Slashdot Mirror


Macs Do Star Wars Dirty Work

bfl writes "The BBC is running a story about Lowry Digital Images and how they used 600 dual G5s and 400 TB of storage space to clean the dirt off of the old Star Wars reels, and upgrade the resolution to get them ready for their DVD release."

219 comments

  1. CmdrTaco Does Slashdot Dupe Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    1. Re:CmdrTaco Does Slashdot Dupe Work by magarity · · Score: 5, Funny

      Dude, that old article about the 378TB is so Sept 12. Now it's 400TB. Ergo: new article.

    2. Re:CmdrTaco Does Slashdot Dupe Work by TAGmclaren · · Score: 2, Funny

      man, when it comes to Apple, too much is never enough ;)

      --
      Iran has endorsed
    3. Re:CmdrTaco Does Slashdot Dupe Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, it's a conversion rate thing. 378TB American = 400TB UK.

    4. Re:CmdrTaco Does Slashdot Dupe Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this sarcasm?

    5. Re:CmdrTaco Does Slashdot Dupe Work by justforaday · · Score: 1

      Is this sarcasm?

      Of course not...Hence the informative moderation...

      --
      I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
    6. Re:CmdrTaco Does Slashdot Dupe Work by Jeff321 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, if you're going to dupe post at least make it something useful :)

    7. Re:CmdrTaco Does Slashdot Dupe Work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuckin' tibibytes.

    8. Re:CmdrTaco Does Slashdot Dupe Work by Randy+Wang · · Score: 1

      Less is more; hell, more is more!

      --
      --- Egads, I glow in the dark!
  2. Movie dirt by 2.7182 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Movie dirt is a special kind of "noise" in images, from a statistical point of view. Thus special filters can be applied.

    1. Re:Movie dirt by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      "noisey" is how the mac users who love Star Wars feel right now I bet! ;)

    2. Re:Movie dirt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oooo gaussian noise.....get out the ECCs!!!!

    3. Re:Movie dirt by bman08 · · Score: 2, Funny

      If only they could have made the sailbarge scene dirtier....mmmmmmm....

    4. Re:Movie dirt by tonywong · · Score: 3, Funny

      Thank god that the dirt particles removed from the original prints showed Greedo firing first.

      Totally clears Han as being a bad guy.

    5. Re:Movie dirt by tonywong · · Score: 1

      erm, showing.

      Of course the preview button was hit first. Why do you ask?

  3. This story has been around a while.. by jcr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Apple has it on their own web site here.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:This story has been around a while.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surprisingly effective noise reduction.

    2. Re:This story has been around a while.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      The real story is (from the Apple article): "...we need access to memory, because these frames are all computed while they're in RAM. Mac OS X gives us the ability to use virtual memory if necessary to swap around."

      Wow, what amazing technology!

  4. Thats like, how many dvds now ? by ThomasFlip · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is it me or does it seem like they this cash cow is never going to run out.

    --
    If the dollar is an "I owe you nothing", then the Euro is a "Who owes you nothing." - Doug Casey
    1. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by lxt · · Score: 2, Informative

      That would be the FIRST time the Trilogy has been released legally on DVD. RTFA!

    2. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by GerbilSocks · · Score: 5, Insightful
      There's only a finite number of old films. Of those old films, most are either shoddy or have been long forgotten. Only a very small number of movies are beloved enough that studios are willing to cost out the restoration work.

      Most films shot now are digitized, or shot digitally in the first place.

    3. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by magarity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Only a very small number of movies are beloved enough that studios are willing to cost out the restoration work.

      A bulk of this cost is the initial hardware outlay and creating software to do the work. Once these 600 Macs are done with SW IV-VI, it should be fairly easy and cost effective to crank plenty of other old movies through.

    4. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by TekkaDon · · Score: 1

      "Most films shot now are digitized, or shot digitally in the first place."

      Actually, digital shots are still uncommon, Attack of the Clones being the first to be the first live feature film ever to be entirely shot digitally (I said live, which means without counting 3D animation movies, which obviously are all 100% digital as well).

      Digitalization is an entirely different issue and also pretty obvious: any film in DVD has been digitized, period. However, the level of what Lowry has done with Star Wars is unheard of. Or better said, unseen :-)

      I wish the studios could get all the classical movies in the vaults under a similar process, to preserve them intact, digitally, forever. Of course, the restorations should be performed as you restore a painting, studying the period, the medium and the history of the film to get as closer as the original first print as possible.

      And then, start releasing them in Blu-ray format. I have a Marantz high definition projector with Minolta lens that is begging for a restored copy of The Godfather, Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Seven Samurais, Hidden Fortress and of course, Beyond the Valley of the Ultravixens (and two zillion other jewels :-)

    5. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by EtherAlchemist · · Score: 4, Interesting


      Most films shot now are digitized, or shot digitally in the first place.

      Most films are not shot digitally, very very few films are shot digitally. Most films are still shot on film.

      I wouldn't say older films are forgotten, not at all. Almost all of the studios (the big ones at least) started sending the old, original reels to the massive underground storage facility that I believe is run by Iron Mountain. Here they are kept in controlled temps and dust free.

      --
      R(k)
    6. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by toddestan · · Score: 1

      There's only a finite number of old films. Of those old films, most are either shoddy or have been long forgotten. Only a very small number of movies are beloved enough that studios are willing to cost out the restoration work.

      True, but as Lucas has demonstrated, you can take the same 3 films and rerelease them as many times as you want. So really, the cash cow will never run out.

    7. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by bob+beta · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In other words, since those 600 Macs will have been paid for, further use of them will be free. Even though there were obviously 600 paid employees sitting in front of them.

      Hmmm.

    8. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by carpe_noctem · · Score: 1

      There's only a finite number of old films

      That's your first mistaken assumption. Haven't you learned anything from Tupac? Old tapes never die... they just keep getting "remastered".

      --
      "Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
    9. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by noewun · · Score: 0
      Actually, digital shots are still uncommon, Attack of the Clones being the first to be the first live feature film ever to be entirely shot digitally (I said live, which means without counting 3D animation movies, which obviously are all 100% digital as well).

      AoTC was not shot digitally. It was shot on 35mm film, as were all the other Star Wars films, and just about any other film you can think of. Digitial still has a ways to go before it catched up with film. It's getting getter - I've seen some stuff shot on hi def which looks okay - but it ain't there yet.

