Episode 2 entirely in digital

Justin Chin · May 17th, 2002, 11:56 AM

Yeah, it's very exciting right now. You don't even need to do blue/green screen work. It's easier of you do, but hell, anything is possible.

The one thing that I miss, is reading about all the practical model and camera work that went into a shot. I read the Blade Runner and Star Wars Cinefex's over and over again. Plus the photographs were just so cool.

Unfortunately, now most of the time you have pictures of people looking at their computer screens.

The future does look great.

I've got some scripts that can only be done with a huge amount of digital work. I hope to start some work this winter.

More sitting in front of a computer for me...

Martin Munthe · May 17th, 2002, 12:13 PM

<<<-- they just put "weird" creatures in there just for the purpose of having
"wierd" creatures in the film....-->>>

Come on! It's Star Wars! Not The Unbearable Lightness Of Being. It's a roller coaster ride. You could critizise the first film for doing the same thing. If you don't like the Star Wars concept, that's fine. But don't expect deep emotional drama and real people.

Justin,

you wrote "Oh, Anakin is a brat, I guess that's character development."...

WARNING SPOILER!

Annakin Skywalker: -"They are animals. And I slaughtered them all like animals. Not just the men, but the women and the children."

I'm greatful I don't have those kinds of brats running around in my neighbourhood. Yikes! ;-)

Joe Redifer · May 17th, 2002, 01:15 PM

Yeah and I liked Natalie Portman's response to that comment. It's basically as if she said "That's nice, dear. Now give me a hug." She didn't seem to care at all. Wouldn't people with emotions be at least a bit bothered? Oh yeah I forgot, Lucas does not direct his actors so that they display emotion. The movie would have been much better if Lucas got someone else to direct it like he did with Empire Strikes Back.

MusarInteractive · May 17th, 2002, 02:04 PM

Hi Everyone,

I'm planning on viewing the movie again tonight at a different theater (35mm again) to see if I notice the same dark, contrasty image. Will inform everyone of my experience.

Tim

Adam Lawrence · May 17th, 2002, 02:38 PM

i agree it is Starwars for the purpose of various creatures at random times..

yet in the old movies the creatures had organic sense, a reason to be, plus a a story behind the face... it seemed like they threw characters in just becuase they could so easily due to technology. And in my opinion, the old movies
had good acting! and emotion.. I agree that Anakin had a good sense of
evilness to him and was well demonstrated. The Starwars story is so great
it seems to override the small flaws in the new movies...

I was also pleased to see that C3PO was the source of comic relief as in the old movies, other than Jar Jar. I loved the set design too, I think the yin tends to out balance the yang in this one.

The good stuff is just too good to forget, unlike the bad.

Casey Visco · May 17th, 2002, 02:50 PM

Justin...if you haven't yet, check out the current Cinefex issue with the Lord of the Rings peice...TONS of model/miniatures work in that one...great article...and a good mix of practical and CG visual effects...as opposed to just the shots of the guys at their computers ;)

Chris Hurd · May 17th, 2002, 05:11 PM

I have that issue as well, Casey... the LOTR piece is amazing, but the articles detailing The Time Machine and Black Hawk Down are just as fascinating. Can't wait to see the forthcoming Cinefex coverage of Ep2.

Shawn McBee · May 17th, 2002, 08:13 PM

SPOILERS!!!

I've always said that no good would come of Jar Jar's continued existence, and look what happened, he single-handedly created the Empire. I bet in Episode three the Emperor makes Jar Jar his bitch.

-Shawn

Joe Redifer · May 17th, 2002, 11:29 PM

Redone said:

"I loved the set design too"

What sets? I think 98% of the sets were created in the computer in post.

Martin Munthe · May 18th, 2002, 10:23 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Joe Redifer : Redone said:

"I loved the set design too"

What sets? I think 98% of the sets were created in the computer in post. -->>>

Does the fact that they are build in a virtual environment make it less set design?

The debate on Episode II around the we is highly amusing. These are some of the most common opinions:

The film is to dark - The film is to bright
The design stinks - The design is great
The acting is bad - The acting is great
The FX sucks - The FX is ground breaking
The is no heart and soul in the film - At last Lucas brought some heart and soul back
The music is boring - The music is exciting
...and so on...

