8mm Forum: Star Wars 400ft Cineavision & Scope versions.

»	8mm Forum » 8mm Forum » Star Wars 400ft Cineavision & Scope versions.

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

Author

Topic: Star Wars 400ft Cineavision & Scope versions.

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003

posted February 22, 2018 02:33 AM

Started a new thread so as not to continue on the wanted section.

I'd only ever seen the Cineavision version in the Ken Cinemascope box, but David has pointed out that he has one in a Cineavision labelled box.

Little bit of google and...

http://www.swonvideo.com/8mm/8mmf64cineavision.htm

And also...

http://www.swonvideo.com/8mm/8mmf64cinemascope.htm

Also, Adrian has asked why the two different versions?

Anyone any ideas?

| IP: Logged

David Hardy
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 955
From: Johnshaven Village , Montrose, Scotland
Registered: Jan 2015

posted February 22, 2018 04:44 AM

Rob I was struggling to get an image up for you. I don't know if its me or I having some techy problem.

I am so glad you found one. That's the same box as my copy but the CINEAVISION red label is in a different position on the front but the same place on the back.

Also my some strange coincidence my copy has an old Perry's Movies sales sticker still on the box cover.

I ran my print last night and it has went pinky. Funny enough though its is not so bad on the second half of the reel.

I guess its slowly going to creep into that section now that I have ran it again.

--------------------
" My equipment's more important than your rats. "

| IP: Logged

Alan Rik
Film God

Posts: 2211
From: New York City, NY, USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted February 22, 2018 07:31 AM

I had this print once and sold it. I didn't think the picture quality was very good and on top of it.. it was faded. The Derann print is much better IMHO.

| IP: Logged

Osi Osgood
Film God

Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005

posted February 22, 2018 11:45 AM

I have the one that has the "Cinemascope" sticker to it.

I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that the "Cinemascope' version was the second version to come out?

My theory on why two versions?

The first version (I'm assuming), the "Cineavision" was a big seller but perhaps the Cineavision company went out of business, so no new prints could be struck, but FOX/Ken films got ahold of the Cineavision negative and chose to re-print this full frame as, except for no "Cineavsion" logo at the beginning, both prints are identical.

Just my theory. [Smile]

--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "

| IP: Logged

Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003

posted February 22, 2018 03:26 PM

That's very possible, Osi.

Interesting that the flat Ken Pt. 2 is also an identical to these two releases.

Alan, I agree that whilst the Derann print is far from perfect, it is vastly superior to all of the Cineavision / Ken prints.

| IP: Logged

Osi Osgood
Film God

Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005

posted February 23, 2018 11:50 AM

I do agree with Rob on the Derann being better quality.

I wouldn't say vastly better, as i have the Cineavision full feature of Star Wars, (quite rare), and I'm holding onto it due to the fact that it is NOT the 1982 re-issue, (which the Derann is taken from, I think it was from a French negative origin? Someone could possibly back that up), while the Cineavision full feature is taken from the actual 1977 STAR WARS, without a single change to it, (Dang that Lucas!!).

In fact, during the last battle especially, looking at the frames seperately, you need the splice lines constantly. Fortunately, they don't show up on screen. [Smile]

--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "

| IP: Logged

David Hardy
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 955
From: Johnshaven Village , Montrose, Scotland
Registered: Jan 2015

posted February 23, 2018 03:15 PM

I always felt that Cineavision prints were for "purists" who liked to see the whole frame of the film un-cropped and to the correct aspect ratio width of 2.35:1 ( 0r 2.39:1 ). Unlike the usual 8mm print reductions which are 2.66:1 ratio which are cropped top bottom and sides and really slightly to wide for true proportionally reduced theatrical CinemaScope prints on the 8mm film frame.

I always like the Cineavision reductions and don't mind the black bars at the side.

However the Cineavision prints sadly were never as sharp as they could have been no matter what the reviewers said at the time.
Still I bought some and still have them but they are fading, even the trailers. [Big Grin]

--------------------
" My equipment's more important than your rats. "

| IP: Logged

Brian Fretwell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1785
From: London, UK
Registered: Jun 2014

posted February 23, 2018 04:10 PM

I found it strange that people were talking about the Cineavision Ben Hur being in the correct ratio (which it was only for the 2.35:1 35mm prints) when in its camera original 70 Super Panavision it was 2.7:1. If that had been reduced to Super8 full frame - what a release that would have been!!

| IP: Logged

Osi Osgood
Film God

Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005

posted February 24, 2018 01:10 PM

You can still find some of the Cineavision digests with great color. The cartoons shorts as well.

In the case of the STAR WARS feature, this is a mystery (which has been discussed before) as, the Cineavision digests were printed before the advent of L.P.P. film stock ...

... but the STAR WARS Cineavision feature ... is L.P.P.

A mystery for you ... Scooby Doo!

--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "

| IP: Logged

All times are Central

Printer-friendly view of this topic

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2