      --
      I am a believer of momentum and curves.
    10. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by platipusrc · · Score: 1

      Yup, yup, just like in the picture in the article. You can tell where they squeeze the people up in between the computers on the racks. It's the most efficient people storage I've seen!

      Or maybe I'm mistaken and it was a cluster of G5's??? nah that's not possible!

      --
      And the muscular cyborg German dudes dance with sexy French Canadians
    11. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

      Most films shot now are digitized, or shot digitally in the first place.

      Most film is shot on film, then scanned, edited, and output back onto film. The reason is that it is very hard to shift a lot of data off the sensor in real time. The best digital cameras can move 4MP at 8FPS, that's not enough for movie making, either in speed or resolution.

      Some films are shot entirely digitally, like Collateral, and it's *obvious* in the poor quality of the low-light scenes. There's a long way to go before the quality of an all-digital workflow can match a film-digital hybrid.

    12. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1

      I know that Robert Rodrigues uses digital, and I thought Spy Kids predated AOTC.

    13. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by Teddeh · · Score: 1, Informative

      "AoTC was not shot digitally. It was shot on 35mm film,"

      Really?

    14. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by sahonen · · Score: 1

      Actually, there are cameras that can move 1080i HDTV resolution onto tape at 60 fps. It's not *quite* theater res, but if you double the resolution and halve the frame rate, you've got it.

      --
      Make me a friend and I'll mod you up
    15. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by TekkaDon · · Score: 1

      Please do your homework.

      AoTC WAS shot digitally, as has been the last of the trilogy. Sony and Lucasfilm have invested a ton of money on making digital film happening and, guess what, they have achieved it, as demostrated by the movies awesome quality.

      Not only they have matched film properties, but also surpassed them in many departments (and I am not even talking about convenience and cost).

    16. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by secretsquirel · · Score: 1

      Well whoopty do, they've still sold the same movies in multiple different formats for the last 30 years. Great, all 3 have never been in the same DVD box set before, they're still the same F&@%!#& movies, I promise you, (*spoiler warning*!) Vader is still Luke's father and Leia still looks hot in the slave girl outfit.

    17. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by mikethefreak · · Score: 1

      Awesome quality? Other than a few all live-action scenes, I found the quality to be lacking. Everything seemed sort of dull and cartoonish. I watched it in DLP so it's not like there was a transfer to film either.

    18. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by TekkaDon · · Score: 1

      The quality is awesome, no matter the look Lucas went for, which is an entirely different subject from the features and quality of the 24P format.

    19. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by noewun · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I had read that he decided to use 35mm instead, but I guess either my source was wrong or he changed his mind again. Does explain why the print I sa was so washed out. I thought it was just a bad print.

      --
      I am a believer of momentum and curves.
    20. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely you realize that's still TWICE the data?

    21. Re:Thats like, how many dvds now ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it doesn't explain anything at all. If it's true that it looked washed out, it was a bad print or a poor projection job.

      The fact is that there's NO apparent difference between the digital 24P developed by Sony and Lucas and chemical film photography. Not one that neither you nor I can be able to discern by looking at a projection. The ranges are similar, with the digital process even surpassing some aspects of the traditional film and allowing to do things that are way more complex to achieve (if possible) with traditional film.

      Trying to state the contrary is just like people trying to make a difference between a traditional SLR camera and a current digital SLR camera. There were differences in the past, but not now. I make my living as a professional photographer and neither I nor my colleagues are able to see the difference on screen or paper (I am talking about color photography using regular reproduction methods; of course a silver gelatin b&w photo will be completely different, but that's a question of texture and finishing of the art).

  5. 180,000 frames by helfen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    just imagine:
    they have 180 000 frames
    1 frame = 70 MB
    use your calc folks ;)

    1. Re:180,000 frames by teamhasnoi · · Score: 1

      How do they fit it all on a DVD?

    2. Re:180,000 frames by trompete · · Score: 1

      Outstanding compression

    3. Re:180,000 frames by tmbg37 · · Score: 1

      Actually, that only comes out to 12.6 terabytes:

      180,000 frames * 70 MB = 12,600,000 MB = 12,600 GB = 12.6 TB

      --
      This comment was thought up very late at night and does not necessarily reflect my views at a more reasonable hour.
    4. Re:180,000 frames by l3v1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      To the guys with how-does-it-fit-on-a-DVD: the resolution they work with is the scanning res needed to process the cleaning on high quality. The size is the uncompressed size of th scanned frames. When putting on a DVD the resolution is highly reduced and compressed into mpeg2.

      Well, and that is not what's usually the biggest size. I participated in a project in which we cleaned up a pretty much damaged color movie from the 1950s. It was about 130000 frames, each frame was scanned into ~2K files (w/ 3 channels, 10 bit log density / channel - this res was enough for this movie, but usually higher scanning res is required). If you add that up, multiply it by a few times for storage of during-the-work duplicates for checking, quick back stepping, etc. and you end up with lotsa-lotsa hard drives.

      Then calc up how much space you would need to process all that stuff on e.g. 4 or 6K res.

      --
      I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    5. Re:180,000 frames by helfen · · Score: 2, Informative

      but remember that 1GB isn't 1000 MB (but 1024MB), nevertheless it isn't 400 TB.

    6. Re:180,000 frames by JayAndSilentBob · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are also multiple high quality audio channels.

      --


      Love,
      Jay and Silent Bob
    7. Re:180,000 frames by afd8856 · · Score: 1

      All that extras are tons of scene never released before. It will make for the first real competition Young and Restless had in decades, for the lenghtiest soup aaaa... I mean space opera.

      --
      I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
    8. Re:180,000 frames by lcsjk · · Score: 3, Funny

      How do you make it fit? First you convert the analog to digital "1"s and "o"s. Then you take the "1"s and lay them parallel starting from the inside of the disk. Then you put the "o"s down nearer the outside of the disk where there is more room. Any more questions?

    9. Re:180,000 frames by Donny+Smith · · Score: 1

      >there are also multiple high quality audio channels.

      It's not like they have to clean the audio. Besides, size of audio data is usually much smaller than size of video data.

    10. Re:180,000 frames by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What movie are you speaking of?

    11. Re:180,000 frames by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Does that mean there is a super-high resolution version of that pool scene from Fast Time at Ridgemont High out there somewhere?

    12. Re:180,000 frames by T'hain+Esh+Kelch · · Score: 0

      Would that be US or canadian MB's?

    13. Re:180,000 frames by suwain_2 · · Score: 3, Funny

      The 1's fit together nicely, but this raises an even better question.

