What makes these 2 Star Wars different?

[Tony Kelly]

exactly guys if it looks and sounds good that is all that matters

[Oliver Feld]

Absolutely!

[Mike Newell]

Is it the same prints going round and around or did Derann and others (Germany) print more than they let on they did.

[Osi Osgood]

I don't know how many prints of Star Wars were made by Derann, though it had to have been one of they're most popular. The cineavision prints would be far rarer, as it wasn't an official release, so probably printed by demand. I've only seen two, the one I have and one other, but I'm sure there must have been more than that. The 1X400ft Cineavision Star Wars part 2 scope digest would be a little more numerous, though they are pretty rare as well. The official Star Wars part 2 Anamorphic scope digest, released by Ken Films, has tended to age much better than the Cineavision part 2, which has tended to be pinkish these days. There must have been a span of time between the two Cineavision scope releases, unless the feature was printed on LPP and even though LPP was available for the digest, they went ahead and printed on what was available at the time. For instance, the extremely rare ESB Cineavision feature was printed on Kodak SP, instead of LPP, sadly. There's so much of that history that may we'll be lost to time. The main curiosity to me, is who printed the scope/Cineavision first? Ken Films ... or the people responsible for the Cineavision digest, as it is the exact same digest, frame for frame. Did Ken Films share the edit with the "Cineavision people"? By the way, there is a very interesting YouTube video, that shows the Star Wars Part 2, Ken Films scope and Cineavision digest, side by side, the whole digests! If someone could be so kind, please put up a link to that YouTube video!

[Osi Osgood]

Another Additional thought. Being that the Cineavision negative would draw back further to have the perfect 35mm frame preserved, and the Ken Films negative come in some on the original negative, holding the original edit of the digest, to fill the whole super 8 frame, one of two things must be true ... 1. The Original negative must have been the Cineavision negative, and the Ken Films was a copy of the Cineavision. 2. The Ken Films editors may have had a "Cineavision style" original edit negative, but chose to come in on the 35mm frame to eliminate black bars on the left and right, perhaps thinking that purchasers wouldn't appreciate that, but it is apparent that the original negative had a "Cineavision" scope aspect ratio for the digest to begin with.