarke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2006
Jeff Rife wrote:

> Subject: Re: May 25, 1977: Star Wars released
> From: Jeff Rife <(E-Mail Removed)>
> Newsgroups: alt.fan.starwars
>
> J. Clarke ((E-Mail Removed)) wrote in alt.video.dvd:
>> > I hate to bring this up, but the laserdiscs from which the masters were
>> > made were THX-certified. It was a requirement for THX-certification
>> > for laserdiscs that the original telecine be done in high-def, and then
>> > the laserdisc master be created from a down-conversion of that
>> > telecine.

>>
>> There was not even a _standard_ for high definition television when the
>> THX Laserdisc requirements were established.

>
> Actually, the first THX laserdisc showed up in 1993, and Japan already
> had HDTV at that time, *and* Hi-Vision laserdiscs had already been
> released. Then, by 1995 when the "Faces" THX-certified discs came
> along, HDTV *was* firmly established, and the THX laserdisc certification
> program required the use of high-definition masters.


Check the dates. You'll find that the THX standard was established in 1990,
not 1993. The first THX Laserdisc did not show up until after (a) the THX
standard was established and (b) someone had built the necessary pieces and
put them in a studio.

> Just because HDTV is just beginning to really take off with the consumer
> in the US doesn't mean it hasn't been around for a *long* time. Heck,
> it's nine years old in the US.


TV was round in the 1860s. That doesn't mean that the standard used then has
any relevance to current production.

>> There might be "good quality"
>> masters somewhere but that doesn't mean that they contain 1920x1080
>> recordings.

>
> It doesn't really matter. If they are at least 853x480 (in the 16x9
> area), they can be used for full-resolution creation of anamorphic DVDs.
> It may not be as good as a full HD source, but it will be 25% more
> vertical resolution, and somewhat more horizontal.


Which is not the same as high definition.

>> > This is also true for THX-certifed DVDs, so if the DVDs released this
>> > fall are THX-certified, then there *must* be high-def masters
>> > somewhere.

>>
>> Would you be kind enough to state a source for that. What I'm seeing is
>> that high definition masters can be certified but there is no requirement
>> that they be used for SD DVD production.

>
> Now that I read current requirements, there may not be any more, with
> the continued slacking off of the THX standard. There was at the
> inception of the program, to keep it in line with the laserdisc standard.


And when did the laserdisc standard call for high definition masters? Not
your wide SD 853x480 but HD?

> But, the wording of even the current standard would require Lucas to
> go get some of those prints that are out there and clean them up and
> do a new telecine, if he wants them THX-certified:
>
> "THX's parameters define that film transfers used must come from the
> highest possible resolution digital medium available to the client,
> and stresses that high definition transfers should be used
> throughout"
> -- http://www.dvdreview.com/html/how_dv...certified.html


That's _film_ transfers. If they come _from_ digital then they must be
going to _to_ film. This has zip all to do with DVD production or any
other kind of digital distribution.


--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jeff Rife
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-28-2006
Stop randomly changing the "Followup-To". I have fixed it *again*.

J. Clarke ((E-Mail Removed)) wrote in alt.video.dvd:
> > Actually, the first THX laserdisc showed up in 1993, and Japan already
> > had HDTV at that time, *and* Hi-Vision laserdiscs had already been
> > released. Then, by 1995 when the "Faces" THX-certified discs came
> > along, HDTV *was* firmly established, and the THX laserdisc certification
> > program required the use of high-definition masters.

>
> Check the dates. You'll find that the THX standard was established in 1990,
> not 1993.


Until the first THX laserdisc came out, the standard wasn't officially
established. It was in flux all the time. The "test discs" ("Apocalypse
Now" and the 3 "Raiders" movies) were part of that. They were not
officially certified, but adhered to many of the same standards that
eventually became the final THX laserdisc standards. Because of the
experience with these discs, some of the standards changed. One of
these things was the quality and resolution of the telecine used. At
the time the first disc came out, a digital, high-def telecine was a
requirement.

> > Just because HDTV is just beginning to really take off with the consumer
> > in the US doesn't mean it hasn't been around for a *long* time. Heck,
> > it's nine years old in the US.

>
> TV was round in the 1860s. That doesn't mean that the standard used then has
> any relevance to current production.


You claimed that there was no HDTV standard when the first THX-certified
laserdisc was produced. In truth, there was not only an HDTV standard,
but HDTV laserdiscs had been around for at least THREE YEARS (some were
released in 1990). Thus, your other sidetrack of when the THX laserdisc
standard was established is also a red herring.