      Why do we still use 'big' characters, like 1's and 0s? Why not use a . and a , for example. These would take up a lot less space than 0's and 1's would.

      Illustration: 10 1's:
      1111111111

      10 .'s: ..........

      You can probably get about 5 .'s to one 1.

      --
      ________________________________________________
      suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    14. Re:180,000 frames by Durandal64 · · Score: 1

      MPEG-2 is hardly what I'd call "outstanding" compression.

    15. Re:180,000 frames by JayAndSilentBob · · Score: 1

      They do major cleaning restoration and enhancement to the audio! Do you really think they recorded A New Hope in Dolby 5.1 in 1978? They had to do major work on the soundtrack when they enhanced the film for DVD.

      --


      Love,
      Jay and Silent Bob
  6. The MACS did it! by nebenfun · · Score: 5, Funny

    The MACS made Greedo shoot first!

    1. Re:The MACS did it! by Dirtside · · Score: 4, Funny
      The MACS made Greedo shoot first!
      Don't laugh. Rumor has it that the Mac responsible for doing the "Greedo shoots first" changes later became clinically depressed, turned to pills and booze, and finally committed suicide.

      Lucas, you maniac! When will this abuse of innocent computers end?!

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    2. Re:The MACS did it! by FlopEJoe · · Score: 2, Funny
      "The MACS made Greedo shoot first!"

      I see a new Linux commercial!

    3. Re:The MACS did it! by macshome · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean LINUX? Or perhaps WINDOWS?

      I for one didn't know that a Media Access Controller could restore anything. Now a Macintosh, or Mac, that I can see...

  7. dupe by wikinerd · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I wonder whether it would be too difficult to script a dupe checker with google's help.

    1. Re:dupe by Lispy · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      That would mean touching the Slashcode and I guess we will see a few more DVD releases of Starwars before there will be a "Slashdot Special Edition" that also renders fine in Firefox.

    2. Re:dupe by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 1

      How about one that renders properly in Mozilla 1.7.x?

    3. Re:dupe by wikinerd · · Score: 0, Troll

      My favourite browser Konqueror renders Slashdot correctly, proving one more time the superior rendering capabilities of KHTML and its technical dominance over IE and Gecko.

    4. Re:dupe by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      Firefox and Mozilla use the EXACT SAME rendering engine, it's called gecko.

      If you use Firefox, Thunderbird, and Mozilla, you can see how the same exact bugs are oftne present in all three. Firefox is just Mozilla rendering with a different 'shell', Thunderbird is just Mozilla mail with a similarly-stripped 'shell'.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  8. OH by FrivolousPig · · Score: 1, Funny

    I CANT WAIT! for the super extended hyperspace collectors addition where they replace Han with a pink bunny named Lulu Astro-whiskers and replace all the blasters with walkie-talkies!!!

    --
    ~ All comments automatically moderated -1 since 2004 ~
    1. Re:OH by flyingheath · · Score: 1

      You will have to wait for the Mel Brook's version for that!

  9. movie dirt by mothis2 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    While it is true that filters can be applied, why bother when you can just keep them clean instead?

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent - Isaac Asimov
  10. Don't forget the "Jedi Clause." by sakusha · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Most people don't realize, much of the primary CG work done on the Star Wars films are done on Macs. But ILM signed contracts with SGI which prohibits them from acknowledging the contribution of any system other than SGI. Inside ILM, this contractual obligation is known as "the Jedi Clause." So the contribution of Macs and Mac users to these films go largely unrecognized.

    1. Re:Don't forget the "Jedi Clause." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have worked on vector processors in the past. I am certain that the altivec engine is probably what made ILM choose apple. I wonder if the Apple C/C++ compiler is able to vectorize code or if applications have to use pre-built libraries or even assembly language.

    2. Re:Don't forget the "Jedi Clause." by BitwizeGHC · · Score: 1

      IIRC Apple introduced extensions into GCC which allow you to vectorize C code.

      --
      N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
    3. Re:Don't forget the "Jedi Clause." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've read several articles about ILM supposedly replacing their Windows and SGI IRIX workstations with GNU/Linux systems.

      So obviously that contract didn't prevent them from announcing their use of GNU/Linux on x86 workstations.

      Some related articles:
      http://www.linuxjournal.com/modules.php ?op=modload &name=NS-lj-issues/issue99&file=6011s1
      http://www .zdnet.com.au/news/business/0,39023166,2 0266843,00.htm
      http://preview.millimeter.com/mag/ video_linux_holl ywood/

    4. Re:Don't forget the "Jedi Clause." by SideshowBob · · Score: 4, Informative

      You have all three: -faltivec turns on vector optimizations in Apple's GCC. Also there are the vImage and vecLib frameworks (contained under the Accelerate.framework umbrella) for a set of altivec optimized library routines. Finally there is -mabi=altivec in gcc to turn on support for vector keywords and altivec asm (this switch is implied when -faltivec is given)

    5. Re:Don't forget the "Jedi Clause." by malducin · · Score: 1

      Actually most of the work on the the Star Wars prequels were done on SGIs and Linux, though there was some work done on Macs. Actually most of the work done by ILM was SGI/Linux. The Art and Matte depts. do use Macs heavily. But lots of commercial (like Softimage and back then PRMan) and their propietary software don't run on Macs anyway.

      The Rebel Unit was known as the Mac Rbel Unit, but they have mostly switched to PCs (for example the Rebel Unit worked on the R2 flying sequence in Ep. 2), dropping the Mac part of the name. While they did have something like the SGI clause it was unofficial and it wasn't exactly unknown they were using Macs.

      Actually the story is a bit different. In the late 80s ILM started switching from specialized and propietary hardware (like the Pixar Computer) to workstations and adopted SGI. Curiously that's around the time John Knoll and his brother created Photoshop. Anyway since they invested heavily on SGI and were a poster child for CG, Lucas and SGI enetered into coopeation agreements, called the JEDI agreements, for Joint Environment for Digital Imaging. Basicly ILM would get early access to SGI hardware (and discounts) while providing feedback and allow SGI to promote the use of the gear at ILM. They had 4 such agreements, the JEDI IV recently finished,don't know if they extended it. There is still quite a bit of use of SGIs at ILM.

      Macs were adopted more informally at ILM in the beginning, to do paint fixups, like on The Abyss and on matte painting, thie first with diogital work, the matte painting at the end of Die Hard 2. Dennis Muren himself took a sabatical back then to learn the new fangled CG technology using a Mac. While they eventually became an important part of the facility, the bulk was still done on SGIs.

