So there were two runs of the "Faces" discs, one from kurraray in Japan, one from Pioneer in the USA.

But if neither of them are SuperNTSC, does it even matter? They should be pretty much the same right?

I quoted the wrong post. Wth. Sorry.

Which DVD version is this?
I have PAL R4 (GOUT and older versions) and also NTSC US (R1) "original" versions but I don't have a proper original version of the first film on any physical media.

The Limited Edition DVD? The theatrical version of the original movie on the DVD doesn't have the "Episode 4" subtitle in the opening scroll, which is in every laserdisc release.

2006 box set?

I did a search and can't find the exact topic.
For LD the best versions are the CAV widescreen versions, for US the best are the first FOX or CBX/FOX widescreen releases, I believe
these use the same masters but one is slightly cleaner.

Just going by what I remember in that topic.
The faces and later releases have too much noise reduction or DNR on them for some people.

I personally had the faces and first widescreen releases at one time, can't really remember which was personally better at the time, but the faces
were selling for more so I sold them to have a nice dinner that week.

2006 box set/individual releases. You say you have the GOUT but you don't know what I'm talking about?

I thought i heard the 2006 DVDs were mastered from a composite master, so aren't really component? They also have a huge variation in quality from scene to scene, partially from the fact that they are non-anamorphic widescreen. This is an intentionally bad example from the 2006 GOUT DVD:



In that picture above, the compression artifacts kill it for me. Later scenes, especially inside the death star, look much better though.



^ i agree with that 110%

I do have a PAL GOUT set tin and NTSC US GOUT discs (with covers).
Yeah those use 1993 Laserdisc masters with edited opening crawl. Also some colour correction (which is rather old now).
I wouldn't say they are original versions, much the same way harmy's aren't original but obviously to a much lesser extent.

You should be able to make a superior version of Star Wars than GOUT DVD by using a better LD as main video source (eg possibly? Star Wars: A New Hope: Special Collection (1977) [SF148-1196] ). Although as I stated in another thread I don't have all LD versions so I can't compare myself, I have to judge by screenshots I have seen.

GOUT uses really old (and notoriously bad) DNR so it's possible for an avid amateur to do much better with today's technology.
Obviously it would depend on what LD player you are using and also capture hardware, software isn't an issue.

But then using multiple 35mm prints is realistically (not as easy as LD capture so not really an option the average person) the best way to go which is why it was done. It would be much easier (and not expensive at all) for a studio to do even better than fans have.


Actually, speaking of screenshots, I wonder if this would be a nice addition to the database (if at all possible)? Much like gamefaqs has screenshots gallery.
I guess it would prove difficult as there would be huge variations in picture quality due to whatever hardware/methods used by different members

Man, I f*cking hate Star Wars.

Well we could talk about the mono mix of The Terminator too if that's more up your alley...or the screwed up mono mix of Mad Max, but unfortunately I don't think any of the Laserdisc releases of that film include the original Aussie mono track.

Probably not, idk.
The first 2 films should only be viewed using original uncut Aussie versions (with proper audio). But I understand why dubbed versions of films exist, plenty of people (not just some Americans) are too lazy to read subtitles if they can't understand other English regional accents (I've always found this hilariously ignorant myself) and even more people don't like listening to foreign languages at all. Probably not as much of an issue now but decades ago it was a huge problem that just wrecked many films and tv shows (imo anyway).

Okay, all this talk got me curious. I did some captures and have some samples. Here is a comparison between 4 of the discussed versions:

This is an exterior woodland shot before they pick up inside the rebel base to talk about the attack, towards the end of the film (click on the magnifying glass, or you won't really see the difference).


Disclaimers:
1.There is something in my capture chain that makes the images stretched a little in the horizontal direction. Not sure what that is, the capture thing is secondary to me viewing it on my PJ. That makes everyone and everything look a little "plump".
2. My japanese definitive edition is lent to my daughter, so I didn't have it here to compare with.
3. this is a subjective comparison based on my hardware and capture chain. These LDs could look better, or worse, on someone else's hardware (wrt comparing to DVD).