The only one that can tell us the quality of Star wars is the person it was made for - a twelve year old boy or girl that visits the Star Wars universe for the first time (or perhaps second). And so far they seem to like it.

I'm happy HD looks great. I love working in digital and Episode II was a major proof for me that HD holds up on the big screen.

MusarInteractive · May 18th, 2002, 02:47 PM

My concern when I saw it opening day was that the whole thing seemed too dark and contrasty. Well, I watched the movie for the second time last night, this time at a different theater to eliminate the possibility of a projector shortcoming. I haven't watched it in a theater equipped with digital projection so I can't formulate any observation which includes *that* evidence, but having seen it in two different theaters in 35mm format, I've concluded that the dark quality is intentional. Maybe it's to signify the encroaching shadow of the dark side. But at any rate, I walked away last night relieved since I initially feared that this darkness was a shortcoming of the HD video format and I really want digital to win the game... soon.

That the movie as released in 35mm is darker than the video material available for download from the Star Wars site is evident to anyone comparing the two formats scene-by-scene. If you look at the "Forbidden Love" trailer from the website you'll see what I'm talking about. Notice the scene in which Anakin and Padme pull up in a rickshaw-type transport on Tatooine. In the QuickTime trailer the Tatooine sand is really light sand in color. In the theater the sand is darker, bordering on brown rather than tan. Notice also the field scene in which Anakin and Padme are in front of some Niagra-type falls. In the QuickTime trailer, the field and sky, though probably modified a little to make Naboo surreal, are fairly light. In the theater, this scene seems almost like twilight.

In short though, I'm content that this is not a digital fault. And besides, maybe George Lucas was showing off the low-light capabilities of digital cinema.

Adam Lawrence · May 18th, 2002, 04:34 PM

well put martin_m....

i agree that the little guys maybe have the best input on this one.. it seems like were giving it to much technicall insight. which
may be too opinionated for a Starwars type of movie. ...

It could may be just as simple as arguing which Jedi is the best.
(like when we were young)

Set design in my opinion, can be great even if sketched onto a
napkin at a resturant...just like a car design would be good, if
even it wasnt made into a real car.

but agree i would have been more impressed if it some of the sets where ACTUALLY built. rather than CGI, but thats technology.

gvancott · May 18th, 2002, 05:15 PM

We saw it today with digital projection. My son has now seen both and he thought the both the sound and picture were considerably better today than in the 35mm version. The picture was rock steady throughout.

The only scene where I really wondered if film would have been better was the backlit wedding at the end. It seemed too contrasty with too little definition in the darker areas of the picture.

Dean Bull · May 18th, 2002, 07:51 PM

amazingly enough, I went to my small home town theater and they HAD 2 screens showing Episode 2 in digital projection. How they got the cash to foot the bill for 2 150,000 dollar projectors is a mystery to me, but I was super excited since I was expecting to see it on film. DLP is a new format plain and simple. It looks different than film, but is it worse? I don't believe so. Video has finally become an acceptable source for motion pictures, and the technology will only get better. I can't really say why I am so excited by the technology, but I think it has something to do with the fact that we are on the forefront of some big changes in the medium. I can't wait to see what happens next.

May 18th, 2002, 09:24 PM

MusarInteractive: " That the movie as released in 35mm is darker than the video material available for download from the Star Wars site is evident to anyone comparing the two formats scene-by-scene."

I think the brightness on your computer monitor is turned up way too high. I too can make the images overly bright, or dim them down to black, if i so desired.

Either that, or the theaters that you were viewing at were using old xenon lamps which weren't meeting the 16f/l standard. This is an issue with DLP as well due to the fact that they use the same light source (Only dlp requies much higher wattages to light a smaller screen).

gvancott: How could the sound be better in the DLP presentation than 35mm? They use the same digital formats.