      Most of the work on Ep. 1 was still done on SGIs although the switch was starting to Linux. By the time EP 2. was in production the Linux switchover on x86 was in full swing, from the renderfarm to the artists workstations. Many TDs, animators and compositors worked on Linux machine for the films. Actually many artists had 2 machines on their desks, their Linux PC along with an SGI (O2s if I remember right).

  11. Overheard at a Lucas meeting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Hey, you know what would be cool?"
    "What's that?"
    "These G5s are pretty cool...we should make a beowulf cluster of them!"
    "Well, we're obscenely rich, so..."
    "Yipee!"

  12. I wonder if they used Film Gimp/Cinepaint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    ILM used and contribute code to Film Gimp/Cinepaint.
    ILM contribute code as a plug-in (OpenEXR). It would be interesting to know if Lowry Digital Images used Film Gimp/Cinepaint including the ILM developed OpenEXR plug-in in cleaning Star Wars.

    1. Re:I wonder if they used Film Gimp/Cinepaint by yrch93 · · Score: 0

      Thanks to plug-in developers Red Giant software, Adobe After Effects supports OpenEXR for free: http://thecarpark.net/press_elin.htm

  13. Explains generation gap? by Hao+Wu · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This may be why Star Wars was so popular when if first came out, but when little kids and others watched it many years later in re-release or on video they were somewhat less impressed by the lesser quality film they were watching.

    Or... "Gee it was more fun the first time when I was 10!" Well, that's because it actually was a better-looking film.

    --
    I suggest you read Slashdot
    1. Re:Explains generation gap? by Detritus · · Score: 1

      I think that has happened with many films. If you saw a new print in 70mm as a kid. it is going to look much better than a current 35mm print with dirt, scratches, missing frames and faded color. Many of the old technicolor films still look great. Something about that process made it more stable.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  14. Re:Indiana Jones by BobWeiner · · Score: 1

    Actually, it talks about Star Wars. I didn't see any mention of Indiana Jones. But nonetheless, the computing horsepower used to clean the film is impressive.

    --
    The PC Weenies: 11 Years of Online Tech 'Too
  15. Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by Anubis333 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I love Apple and I love the spirit of competittion, I have been a Mac user much of my life. But why are Macs always treated like the retarded child of the computer industry? Look at the guy pictured in the article; he's smiling, he's so proud 'THEY DID IT!'

    It seems like any time the Mac platform does something that is remotely interesting people rejoice and it is plastered everywhere. Would this story be on the front page if PCs were used? I doubt it, even if they were running Linux.

    It's just like this weird thing where anything, even commonplace events get blown out of porportion just because Macs were used, as if the entire platform blows and it's amazing anything gets done, which is not the case. Maybe it is just the Mac user hubris as pictured above, but it comes across as this weird feeling I mentioned earlier. Touting that the macs 'can do!' things PCs do all the time makes them seem inferior and retarded, like they need the positive reinforcement.

    1. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean they don't!? *shock*

    2. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's unlikely that a PC can match the speed of a G5 if the altivec engine is used extensively. Apple provides the cheapest hardware for vector intensive tasks.

      By the way, I am a vector programmer.

    3. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by ptlis · · Score: 0

      I think it's more the fact that any organisation can afford to purchase that number of apple machines that gets peoples attention...

      --
      There's mischief and malarkies but no queers or yids or darkies within this bastard's carnival, this vicious cabaret.
    4. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by Epistax · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well you see back when Mac and PC were growing up (they are brothers) PC would always be studying his math and science for school. Mac played with dolls. We discouraged this, but he'd just started kicking and screaming if we gave him a math problem. One day he found art and worked feverishly on it. It was the day of the big art show and Mac had his favorite painting on display. Unfortunately on a whim PC had decided to draw a picture the night before and it was just as good as Mac's, despite all the effort.

      It's ok though, because Mac is special.

    5. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by nine-times · · Score: 1
      It seems like any time the Mac platform does something that is remotely interesting people rejoice and it is plastered everywhere. Would this story be on the front page if PCs were used? I doubt it, even if they were running Linux.

      First, I think the same thing does happen with Linux. -and in either case, I don't think it's merely "Yea! We did something that you can do on Windows!" It's a little more like, "To all those people who say our system of choice is somehow inferior, here's some evidence to the contrary. Here are people doing serious work, who need serious power, and after evaluating their choices, their well-informed decision was that the [Mac/Linux] platform was the best thing going, for what they needed anyway."

      Anyway, that special-effects houses for the major motion-picture industry favor Macintoshes is no small thing as far as bragging rights. In that way, it's also not, "Yea! We did something you mediocre you could do on Windows 5 years ago!" I mean, we're not talking about word-processing. We're talking about pretty innovative digital editing that you couldn't practically do 10 years ago. You're getting to the point when people are making who CG films on consumer desktop machines. That alone is impressive. That many people are choosing Apple's platform for this says something positive about Apple.

    6. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by ivano · · Score: 1
      it was on BBC's homepage. I don't think the BBC is some sort of Mac fan boy. I presume that this is just some impressive numbers and its done with Macs.

      Ciao

    7. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's part of a Macintosh marketing campaign, what do you expect?

    8. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by SideshowBob · · Score: 4, Informative

      Only people then invest their own personality in something refer to themselves as "literati"

      A computer is a tool. A mac just happens to be a good video tool because it was built that way. Calling someone illiterate because they chose a good tool for the job is just assinine.

      A really good vector unit, vectorizing compiler, vector libraries, and a host of system and application software make the Mac platform well suited for the task described in this article. Why people feel so threatened by this fact is beyond me. Linux is great at the things it was built to excel at, Windows (gasp!) does some things very well, too. BIG FUCKING DEAL.

      If you were a true computing enthusiast you would have one of each. I do.

    9. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by Otter · · Score: 3, Funny
      Would this story be on the front page if PCs were used? I doubt it, even if they were running Linux.

      You must be new here.

    10. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by forkazoo · · Score: 2, Funny

      What operating systems do you run on your VAX?

    11. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Would this story be on the front page if PCs were used? I doubt it, even if they were running Linux.

      Sorry, you are wrong. Linux got the front page several times when Digital Domain used it to render Titanic and several other movies. Granted, it did use Alphas, but IIRC, several PC/Linux based projects were given front page treatment here.

