Star Wars 3-D

[Larry_Mudd]

@mlees

I’m sure there are Star Wars purists who won’t like the results of whatever compromises had to be made during the conversion process.

There won’t be nearly as much compromise required for a conversion to 3D as are required for conversion to a different aspect ratio.

The kind of compromise we see in pan & scan totally changes the composition of a frame, which can distort the intent. (eg; characters shown at the extreme opposites of the frame, with a gulf between them – pan & scanned so that only one characer is shown at a time.)

The translation to 3D will not be lossy in this way - there should not really be a need to discard anything. At worst, a very small amount of information at one edge will be fudged out. Parallax shift will typically be quite small for pixels at left and right edges of the screen. The type of cropping that this will require won’t really affect the composition of the frame, it would only be a tiny slice off the margin. I would expect that the prints that they are working from will have enough leeway to cover this, so that no cropping is required at all.

[mlees]

@Larry_Mudd

There won’t be nearly as much compromise required for a conversion to 3D as are required for conversion to a different aspect ratio.

The kind of compromise we see in pan & scan totally changes the composition of a frame, which can distort the intent. (eg; characters shown at the extreme opposites of the frame, with a gulf between them – pan & scanned so that only one characer is shown at a time.)

The translation to 3D will not be lossy in this way - there should not really be a need to discard anything. At worst, a very small amount of information at one edge will be fudged out. Parallax shift will typically be quite small for pixels at left and right edges of the screen. The type of cropping that this will require won’t really affect the composition of the frame, it would only be a tiny slice off the margin. I would expect that the prints that they are working from will have enough leeway to cover this, so that no cropping is required at all.

You seem to be focusing on the cropping, but I meant that any change, no matter what it is, will be nit picked by someone who (maybe subconciously) has decided that the original content and format was perfect as is, thus prompting them to look for nits to pick. When they find these nits, hyperbole will result.

Pan & Scan was a compromise, and more or less, acceptable to the unwashed masses, but obviously not the avid film making connoisseur. I expect that 3D Star Wars would probably be acceptable to most folks looking to get entertained on mantinee weekend, but will offend the extreme hardcore Star Wars fans.

[Skammer]

You have to admit, those space battles would be pretty cool in 3D.

[Just_Some_Guy]

I wonder if after he finishes Lucas will declare that this was his original vision and and other versions of the film would never be seen again since he had to destroy all of the prints in order to make the 3d edition.

[digs]

I’m planning on boycotting any 3-D release of “A Newer Hope”, but then sneaking in* for the “rollercoastering through the trenches of the Death Star” scene.
*(why, yes, with a fake beard and boobs, how did you know?)

[Mangetout]

@Larry_Mudd

There won’t be nearly as much compromise required for a conversion to 3D as are required for conversion to a different aspect ratio.

The kind of compromise we see in pan & scan totally changes the composition of a frame, which can distort the intent. (eg; characters shown at the extreme opposites of the frame, with a gulf between them – pan & scanned so that only one characer is shown at a time.)

The translation to 3D will not be lossy in this way - there should not really be a need to discard anything. At worst, a very small amount of information at one edge will be fudged out. Parallax shift will typically be quite small for pixels at left and right edges of the screen. The type of cropping that this will require won’t really affect the composition of the frame, it would only be a tiny slice off the margin. I would expect that the prints that they are working from will have enough leeway to cover this, so that no cropping is required at all.

It depends - one of the techniques used to reinforce the 3D illusion in Avatar was to subtle tracking of the camera. It would be possible to reproduce that as part of the conversion of a 2D film to 3D, but the starting point for the process would probably be a gentle pan of a cropped frame within the full filmed frame.

[The_Piranha_Brothers]

@Jester

That’s the thing, though. It’s not. Lucas re-did the original trilogy once already (the Special Editions in the 90s), and changed/added a number of scenes that, while not major, are still very aggravating and make them worse films.

And then he released the Special Editions on DVD, and not the originals. And when fanboys whined and complained enough, he finally came out saying that the masters for the originals were now lost, and when they whined more, he finally kinda-sorta acquiesced and put a crappy, non-widescreen transfer of the laserdisc version of the original in as a special feature on the Special Edition DVD. The only way to see not-sucky versions of the actual, unaltered, original trilogy now is to watch them on VHS or, shudder, Laserdisc.

So, while I guess the 3-D thing would be interesting to see, my personal worry is that George will follow it up by claiming that 3-D was how he “originally intended” the trilogy, and proceed to discontinue even the slightly altered Special Edition DVDs and make only the 3-D version available. And then, I dunno, track down and kill everybody who saw the originals.

It’s very annoying.

He can go ahead if he also make a 3D SW Holiday Special.

And if he takes out this scene: http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/2250/poster86231546.jpg