May 17th, 2002, 11:56 AM	#46
Justin Chin Major Player Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Oakland, CA Posts: 227	Yeah, it's very exciting right now. You don't even need to do blue/green screen work. It's easier of you do, but hell, anything is possible. The one thing that I miss, is reading about all the practical model and camera work that went into a shot. I read the Blade Runner and Star Wars Cinefex's over and over again. Plus the photographs were just so cool. Unfortunately, now most of the time you have pictures of people looking at their computer screens. The future does look great. I've got some scripts that can only be done with a huge amount of digital work. I hope to start some work this winter. More sitting in front of a computer for me... __________________ justin www.monsterrocket.com Filmmaker \| Cinematographer

May 17th, 2002, 12:13 PM	#47
Martin Munthe Major Player Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 331	<<<-- they just put "weird" creatures in there just for the purpose of having "wierd" creatures in the film....-->>> Come on! It's Star Wars! Not The Unbearable Lightness Of Being. It's a roller coaster ride. You could critizise the first film for doing the same thing. If you don't like the Star Wars concept, that's fine. But don't expect deep emotional drama and real people. Justin, you wrote "Oh, Anakin is a brat, I guess that's character development."... WARNING SPOILER! Annakin Skywalker: -"They are animals. And I slaughtered them all like animals. Not just the men, but the women and the children." I'm greatful I don't have those kinds of brats running around in my neighbourhood. Yikes! ;-) __________________ Martin Munthe VFX Supervisor/DP/Director

May 17th, 2002, 02:04 PM	#49
MusarInteractive New Boot Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Franconia NH 03580 USA Posts: 19	Ep II Theater Experience Hi Everyone, I'm planning on viewing the movie again tonight at a different theater (35mm again) to see if I notice the same dark, contrasty image. Will inform everyone of my experience. Tim

May 17th, 2002, 02:38 PM	#50
Adam Lawrence _redone_ Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 224	i agree it is Starwars for the purpose of various creatures at random times.. yet in the old movies the creatures had organic sense, a reason to be, plus a a story behind the face... it seemed like they threw characters in just becuase they could so easily due to technology. And in my opinion, the old movies had good acting! and emotion.. I agree that Anakin had a good sense of evilness to him and was well demonstrated. The Starwars story is so great it seems to override the small flaws in the new movies... I was also pleased to see that C3PO was the source of comic relief as in the old movies, other than Jar Jar. I loved the set design too, I think the yin tends to out balance the yang in this one. The good stuff is just too good to forget, unlike the bad. __________________ Adam Lawrence eatdrink Media Las Vegas NV www.eatdrinkmedia.com

May 17th, 2002, 02:50 PM	#51
Casey Visco Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 280	Justin...if you haven't yet, check out the current Cinefex issue with the Lord of the Rings peice...TONS of model/miniatures work in that one...great article...and a good mix of practical and CG visual effects...as opposed to just the shots of the guys at their computers ;) __________________ Casey Visco Glidecam Industries, Inc.

May 17th, 2002, 01:15 PM	#48
Joe Redifer Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 290	Yeah and I liked Natalie Portman's response to that comment. It's basically as if she said "That's nice, dear. Now give me a hug." She didn't seem to care at all. Wouldn't people with emotions be at least a bit bothered? Oh yeah I forgot, Lucas does not direct his actors so that they display emotion. The movie would have been much better if Lucas got someone else to direct it like he did with Empire Strikes Back.

May 17th, 2002, 05:11 PM	#52
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	I have that issue as well, Casey... the LOTR piece is amazing, but the articles detailing The Time Machine and Black Hawk Down are just as fascinating. Can't wait to see the forthcoming Cinefex coverage of Ep2. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

May 17th, 2002, 08:13 PM	#53
Shawn McBee Regular Crew Join Date: May 2002 Location: Sarasota, FL Posts: 69	Jar Jar's Role SPOILERS!!! I've always said that no good would come of Jar Jar's continued existence, and look what happened, he single-handedly created the Empire. I bet in Episode three the Emperor makes Jar Jar his bitch. -Shawn __________________ "Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great." -Mark Twain

May 17th, 2002, 11:29 PM	#54
Joe Redifer Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 290	Redone said: "I loved the set design too" What sets? I think 98% of the sets were created in the computer in post.