    12. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by Erik+Hollensbe · · Score: 1

      I agree with you that way too much stink is made about [fringe os] doing [something that any os can do].

      If anything, the advantage is that it's easy to point at to object to arguments that are based on superstition and not experience or fact.

      The downside is that while Mac OS X is a great UNIX workstation, you're not going to see any news source write, "Good god! I got my workstation up in an hour and a half and it works just as great or better than any other system!", or, "To install this program, I didn't have to configure 12 packages or hunt down a small army of rpm files! I just opened the disk image and copied the app to a location where I want to run it from!". "I can run photoshop, office, and KDE on it with no extra software!"

      That doesn't have any "sex appeal", but I'd argue these things are some of the most redeeming things about using a Mac.

    13. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Touting that the macs 'can do!' things PCs do all the time makes them seem inferior and retarded, like they need the positive reinforcement.

      No, it's not weird. Macs has been under attack from ignorant PC users since day 1. We are just showing that Macs can do heavy work too, and do it better and with style. Graphics isn't the only thing Macs excell at. Some scientific apps started their life as Mac only. LabVIEW is one of them. That point is lost on the "Mac is a toy" crowd. We still have some people believing they can't access the Internet from a Mac.

      The fact is in this case, the guy who created the algorithm for cleaning up and enhancing image frames acknowledge that Mac is better at this than PC. It's not just a matter of 'can do', but 'can do better'. That is the point. Of course, PC has its own strength, but PC crowd doesn't have to keep defending their platform since
      1. They own a vast marketshare,
      2. They have Redmond 800lb gorilla behind it,
      3. Most Mac users are not that ignorant about Windows since most of us are dual users. We just happen to think Mac is better.

    14. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by SideshowBob · · Score: 1

      Ehhh... I didn't mention VAX anywhere in my previous post, but if I had one I guess I'd run True64 on it (or whatever version of Digital Unix ran on that hardware)

      Are you offering to donate one to my collection? :-P

    15. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by piecewise · · Score: 1

      Yeah, software algorithms that reduce sh*t on a frame of a movie is total sex appeal.

      --
      The next comment I write will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!
    16. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      By the way, I am a vector programmer.

      I need to go to the store. Could you program a vector for me? =)

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    17. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by SideshowBob · · Score: 1

      If you would have actually read my fucking post you wouldn't be so confused. Here, let me quote the relevant part for you:

      ... the Mac platform well suited for the task described in this article. ... Linux is great at the things it was built to excel at, Windows (gasp!) does some things very well, too....

      If you were a true computing enthusiast you would have one of each. I do.


      Note I specifically mentioned three platforms (the 3 that generate 99.9999% of the advocacy flames on the internet) and mentioned that I have one of each.

      Clue for you, when someone enumerates 3 things, then says they have one of each, that means they have those 3 things, NOT something that was not enumerated.

      But as it happens, I have numerous other (less zealously advocated) machines but I didn't feel the need to enumerate them specifically in a response to a platform war thread.

      True64 - aka OSF/1 - aka Digital Unix - did in fact run on the VAX. I said if I had one I would run whichever version of that OS I could find for that hardware. Does my lack of interest in that particular hardware platform mean I'm somehow half-a-geek? Gimme a break. Or was it the fact that I used the most current name for that OS make what I said so fundamentally flawed that you felt the need to flame me a second time? Thanks!

    18. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      Yeesh, I put a smily face in the post. I was just ball busting for the sake of it, not to genuinely offend. Certainly, your post could be read as referring to only those platforms you mentioned. I won't argue that. But, being pedantic, you were unspecific, so I decided to make a broader reading of your post. When you wrote, "If you were a true computing enthusiast you would have one of each. I do," it seemed pretty clear that you were belittling the OP, and implying that he didn't count as a "true enthusiast" because he wasn't good enough. So, take a deep breath, and realise that I was just taking a round about means of pointing out to you that your own words may have come across more harshly than was warranted, and possibly more harshly than you intended.

      That said, you didn't specifically say that your statement was limited to the afformentioned platforms, so I reader could well take your topic to have been "operating platforms" since you mentioned several, rather than "the specific operating platforms of PC and Mac."

      Further, True64 was the 64 bit port. Running it on a VAX is a bit like running OS-X on an old 68k Mac. IMHO, they really do count as separate from their (related) predecessors. But, that it clearly a amtter of opinion and marketing...

      Anyhow, good luck with getting all defensive and reactionary because some guy responded to your post. I guess you just aren't happy with the size of your penis. It's okay. Mine is tiny, too, and I used to be very defensive. Relax. Being angry won't make it any bigger.

    19. Re:Macintosh = The Industries Retarded Son by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately on a whim PC had decided to draw a picture the night before and it was just as good as Mac's, despite all the effort.

      Unfortunately, on the way to the art show, the PC ran into the door face first.

  16. Re:Indiana Jones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    impressive.
    Most impressive, but you are not a jedi yet.

  17. If you haven't seen the LD-SE-DVD comparisons by tangent3 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Check them out on the previous slashdot articles for ESB and ANH. You can compare the improvements in the image quality. It's amazing how much improvement can be made and detail added in.

    1. Re:If you haven't seen the LD-SE-DVD comparisons by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      It's amazing how much improvement can be made and detail added in.

      You can't add detail using filters. You might be a able to approximate what data might have been under a blotch but it is still a guess. Even sharpness filters generally takeaway detail, look up edge enhancement - which is basically a sharpness filter that makes an image appear sharper when it actually takes away real detail.

    2. Re:If you haven't seen the LD-SE-DVD comparisons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't add detail using filters.

      Not with filters, but you can by gathering data from adjacent frames - which is precisely what they have done.

      Read this.

  18. Shot noise in optical systems by murderlegendre · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Can someone elaborate on how shot noise applies to optical systems, specifically, cinematography? Since the original source material is conventional 'analog' film, at what point is the noise introduced? How is it introduced? (Yes I realize that film is not a pure analog format; the resolution being limited by the grain size of the emulsion - but at the same time, it's not what we consider digital.)

    --
    There's a Starman, waiting in the sky / He'd like to come and meet us, but he hasn't got the time.
    1. Re:Shot noise in optical systems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is nothing new. Even without dirt, noise is present in film-sourced, HDTV-encoded content. Film grain is noise. It can be removed with a spatial-temporal filter like they use in the article. It is used in almost every XviD or similar file you can find on the net.

