my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets   » Star Wars

Author Topic: Star Wars Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 03-26-2003 09:28 PM                     A prior request was made here but has been relocated into another forum category. Since some print spec info/variations was being requested I thought it would be ideal to have a new entry created for the FITA archive. Print details only...no chat, please. Find any of the numerous other Star Wars threads for discussion. 1977 original release: 70mm: 20th Century Fox "Full width" (2.21:1) Six-Track Dolby Stereo A (41 or 42) Six reels 121 minutes Deluxe Lab (print) Todd-AO (sounding) 35mm: 20th Century Fox Scope (2.39:1) Dolby A Six reels 121 minutes Deluxe Lab 35mm: 20th Century Fox Scope (2.39:1) Mono Six reels 121 minutes Deluxe Lab • there were also a number of IB Tech and 4-track mag prints made • multiple audio mixes were made - 70mm, 35mm-stereo, and 35mm-mono versions differ from one another (mainly minor non-sync dialogue and sound effects differences) • post Empire re-release prints have a revised opening scroll • AKA Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope 1997 Special Edition: 20th Century Fox Scope (2.39:1) SR/SRD/DTS/SDDS Six reels 125 minutes Deluxe Lab Trailer: The Empire Strikes Back • a 70mm-DTS print was made for special screening(s)  |  IP: Logged Aaron Sisemore Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day! Posts: 3061 From: Rockwall TX USA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 03-27-2003 03:51 AM                     Actually the attatched trailer on the SE version was an Empire/Jedi combo trailer. -Aaron  |  IP: Logged John Hawkinson Film God Posts: 2273 From: Cambridge, MA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 09-29-2003 12:48 AM                     ---- Print-specific info (for rep. titles) Special Edition (1997 rerelease) Nontheatrical exchange: Criterion Pictures (their print) Criterion print #A:0776 Kodak 2386 polyester stock (1997) Grade-by-reel (range 1-10): 576667 Overall grade: 6 ("Good") DTS discs missing (and hard to come by, it seems) Tail of the film generally intact (original cues still there), though it's gone through a fair bit of use. Visible base-side scratching, particularly on R1, but under control. Perhaps the most odd thing is periodic color shifts toward red, lasting anywhere from a few seconds to a few minutes. Perhaps the result of improper storage and infrequent rotation? --jhawk  |  IP: Logged Adam Martin I'm not even gonna point out the irony. Posts: 3686 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Nov 2000 posted 09-29-2003 02:06 AM                     Wasn't anamorphic 2.35:1 at that time?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 09-29-2003 04:14 AM                     Yes, these were 2.35 prints. I am shocked Mike missed that. John, the color shifting was on all prints. It was that way on the best of the remaining elements. That wasn't just the copy you screened. (BTW, there is a mistimed lab cue in the SE version of Empire Strikes Back. Around reel 2 or 3. The cues are too late and it will botch up your changeover.)  |  IP: Logged Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 09-29-2003 01:41 PM                     I thought there wasn't supposed to be any chat.... quote: Wasn't anamorphic 2.35:1 at that time? quote: Yes, these were 2.35 prints. I am shocked Mike missed that. Huh?! What was it that Mike missed??? Didn't SMPTE recognize "2.39:1" as the anamorphic projection standard six or seven years prior to the release of Star Wars? Please don't turn this into a nit-picky argument over the "correctness" of "2.35:1," "2.39:1" and "2.40:1."  |  IP: Logged Paul Linfesty Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1383 From: Bakersfield, CA, USA Registered: Nov 1999 posted 09-29-2003 03:17 PM                     quote: I thought there wasn't supposed to be any chat.... Well, the rules at the top ALSO say "You must have personally handled the print being discussed to post in this forum". Have you personaly handled every version of the prints you posted?  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 09-29-2003 03:59 PM                     quote: Please don't turn this into a nit-picky argument over the "correctness" of "2.35:1," "2.39:1" and "2.40:1." It's just that you are usually so picky about the tiny little details, Mike.  |  IP: Logged Michael Coate Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1904 From: Los Angeles, California Registered: Feb 2001 posted 09-29-2003 04:39 PM                     Brad wrote: quote: It's just that you are usually so picky about the tiny little details, Mike. Yeah, but I was correct!!! I stated in the initial post that the scope prints were intended for 2.39:1 projection. I wasn't trying to bait anyone for an argument with that info; the ratio was listed simply as a formality. Maybe I should've wrote "scope" and left it at that. Adam chimed in asking if 2.35:1 was the correct ratio in 1977. I replied with a comment that SMPTE changed the anamorphic projection standard from 2.35:1 to 2.39:1 before the release of Star Wars, which means that my original information was correct. Unless I've misunderstood Adam's question.... Paul asked: quote: Have you personally handled every version of the prints you posted? Paul, Just because I'm a journalist today doesn't mean that I wasn't once a projectionist. And just because I wasn't a projectionist in 1977 doesn't mean that I couldn't have come into contact with the prints in subsequent years. Moreover, you're overlooking the fact that I know many projectionists and have access to private screenings and to prints in the possession of collectors. But to answer your question: no, I have not handled every print I provided specs for. I haven't handled that 70mm-DTS print. So ban me from the site for not following directions....  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 09-29-2003 06:19 PM                        2.39:1 was proposed in 1970 and standardized in 1971. John Pytlak's post about his paper for WideScreen Museum http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/apertures.htm  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 09-29-2003 11:17 PM                        quote: Perhaps the most odd thing is periodic color shifts toward red, lasting anywhere from a few seconds to a few minutes. Perhaps the result of improper storage and infrequent rotation? Uneven dye fading is often indicative of improper storage. For example, film stored near a heat source will have a convolution repeat, where the side of the roll that was hotter fades faster. Or acidic by-products of hydrolysis from excess humidity settle on one side of the storage container, causing localized dye fading.  |  IP: Logged System Notices Forum Watchdog / Soup Nazi Posts: 215 Registered: Apr 2004 posted 11-13-2007 10:52 PM                 It has been 1505 days since the last post.  |  IP: Logged Blaine Young Master Film Handler Posts: 477 From: Kirkland, WA, USA Registered: Sep 2006 posted 11-13-2007 10:52 PM                     International Print: No Attachment While the heads/tails indicate SR/SRD/DTS/SDDS on the international print, there is no SDDS track - at least not on the print I've handled.  |  IP: Logged System Notices Forum Watchdog / Soup Nazi Posts: 215 Registered: Apr 2004 posted 05-20-2012 06:06 PM                 It has been 1649 days since the last post.  |  IP: Logged Jim Henk Master Film Handler Posts: 364 From: San Diego, CA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 05-20-2012 06:06 PM                     Never mind - just went back and double checked something. Was wrong. These are not the droids you're looking for. Move along...  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.