May 18th, 2002, 10:23 AM	#55
Martin Munthe Major Player Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 331	<<<-- Originally posted by Joe Redifer : Redone said: "I loved the set design too" What sets? I think 98% of the sets were created in the computer in post. -->>> Does the fact that they are build in a virtual environment make it less set design? The debate on Episode II around the we is highly amusing. These are some of the most common opinions: The film is to dark - The film is to bright The design stinks - The design is great The acting is bad - The acting is great The FX sucks - The FX is ground breaking The is no heart and soul in the film - At last Lucas brought some heart and soul back The music is boring - The music is exciting ...and so on... The only one that can tell us the quality of Star wars is the person it was made for - a twelve year old boy or girl that visits the Star Wars universe for the first time (or perhaps second). And so far they seem to like it. I'm happy HD looks great. I love working in digital and Episode II was a major proof for me that HD holds up on the big screen. __________________ Martin Munthe VFX Supervisor/DP/Director

May 18th, 2002, 02:47 PM	#56
MusarInteractive New Boot Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Franconia NH 03580 USA Posts: 19	Ep II Theater Experience My concern when I saw it opening day was that the whole thing seemed too dark and contrasty. Well, I watched the movie for the second time last night, this time at a different theater to eliminate the possibility of a projector shortcoming. I haven't watched it in a theater equipped with digital projection so I can't formulate any observation which includes that evidence, but having seen it in two different theaters in 35mm format, I've concluded that the dark quality is intentional. Maybe it's to signify the encroaching shadow of the dark side. But at any rate, I walked away last night relieved since I initially feared that this darkness was a shortcoming of the HD video format and I really want digital to win the game... soon. That the movie as released in 35mm is darker than the video material available for download from the Star Wars site is evident to anyone comparing the two formats scene-by-scene. If you look at the "Forbidden Love" trailer from the website you'll see what I'm talking about. Notice the scene in which Anakin and Padme pull up in a rickshaw-type transport on Tatooine. In the QuickTime trailer the Tatooine sand is really light sand in color. In the theater the sand is darker, bordering on brown rather than tan. Notice also the field scene in which Anakin and Padme are in front of some Niagra-type falls. In the QuickTime trailer, the field and sky, though probably modified a little to make Naboo surreal, are fairly light. In the theater, this scene seems almost like twilight. In short though, I'm content that this is not a digital fault. And besides, maybe George Lucas was showing off the low-light capabilities of digital cinema.

May 18th, 2002, 04:34 PM	#57
Adam Lawrence _redone_ Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 224	well put martin_m.... i agree that the little guys maybe have the best input on this one.. it seems like were giving it to much technicall insight. which may be too opinionated for a Starwars type of movie. ... It could may be just as simple as arguing which Jedi is the best. (like when we were young) Set design in my opinion, can be great even if sketched onto a napkin at a resturant...just like a car design would be good, if even it wasnt made into a real car. but agree i would have been more impressed if it some of the sets where ACTUALLY built. rather than CGI, but thats technology. __________________ Adam Lawrence eatdrink Media Las Vegas NV www.eatdrinkmedia.com

May 18th, 2002, 05:15 PM	#58
gvancott Registration Incomplete -- contact Admin. Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 4	We saw it today with digital projection. My son has now seen both and he thought the both the sound and picture were considerably better today than in the 35mm version. The picture was rock steady throughout. The only scene where I really wondered if film would have been better was the backlit wedding at the end. It seemed too contrasty with too little definition in the darker areas of the picture.

May 18th, 2002, 07:51 PM	#59
Dean Bull Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 106	amazingly enough, I went to my small home town theater and they HAD 2 screens showing Episode 2 in digital projection. How they got the cash to foot the bill for 2 150,000 dollar projectors is a mystery to me, but I was super excited since I was expecting to see it on film. DLP is a new format plain and simple. It looks different than film, but is it worse? I don't believe so. Video has finally become an acceptable source for motion pictures, and the technology will only get better. I can't really say why I am so excited by the technology, but I think it has something to do with the fact that we are on the forefront of some big changes in the medium. I can't wait to see what happens next.

May 18th, 2002, 09:24 PM	#60
Adam Wilbert Posts: n/a	MusarInteractive: " That the movie as released in 35mm is darker than the video material available for download from the Star Wars site is evident to anyone comparing the two formats scene-by-scene." I think the brightness on your computer monitor is turned up way too high. I too can make the images overly bright, or dim them down to black, if i so desired. Either that, or the theaters that you were viewing at were using old xenon lamps which weren't meeting the 16f/l standard. This is an issue with DLP as well due to the fact that they use the same light source (Only dlp requies much higher wattages to light a smaller screen). gvancott: How could the sound be better in the DLP presentation than 35mm? They use the same digital formats.