    2. Re:Shot noise in optical systems by badasscat · · Score: 5, Informative

      Can someone elaborate on how shot noise applies to optical systems, specifically, cinematography? Since the original source material is conventional 'analog' film, at what point is the noise introduced? How is it introduced?

      Well, it's all explained in the article. And you've got half the answer yourself. But I'll try to explain further...

      (Yes I realize that film is not a pure analog format; the resolution being limited by the grain size of the emulsion - but at the same time, it's not what we consider digital.)

      Film grain itself is a noise component. Film grains are nothing more than crystals sensitive to a particular light wavelength. In commonly used 35mm film stocks, there are three layers of emulsion - one red, one green, one blue. Think of the grains as "pixels", although they're somewhat randomly distributed, they're not all of a uniform size, and they're not all uniformly sensitive to light. The end result is that the minute differences between adjacent grains makes them easily discernible on a theatrical-size screen, and somewhat visible on a large TV set. They appear as noise.

      Optical effects also involve compositing several layers of film on top of each other. According to the article, the light saber scenes were the worst. I'd imagine at that time, shooting a light saber duel probably involved three layers of film; the master shot and one optical shot for each light saber. Obviously this triples your noise and also softens the image. It can also introduce color casts because the light is being altered through each layer of film.

      As films age, chemical reactions also cause color shifts in the grains. This can lead to even more noise.

      Films also get just plain dirty over time. The Star Wars negatives have been handled a lot, so they're probably dirtier than most. 35mm not being very big, when you blow it up onto a theater screen or even a TV set, a small layer of dust or tiny particles of dirt will add a lot of crud to the image.

      The software they used to clean up these films apparently works by comparing each frame of film to the frame before and the frame after, to see what's picture information and what's noise (random noise will be easy for a computer to pick out, because it will not match at all from one frame to the next). It should have no problem removing both film grain and dirt, as well as other types of noise.

      I'd imagine they must have manually isolated each individual edit in the film to reduce errors, but this wouldn't have been that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. There's probably only maybe a couple thousand cuts per film (assuming a high average of 5-10 cuts per minute), so it wouldn't take more than a couple days for one person to do this.

  19. Duplicate story!!! by Danathar · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Great job slashdot editors....Do you have alzheimers?

    http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/09/1 3/ 039220&tid=101

  20. So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your point?

  21. List of Movies restored by Lowry Digital by Danathar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Amazon has a list made up by Chuck Kahn of movies that have been cleaned up by Lowry.

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/listmania/l is t-browse/-/1X2DZ42QS8OVB/103-1368633-4717431

    I've picked up THX1138, Once upon a time in the west, North by Northwest, The Ghoul and of course Star Wars.

    The results are INCREDIBLE. Except for some obvious dubbing with sound, Once upon a time in the west looks like it was filmed yesterday. So does THX1138!

    I've tried finding the Lowry Digital Web site. But INCREDIBLY it seems like they don't have one! Seems strange. You would think they would have a web site telling people the films they have done so people might go out and buy them.

    If somebody knows it....PLEASE post it!

    1. Re:List of Movies restored by Lowry Digital by smallpaul · · Score: 4, Informative

      They really do not have a website. I know someone who works there and he says that they don't bother to market because they are overwhelmed with business.

    2. Re:List of Movies restored by Lowry Digital by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've tried finding the Lowry Digital Web site. But INCREDIBLY it seems like they don't have one!

      "lowrydigital.com" is registered - they just have no website at the address.

      I'd have thought that a high-end digital restoration lab - that has worked on some of the most famous movies of all time - would not have a problem finding customers. I'm sure that if you're in the business you know who they are and know how to get in touch with them.

    3. Re:List of Movies restored by Lowry Digital by Danathar · · Score: 1

      I can imagine they would be. It's just that there are rumors that there are MANY more films that they've done but not been given credit for. And of course movies currently being done.

      Tell your friend to mention to them that they have fans that would love to know the work they've done and what they are doing (if the studios let them tell).

    4. Re:List of Movies restored by Lowry Digital by danila · · Score: 1

      Having a site is just common courtesy. Imagine that you are a French film director who is trying to sell the idea of restoring one of the his early films to a studio exec. It's a pain in the ass to explain who are those Lowry guys. Imagine that you are their customer, but lost your PDA with their contact details, but you need to talk with them about something urgent. Pain in the ass again. Imagine that you are a journalist, a scientist, a military officer, or anyone else wanting to do anything with those guys. Again, it's a pain in the ass and it can backfire. And it will backfire eventually.

      P.S. Also, if they hope that being good means being good forever, with a fat project pipeline, then they are wrong. Not even being farsighted enough to spend 500 bucks on a most basic Internet introduction to Lowry is really stupid.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  22. Why Star Wars? by Hao+Wu · · Score: 2, Funny
    Please, please Mr Lucas, re-release the Christmas Special in new digital format.

    Or better- get working now on those funny Porky's movies. Or Manos, that's another gem that needs improvement.

    --
    I suggest you read Slashdot
    1. Re:Why Star Wars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [TORGO]
      The master wouldn't approve of digital remastering.
      [/TORGO]

  23. Clean the dirt off? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Funny

    And here I would just have used some photo-wash. At least, that's what you use when you develop film :)

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  24. I'm sure they left the film lying in the gutter. by b00m3rang · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm sure they had to handle the originals for duplication and remastering along the way, I'm pretty sure they would have thought to take precautions handling the film. They're not stupid.

  25. Detail increase @ home by Ceriel+Nosforit · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm very glad to hear that this technique of using the data in several frames of footage really does exist today. However, where can I get my paws on it? I've at many times wished for higher quality in various clips I've DLed, and found myself annoyed at knowing that in the sum of the data of a scene the information is there, but I can't access it. With whatever they're running at LDI, I could access it.

    Also, imagine if you will what you could learn by running this on the footage of the JFK assassination? Or all those UFO sightings? This could be the conspiracy buff's dream. =)

    --
    All rites reversed 2010
    1. Re:Detail increase @ home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I've at many times wished for higher quality in various clips I've DLed" "Various Clips" heh? Say no more, your filthy secret is safe with us. ;)

    2. Re:Detail increase @ home by bbc · · Score: 1

      The folks who make high resolution photos of the planet with run-of-the-mill equipment use such software. I believe it's called stacking software or somesuch. Failing that, run your favorite photo editor, load frames into layers and fiddle with the layer mode settings. Google is your friend.

    3. Re:Detail increase @ home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The main problem is that your stuff is probably already compressed (ie. lost data). That means you'll have to uncompess it, "wash" it, then recompress it (more loss).