> > It doesn't really matter. If they are at least 853x480 (in the 16x9
> > area), they can be used for full-resolution creation of anamorphic DVDs.
> > It may not be as good as a full HD source, but it will be 25% more
> > vertical resolution, and somewhat more horizontal.

>
> Which is not the same as high definition.


Since there is no official legal definition of "high definition", there
is no way to know this. And, since the THX laserdisc standard did not
use the term "high definition" (the spec was for a "hi-def master"), it's
another moot point.

Anything that is at least 853x480 (16:9) would be good enough for the
upcoming DVDs. 1000x562 wouldn't be "high definition" by some of today's
standards, but it might have been good enough to be considered a
"high-def" master back then, and would be more than good enough for the
upcoming DVDs.

Basically, even if THX defined *anything* better than 720x480 as
"high-def" back then, that "high-def" master will almost certainly be
good enough.

> > Now that I read current requirements, there may not be any more, with
> > the continued slacking off of the THX standard. There was at the
> > inception of the program, to keep it in line with the laserdisc standard.

>
> And when did the laserdisc standard call for high definition masters?


Never. The standard required "high-def masters". Read the notes on
the first THX-certified laserdisc ("The Abyss") to see the details.

> > "THX's parameters define that film transfers used must come from the
> > highest possible resolution digital medium available to the client,
> > and stresses that high definition transfers should be used
> > throughout"
> > -- http://www.dvdreview.com/html/how_dv...certified.html

>
> That's _film_ transfers. If they come _from_ digital then they must be
> going to _to_ film.


Sorry you don't understand idiomatic English. Let me emphasize it for
you:

"THX's parameters define that transfers used FOR THE FILM ON DVD
must come from the highest possible resolution digital medium
available to the client and stresses that high definition transfers
should be used throughout THE PRODUCTION OF THE DVD".

Maybe the fact that the page was all about how DVDs get THX-certified
confused you into thinking they were talking about film.

Or, maybe it was the next two sentences from the same page that caused
you problems:

"In a word, you need a very good source print, telecined into a high
definition video transfer in order to qualify for this program. Even
more so as the program requires that transfers used are exact copies
of the film print, without prior color correction or level changes,
and only allowing noise reduction to a certain extent."
-- http://www.dvdreview.com/html/how_dv...certified.html

I know you probably had trouble with the words "this program", so I'll
give you a hint: it is referring to the THX-certification program for
DVDs, because you don't need to make a telecine of a movie for theatrical
presentation.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Dilbert/CoWorker.gif
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dylan Winslow
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-28-2006
On 2006-05-27 19:45:08 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<(E-Mail Removed)> said:

> TV was round in the 1860s.


Ahem.

--
Dylan Winslow
All bleeding stops eventually.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Pek Jerkins
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-28-2006

"Rich Handley" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> "Pek Jerkins" <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>>Gee, really? Why don't you just **** off then.

>
>
> <<plonk>>
>

Ahhh, the amazing shitemeister Rich Handley.

More appropriately Dick Handler.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Anybody
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-28-2006
In article <2006052722384216807-dylanw@xmissiondotcom>, Dylan Winslow
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On 2006-05-27 19:45:08 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
> > TV was round in the 1860s.

>
> Ahem.


Errr ... what?!?!?!?

I must have missed something. TV wasn't even invented until the 1920s.
 
Reply With Quote
 
J. Clarke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-28-2006
Jeff Rife wrote:

> Stop randomly changing the "Followup-To". I have fixed it *again*.
>
> J. Clarke ((E-Mail Removed)) wrote in alt.video.dvd:
>> > Actually, the first THX laserdisc showed up in 1993, and Japan already
>> > had HDTV at that time, *and* Hi-Vision laserdiscs had already been
>> > released. Then, by 1995 when the "Faces" THX-certified discs came
>> > along, HDTV *was* firmly established, and the THX laserdisc
>> > certification program required the use of high-definition masters.

>>
>> Check the dates. You'll find that the THX standard was established in
>> 1990, not 1993.

>
> Until the first THX laserdisc came out, the standard wasn't officially
> established. It was in flux all the time. The "test discs" ("Apocalypse
> Now" and the 3 "Raiders" movies) were part of that. They were not
> officially certified, but adhered to many of the same standards that
> eventually became the final THX laserdisc standards. Because of the
> experience with these discs, some of the standards changed. One of
> these things was the quality and resolution of the telecine used. At
> the time the first disc came out, a digital, high-def telecine was a
> requirement.
>
>> > Just because HDTV is just beginning to really take off with the
>> > consumer
>> > in the US doesn't mean it hasn't been around for a *long* time. Heck,
>> > it's nine years old in the US.

