This is topic Star Wars Feature print question.. in forum 8mm Forum at 8mm Forum.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=006899
Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on February 16, 2012, 11:39 PM:
So I just received a copy of Star Wars on Super 8 Full Length feature. Its a little different as it is not in Stereo, has slight bars on the top and bottom, is not called a "New Hope", and in some cases is superior to the Derann Version. Oh- and the Greedo sequence has the subtitles. I think Ricky has this version as well. Can anyone tell me something more about this if you know? Its a very nice print, soft in some spots but the colors are dead on and its as original as you can get to the version that came out in 1977.
[ February 17, 2012, 01:56 AM: Message edited by: Alan Rik ]
Posted by Ricky Daniels (Member # 95) on February 17, 2012, 07:24 AM:
Hi Alan,
My print has CineaVision style 'side-bars' with the original 2.35:1 ratio maintained in the 2.66:1 Super 8mm CinemaScope frame and not cropped at the top and bottom like the Derann version, is not titled 'A NEW HOPE", has the 'open' captions and is 6x400'. I believe it was an 'unofficial' US release. I also have the Derann version, each has it's virtues.
Best,
Rick
Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on February 17, 2012, 07:33 AM:
May the force be with you! ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posted by James N. Savage 3 (Member # 83) on February 17, 2012, 10:27 AM:
Hey Alan that sounds like a good find!
Is it a scope print, or is it a flat print thats been letterboxed for a scope effect??
James.
Posted by John Skujins (Member # 1515) on February 17, 2012, 10:47 AM:
There are letterboxed flat prints? That means the picture is cropped on the left, right, top, and bottom. That must look horrible.
Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on February 17, 2012, 11:46 AM:
It is a scope print. One of the best things is that there is no negative damage at the end of the reels so it doesn't have those little white flecks at the reel changes. In fact some of the best colors is when Luke meets Obi Wan for the first time. However it did have some strange splices that turned out not to be splices but were actually printed into the print I have. Meaning that the splices were on the original that they made this print from.
Right around the part where Obi Wan says, "Thats no moon. Its a Space station."
Ricky, does your print have this strange splice?
Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 17, 2012, 12:45 PM:
Alan ....
You did find quite a rare thing indeed or, at least, it's the much rarer version of the Star Wars scope feature. I'm glad to hear that your's doesn't have any color fade, as these prints, from what I remember, were NOT printed on low fade stock (could super 8 feature you verify the stock please?)
... and, as stated in the above posts, it is truly in the original aspect ratio which is, unsqueezed ... a near perfect square.
Now, I'm not quite sure, to this day, as to who printed this, but it may well be the fellow, (I'm assuming the masculine, as I don't know any women who did super 8 releases), who also released "The Empire Strikes Back" as a Cineavision style print, (side bars on the left and right, as yours has), and that "Empire" print I have.
Now, I can verify that my "Empire" print is on a (thankfully) unfaded kodak SP. Well, the blacks are not completely spot on, but they are as close as you could ask, and the color saturation on this print is really glorious.
Once again, a great find Alan! Hold onto that print, to be sure!
On a last note, I wonder if this person ever released a "Cineavision" style scope feature of "Return of the Jedi"? That would be a stretch to be sure, as that would be after the main heyday of super 8 and in the "decline", but hey, I never expected to find a "Cineavision" style scope of Empire!
Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on February 17, 2012, 04:45 PM:
Dear Kevin,I'm afraid I've got to tell you that women were
involved in the release of Super 8. Susan Turner was the head of
U8 and Wendy Moorhen was the head of Iver Films in the UK!
LETS HEAR IT FOR THE GIRLS!
Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on February 17, 2012, 05:06 PM:
OK...
Star Wars has a 35mm aspect ratio of 2.35:1
70mm prints aspect ratio 2.20:1
Alan, can you post a screen shot or scan of the native frame of your super 8 print so we can compare it to original aspect theatrical prints.
Derann's beautiful prints were, of course, cropped top and bottom due to the aspect ratio of super 8 (unlike official cineavision, but let's leave that for now).
Intriguing...
PS. As for the head of U8 at the end...let's not go there!!! ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
PPS. Isn't the only way to present original aspect scope variations on super 8 by side masking??? Like Cineavision did? What would be the point of top/bottom masking???
PPPS. Osi, with regard to your "Empire" print; do you mean it looks almost square without anamorphic lens, but with full image top to bottom of frame? BTW hope we are still on talking terms
Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on February 17, 2012, 06:02 PM:
Rob with respect, Susan Turner was there at the beginning for
U8 and was responsible for some of the best digests to come from this company.Kevin didn't know of any women responsible for S/8
releases well I mention two that put out some very important
titles during their time and it is definately worth going there when
credit is due.
Posted by Rob Young. (Member # 131) on February 17, 2012, 06:41 PM:
Hugh, with respect, you are right.
I take back my
Sorry. We all make mistakes.
Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on February 17, 2012, 07:05 PM:
That's very gracious of you Rob but theres no need,mistakes,we
all make 'em,thats what this forum's all about plus keeping the
hobby alive and active with the sharing of information.
Posted by Robert Babun (Member # 1873) on February 18, 2012, 12:56 AM:
Wow! A great find.
Alan, by any chance did you obtain this print from Australia?
If so, was it from an ebay user with the ID "glenenterprises2009"?
There was an auction for a "Star Wars" super 8 full length print, but the listing ended early! The seller did say the print was on 400' spools though.
Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 18, 2012, 02:15 AM:
Who the blazes is Kevin, Hugh?
Posted by Larry Arpin (Member # 744) on February 18, 2012, 02:21 AM:
I bought Ricky Daniels print of the Cineavision-style STAR WARS. I was hoping it was the Derann version, I didn't ask, but I wasn't thrilled with the sharpness and eventually sold it to someone in Canada who later ask me the origin of the print like all of us are asking.
Many eons ago I had an Empire Strikes Back scope print but it was overall bluish-green and eventually sold that.
There was a version of Return that was released that had the last 40 minutes, a reel 2, in scope with jagged frame lines, and a flat 200 foot reel that had the Rancor, Desert battle, & speeder bike sequence. I've seen for sale the 200 footer and the last 40 minutes on Ebay.
As I always do on my auctions I had a screen shot or 2 of the Cineavision SW, but I must have deleted it as I cannot find it.
Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on February 18, 2012, 04:46 AM:
Hello Michael,is Kevin not Osi's real monoiker?
Posted by Joe Taffis (Member # 4) on February 18, 2012, 09:35 AM:
Rik, this may be one of the un-authorized feature prints that were rumored to have been made from negatives that were licensed for the purpose of editing down to 200' and 400' digests.
Posted by Adam Deierling (Member # 2307) on February 18, 2012, 09:54 AM:
Just out of curiosity, what is the price comparison to the Derann Scope print vs the CineaVision print you guys are talking about? I know the Derann can go for over $1000 in good condition.
Posted by Alan Rik (Member # 73) on February 18, 2012, 10:06 AM:
No I got mine from a private seller here in the states. Its a dilemma!
As Ricky says there are merits to both prints. I have both the Derann and this one. While the Derann print was taken from a newer negative, its the New Hope Version.
This one has the opening just like the original that I remember seeing in 1977. Also the Derann version on Tattooine looks a little washed out where Luke is with Obi Wan. (on my copy anyways). On this one it looks very good. And the scene in the Cantina has the subtitles for Greedo which is very cool.
I'll have to watch it again.
I did see the original one in the Theatres around 27 times when it first came out. I remember every weekend going to see it and on some days it was sold out. And this was after 6 or 7 months of it being released!
Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 18, 2012, 12:35 PM:
My full legal name is ....
Kevin Shawn OSI Sparrowawk Thorton Osgood
No kidding. Whenn I began my first career (didn't go far) in music years ago, I liked OSI so much, (and hated Kevin for reasons I won't go into) that I made OSI an official part of my name.
Lets put it this way, all my frienjds call me OSI and it is my official title.
Yes, my print of "Empire Strikes Back" is, without using the scope lense and just looking at the image on the super 8 print, a perfect, or near perfect, square; with black bars on the left and right side.
Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 18, 2012, 12:36 PM:
My full legal name is ....
Kevin Shawn OSI Sparrowawk Thorton Osgood
No kidding. Whenn I began my first career (didn't go far) in music years ago, I liked OSI so much, (and hated Kevin for reasons I won't go into) that I made OSI an official part of my name.
Lets put it this way; all my friends call me OSI and it is my official title.
Yes, my print of "Empire Strikes Back" is, without using the scope lense and just looking at the image on the super 8 print, a perfect, or near perfect, square; with black bars on the left and right side.
Posted by Pasquale DAlessio (Member # 2052) on February 18, 2012, 12:52 PM:
OZ
Your name is so long it had to be put in 2 posts! ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
PatD
Posted by Ricky Daniels (Member # 95) on February 18, 2012, 01:36 PM:
Hi Alan,
Yes I've had a few copies of this version in my time the joins you are reporting I'm sure are from the pre-print material. I've checked the copy I have here and there are neg joins from the original 35mm Panavision negative too. These negative joins are usually just out of frame when projected in the 35mm format. Also 2.35:1 negative joining is far more tricky than 1.85:1 because the full height of the 35mm frame is used when filming anamorphic and therefore there is less room for joining purposes.
Best,
Rick
Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on February 18, 2012, 01:51 PM:
quote:
Hello Michael,is Kevin not Osi's real monoiker?
Hi, Hugh.
Of course it is. I'd forgotten. Sorry.
Posted by Colin Robert Hunt (Member # 433) on February 18, 2012, 02:59 PM:
The 70mm print I saw at the Odeon Marble arch was fantasric with great print quaity and sound.
Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on February 18, 2012, 06:57 PM:
My dear Osi, I'm afraid I'm causing confusion here by calling you by the name your Mum gave you,so therefore if you prefer I'll call
you Osi (Kevin sounded like an OK name to me) my apologies and
I would hate to cause any offence,cos I've always been wary of
nicknames.One poor unfortunate that started on our site was
calling one guy by his nickname, until he found out that he was
only called "Fatbags"out of earshot!
Posted by Pete Richards (Member # 2203) on June 12, 2013, 11:17 PM:
Osi, do you still have the 'Empire' Print?
Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on June 13, 2013, 12:35 PM:
If you mean the cineavision 'Empire", nope, sold that last year. I have my German printing of Empire, and I'm keeping that!
Posted by Pete Richards (Member # 2203) on June 13, 2013, 12:55 PM:
How do the two compare?
Visit www.film-tech.com for free equipment manual downloads. Copyright 2003-2019 Film-Tech Cinema Systems LLC
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2