      It really isn't going to work all that well.

      (these guys were using raw scans of the original film by the way; washing then compressing only once).

  26. This is news? by bbc · · Score: 0

    How is this news? Cleaning film frames, whether of new or old films, is daily business. There's nothing exiting or revolutionary about it. What's the next Slashdot article, "Mac user found flipping burgers"? Sheesh.

    1. Re:This is news? by scottking · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      considering how much macs cost, i doubt we'll hear about many "burger flipping" mac users.

      --
      scott king
    2. Re:This is news? by kjcdude · · Score: 0

      I think the reason it was posted as news is becuase most companys will actually clean the film not import the frames then clean the film.
      And since there using MACS, OMG, mac made a big deal about it.

      --
      http://DiabloHeat.com | http://Kyle.TheOCSucks.com | http://TheOCSucks.com
    3. Re:This is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Macs are not expensive. Lets do some math...

      Emac starts at 799

      Dell 2400 starts at 519 (419 with current deal)

      With the dell you must buy antivirus software and possibly a better firewall or spyware detection software. You must buy a third party burner program (try using built-in xp burning..). The average person will also pay someone during the systems lifetime to remove a virus, etc (not talking about us geeks here). That will put you over 799 easily. Very few mac viruses exist. No outlook/oe worms, spyware, or other bs to worry about.

      I could go on, but i think i made my point. Macs are equal in price and have innovative features (like less crashing...), and open source tools builtin.

      One could argue that you could put GNU/Linux or a *BSD on the dell, but nothing stops you from doing that on a Mac either.

      Macs might be more expensive to us geeks because we can go on new egg and put a cheapo box together for nothing. To the average person, its the same price.

    4. Re:This is news? by scottking · · Score: 1

      hey hey, settle down now, i am a mac user, and i wrote this not too long ago.

      bear in mind that to average joe sixpack, the bottom end machines determine who has the cheapest computer.

      just trying to make fun of things.

      --
      scott king
    5. Re:This is news? by MacDaffy · · Score: 1

      Wish I had the points to mod you up. Not only do you get FireWire, high-speed Internet, built-in wilreless capability (in a desktop), but you also get software that manages your pictures ($80), allows you to create simple movies ($129, for anything halfway decent on the Windows side), create your own music (lots of cheap midi-capture apps in Windows, so this is a wash). The only sticking point is that Word or Excel doen't come with it, but I always suggest that customers find used copies of Office 2001 (it runs native under X and has all the features you need---heck, Word 5.1a still woks in Classic under OS X).

      Plus, you can surf without worry. I've convinced four of my customers to switch and that's the one thing they mention to me more often than anything else; the absence of worry about malware and spyware. I just installed a used PowerMac G4 for an elderly couple here in Hawaii and they love the freedom of it. I started trying to convince them to make the switch almost $1000 ago and now, I'll only see them for their regularly-scheduled tune-up. They won't be paying me for spyware, malware and virus removal again.

    6. Re:This is news? by dtfinch · · Score: 1

      With the dell you must buy antivirus software and possibly a better firewall or spyware detection software. You must buy a third party burner program (try using built-in xp burning..).

      There's good freeware for filling in where the xp burner is lacking, mainly burning iso's. AVG antivirus, AdAware, and Spybot S&D are good free anti-virus/malware programs.

      I think if I were to actually purchase a Mac, I would probably go all out on a Power Mac to make it worthwhile. But for the moment I'm on a $470 Dell (double the storage of the Emac, but lacking elsewhere) running Linux because I'm a student's budget.

  27. 600 G5s and the lightsabers were broken. by Guspaz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously, if you're going to devote that kind of hardware to a restoration, why can't you be bothered to pay a guy to airbrush the lightsabers in rather than use the blurred crap that was the result of the cleanup? The lightsabers (in order to look good onscreen) need a white core with a coloured edge. The DVD version blurred them so much the white core is entirely gone and they're just coloured smudges all the way through.

    1. Re:600 G5s and the lightsabers were broken. by polecat_redux · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Seriously, if you're going to devote that kind of hardware to a restoration, why can't you be bothered to pay a guy to airbrush the lightsabers in rather than use the blurred crap that was the result of the cleanup? The lightsabers (in order to look good onscreen) need a white core with a coloured edge.

      Because just like the Macs themselves, it doesn't matter what's at the core as long as the outside is pretty.

    2. Re:600 G5s and the lightsabers were broken. by blincoln · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know which version of the DVDs you have, but on mine the lightsabers have been completely re-rotoscoped to look pretty much the same as the ones in the prequels.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    3. Re:600 G5s and the lightsabers were broken. by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      I'm going by the comparisons Slashdot has frequently posted, comparing the originals, to the special edition, to the DVDs. When looking at the frames, the lightsabers look like smudges compared to the original theatrical release.

  28. If Macs worked so well at the time... by b00m3rang · · Score: 0

    they wouldn't have needed to switch to SGI at all, would they? So saying, "they tried to use Macs, but they weren't up to the task" wouldn't be that great of an endorsement anyway, would it?

    1. Re:If Macs worked so well at the time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Err....

      You are getting it backwards...they are switching AWAY from SGI to Macs. Not that the Macs aren't up to the task so they had to switch to something else.

      The SGIs are still industry standard for a lot of things...and as such, they have more support in these areas even if a mac might have been a better choice all in all.

    2. Re:If Macs worked so well at the time... by Niles_Stonne · · Score: 1

      Every system has it's uses...

      Your statement is like suggesting to use a toaster to grill a steak. It's not the best tool for the job, but just because it's not the best tool for that particular job doesn't mean it's really helpful when you want to make a meal.

      --
      Sticks and Stones may break my bones, but copyright will always protect me.
    3. Re:If Macs worked so well at the time... by sakusha · · Score: 1

      You're BOTH misreading it. Macs and SGIs worked side by side. SGI gave ILM special favors, in return for ILM pretending the Star Wars films were exclusively done with SGI machines.

    4. Re:If Macs worked so well at the time... by Cylix · · Score: 1

      There go people ranting again about things they know nothing about...

      My toaster makes great steaks!

      --
      "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    5. Re:If Macs worked so well at the time... by malducin · · Score: 1

      Not exactly special favors since it was a formal agreement, you can still find the press releases at SGIs site.