What i see is this:
1. the compression artifacts in the DVD are very apparent and annoying (especially so in this particular scene).
2. The kurraray faces is super blurry, this is the DNR that everyone complains about, however, tonight, i would say my perception is that it varies from scene to scene (the extremeness of the DNR, and it was bad in that shot).
3. The fox technidisc pressing actually has a different AR! This makes it look better throughout, because it has more "picture elements" being displayed on the screen.
4. the JSC has the most detail of the LDs i tested.
5. the colors in the FOX technidisc are beautiful. Colors can be adjusted, so not sure how important that is.
6. the resolution/bandwidth of all the star wars LDs is pretty poor when compared to my captures of "the abyss". Unfortunate. ABYSS CAPS

I reset my capture chain components to factory defaults before i started this. All LD were captured the same, except the JSC had the IRE adjusted to account for their different level of black. Of course, my equipment does something to the picture, but let us agree that it does it equally to all the LD captuers (so not the DVD).

What i couldn't capture, is this"
1. the JSC is very "noisy". You notice it when watching it in motion, but it is hard to capture in the stills.
2. the JSC has more cross color artifacts than the FOX or FACES (i don't know why)
3. The Faces has a smeary greasy look when watching it in motion, that i can't capture in a still. it is like the movement of the "color" portion lags behind the movement of the luma portion.
4. The DVD looks quite good in 70% or more of the shots, better than LD, but when it is worse, it is so worse (compression noise/artifacts) that i hate it.
5. the DVD has some jaggies which implies it was composite master, but it has no cross color artifacts ???

i would say, that my opinion stands, that i like the FOX Technidisc best still. The AR isn't that much different to bother me. The JSC is too noisy, and the FACES is too smeary. The GOUT DVD is too "compression artifacty". That's just my personal preference though.

I took 14 stills of each, at as close to the same time as i could, and you can view/download them here: SWANH Comparison

Yeah the main reason GOUT looks bad is the old 90's DNR that was carried over, leading to even more issues with DVD compression.

As I said it's just so sad nobody ever bothered getting hold of like half a dozen (or more) 35mm prints and making a nice master as time has progressed (2k, 4k...) like with other films. Lucas was a dick for years about the original versions, "they're incomplete films", should be forgotten etc. What an arsehole

All the hype more recently about Disney releasing remastered true original versions never actually happened as I knew it probably would.

Wow...faces look like crap.

So the original thinking was that the kurraray faces were superior because they were SuperNTSC; which has been debunked.

Let me again posit my theory that there is no actual discernible difference between the kurraray faces (Japanese pressing) and the Pioneer faces (USA Pressing)

Maybe, idk. Do the US pressings have higher chance of rot?
The US faces art is crap anyway, I've seen better cover art on kids colouring books.

No, its possible that they are superNTSC but they did so much other stuff to them that they screwed the pooch.

As for the Aussie deal, I could never understand it, but then again I grew up in NYC not small state or Midwest where I could totally understand
why.

I mentioned to my wife about these masks, if we had masks on before this pandemic people would be staring at us and saying why are we mumbling.
But now since all are wearing the locals can understand every word we say.

The Kurraray pressed faces have the same covers. They are US releases pressed at a different plant.


Sometimes. It varies from "crap" to "bothersome" depending on the scene.


I don't have the non Kurrary faces to compare. It is a question i have been curious about. There might be differences, but they might be moot because of the DVNR.


I want to say, that 5 or so years ago, i did a deep dive into this, and somehow determined that they weren't/couldn't be. On 2 fronts:

1) I can't recall all the specifics, and of course, i can't be 100% positive, but it was something like this: SuperNTSC discs have to be mastered from a component (D1) tape. The faces were made from the same master tape as the definitive edition. The Definitive edition was mastered from a composite tape. The Definitive edition was manufactured way before anyone was using SuperNTSC for laserdiscs (1993). The only thing here, in #1, that is a "fact", is that the source has to be component. Everything else here, is stuff i read / dug up, and can not be verified 100%.

2) Using my SuperNTSC decoder, I didn't achieve any better result in viewing them and in my most recent comparison above, it appears on par with the FOX disc WRT cross color and jaggies. If it was SuperNTSC, it should be better.

That being said, yes, it is possible that they "screwed the pooch" as you say, and negated any benefit.