>>
>> TV was round in the 1860s. That doesn't mean that the standard used then
>> has any relevance to current production.

>
> You claimed that there was no HDTV standard when the first THX-certified
> laserdisc was produced. In truth, there was not only an HDTV standard,
> but HDTV laserdiscs had been around for at least THREE YEARS (some were
> released in 1990). Thus, your other sidetrack of when the THX laserdisc
> standard was established is also a red herring.
>
>> > It doesn't really matter. If they are at least 853x480 (in the 16x9
>> > area), they can be used for full-resolution creation of anamorphic
>> > DVDs. It may not be as good as a full HD source, but it will be 25%
>> > more vertical resolution, and somewhat more horizontal.

>>
>> Which is not the same as high definition.

>
> Since there is no official legal definition of "high definition", there
> is no way to know this. And, since the THX laserdisc standard did not
> use the term "high definition" (the spec was for a "hi-def master"), it's
> another moot point.
>
> Anything that is at least 853x480 (16:9) would be good enough for the
> upcoming DVDs. 1000x562 wouldn't be "high definition" by some of today's
> standards, but it might have been good enough to be considered a
> "high-def" master back then, and would be more than good enough for the
> upcoming DVDs.
>
> Basically, even if THX defined *anything* better than 720x480 as
> "high-def" back then, that "high-def" master will almost certainly be
> good enough.
>
>> > Now that I read current requirements, there may not be any more, with
>> > the continued slacking off of the THX standard. There was at the
>> > inception of the program, to keep it in line with the laserdisc
>> > standard.

>>
>> And when did the laserdisc standard call for high definition masters?

>
> Never. The standard required "high-def masters". Read the notes on
> the first THX-certified laserdisc ("The Abyss") to see the details.
>
>> > "THX's parameters define that film transfers used must come from the
>> > highest possible resolution digital medium available to the client,
>> > and stresses that high definition transfers should be used
>> > throughout"
>> > -- http://www.dvdreview.com/html/how_dv...certified.html

>>
>> That's _film_ transfers. If they come _from_ digital then they must be
>> going to _to_ film.

>
> Sorry you don't understand idiomatic English. Let me emphasize it for
> you:
>
> "THX's parameters define that transfers used FOR THE FILM ON DVD
> must come from the highest possible resolution digital medium
> available to the client and stresses that high definition transfers
> should be used throughout THE PRODUCTION OF THE DVD".
>
> Maybe the fact that the page was all about how DVDs get THX-certified
> confused you into thinking they were talking about film.
>
> Or, maybe it was the next two sentences from the same page that caused
> you problems:
>
> "In a word, you need a very good source print, telecined into a high
> definition video transfer in order to qualify for this program. Even
> more so as the program requires that transfers used are exact copies
> of the film print, without prior color correction or level changes,
> and only allowing noise reduction to a certain extent."
> -- http://www.dvdreview.com/html/how_dv...certified.html
>
> I know you probably had trouble with the words "this program", so I'll
> give you a hint: it is referring to the THX-certification program for
> DVDs, because you don't need to make a telecine of a movie for theatrical
> presentation.


Rather than addressing all your blather point by point, I'm going to
summarize your viewpoint. Your viewpoint is that high definition DVDs can
by some magic process be made from 480-line originals. If that were the
case you could take any DVD and turn it into HD. Hell, you could take any
SD broadcast and turn it into HD.


--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Star Wars Q: How severe are the bars on widescreen Star Wars DVD set? TNEXTWAVE DVD Video 22 10-01-2004 10:44 PM
DVD Verdict reviews: THE STAR WARS TRILOGY, STAR TREK: THE ORIGINAL SERIES, SEASON ONE, and more! DVD Verdict DVD Video 0 09-27-2004 09:08 AM
Re: Star Wars: Clone Wars on dvd? Machina3317 DVD Video 2 04-14-2004 01:11 PM
Star Wars is not being released to DVD! Mike Kohary DVD Video 106 02-17-2004 07:49 PM
Re: Sound problems on DVDs (was Re: Star Wars digression was Re: The Myths of Gaming) (was: Star Wars digression was Re: The Myths of Gaming) Terry Austin DVD Video 0 12-02-2003 03:21 AM



Advertisments