      ILM never pretended nothing. Maybe they didn't go out of their way to mention it to regular media (which are pretty clueless anyway) but Macs were certainly mentioned in more serious publications like Cinefex and AWN.

      And there is mention of Macs in other projects like Van Helsing on a Mac magazine.

      Usually though Macs are given distinct sequences, they might work on the same project as SGI/Linux machine but a lot of times its for specific things (matte paintings) or given specific sequences (R2 flying in Ep. 2, or the Naboo ship on Ep. 1).

      Besides credits on films are negotiated as well.

    6. Re:If Macs worked so well at the time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No misread.

      Yes, they both work side by side, but in the past it was purely a SGI process.

      Yeah, Macs were used for some artistic things where the artist was more comfortable with the machine, but that had no overall impact on the process as SGI was more interested in what happened on the backend -- the front end was just a lockin to make certain the backend happened.

      Now, Macs are taking a more prominent role in the areas SGI was heavily involved with. Not just the artists seat, but sharing space in the racks. Apple will be taking over more and more of the server racks than SGI as time progresses at the company.

      So my original statement was not inaccurate at all. Apple is taking over...

    7. Re:If Macs worked so well at the time... by sakusha · · Score: 1
      ..in the past it was purely a SGI process.
      And just how do you know this? From reading websites?

      ILM has never been an all-SGI shop, they used to be a primarily Mac/SGI shop.

      My friend who worked at ILM back around the late 1980s (the time frame we're talking about here) told me how their digital matte process ran on a custom app written exclusively for Macs. John Knoll personally gave me a copy of Photoshop .096b after showing me some of his Photoshop/Swivel animatics for "Hunt for Red October." Photoshop would not exist except for ILM, which needed some specialized tools, so John Knoll wrote em.

      Anyway, it is not surprising that much of this process is shrouded in mystery, ILM is very secretive. Even unto this day, the ILM street address is a not-very-well-kept secret, their name doesn't appear on the building, or in any published literature. My friend at ILM told me that employees were prohibited, upon penalty of termination, of EVER having an email address with their real name, or ever using their real name anywhere on the internet. They were concerned about the legions of Star Wars weirdos getting ahold of an employee's info and stalking him.
  29. Re-release of release about re-release by maztuhblastah · · Score: 3, Funny

    This just in, story released about re-release of Star Wars has been re-released for /.'ers to re-read.

    Can't you realize that redoing the same posts over and over again is easily recognized by frequent readers of this news repository. Comments often respect that the editors are only human, but such a repeat of a mistake makes most redears reluctantly repeat the same jokes that they made the last time this was reposted.

    My apologies....really!

    1. Re:Re-release of release about re-release by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Apology accepted.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  30. hah by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 2, Funny
    George Lucas himself can supply an infinite number of films.

    Greedo shoots's first, greedo shoots simultaneously, deleted scene jabba 1, deleted scene jabba 2, greedo first + jabba 2, greedo first + jabba 1, jar-jar on tattoine, jar-jar + greedo 1 + jabba 2, boba fett vocie 1 + jar-jar 2 + pink lightsabre + jabba 2, ad infinitum.

    1. Re:hah by Bombcar · · Score: 1

      Someday you'll get a 500TB HDTVD2 that has all possible scenes and shots, and you'll select which Star Wars you'd like: Greedo gets his ass whipped, Jabba++, remove bikini, etc.

  31. Re:Star Wars generation gap? Sound Effects- by xtermin8 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Firstly, the sound effects made Star Wars an innovative film,(ironic that sound doesn't really travel through space) Many theaters upgraded their sound systems specifically for Star Wars. Secondly, many features of Star Wars quickly became standard in filmaking. The films the newer generation sees are all derivative. Its like listening to Robert Johnson after growing up with Led Zepplin. I respect the blues, but its not so much fun to listen to, sorta like going in a nearly empty basement of an old house.

  32. Light sabers were a trivial distraction from by b00m3rang · · Score: 1

    the true nature of this love story, as evidenced by later incarnations.

  33. Overheard at the render farm.... by nebenfun · · Score: 4, Funny

    Node 23543: "What's the sickest thing you've done for cash?"

    Node 25685: "I once had to render a goat hobbit monkey sex video...I was depressed for a year!"

    Node 65423: "I had to do pitch correction on three hours of Britney Spears audio! I still find myself waking up and crying like a baby..."

    Node 27928: "Once, I had to work on a Lucas proje..."

    All of the other nodes: "Say no more! You poor bastard!"

    Unidentified node : "You whore!"

    1. Re:Overheard at the render farm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The parent post is pretty damn funny! Thanks for the laugh.

    2. Re:Overheard at the render farm.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL that maid my day

  34. Don't be REtarded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    j/k

  35. Extensive use of sound/sound effects by xtermin8 · · Score: 1

    The sound effects made Star Wars an innovative film,(ironic that sound doesn't really travel through space) Many theaters upgraded their sound systems specifically for Star Wars (and now upgrades are fairly regular) For those who didn't grow up with Star Wars though, its like listening to Robert Johnson after growing up with Led Zepplin (or Metallica?). Johnson sound so sparse, and there's such a variety of influences in more modern music that old blues is sometimes like going in a empty basement of an old house. Its great for five minutes.

    1. Re:Extensive use of sound/sound effects by taycalmac · · Score: 0

      Interesting you bought up Robert Johnson as I bought a CD the other day. God, it sounds awful. Sparse hardly describes it and the songs all sound the same. Still I appreciate his awsome contribution to the blues but its hard (for me) to get into...

      --
      A clean chord is a happy chord...
  36. For those who don't believe in Jedi Clause... by Chocolate+Teapot · · Score: 3, Funny
    --
    Modest doubt is called the beacon of the wise. - William Shakespeare
  37. OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is another one!

  38. They didn't clean it well enough... by Canth7 · · Score: 0, Troll

    because it still looks like Greedo shoots first. Someone really needs to take the original films and clean up the scenes which Lucas has mucked around with so that a decent looking film can be created - of course to be distributed on everyone's favorite sharing app or newsgroups. Lucas might have been a genius at one time but its hard to see that after watching him be so arrogant as to not bother releasing a DVD with both versions so as to appeal to the fan who wants to see the movie as they saw it in the theatres.

  39. I mesread that by b00m3rang · · Score: 1

    Nevermind.

  40. OMFG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funniest. Post. Ever. It's "Family Guy" ist like the trees in the casino forest scene.

  41. When money is no object.. by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Get the best tool for the job..

    While most of us are stuck with lesser quality 'white box PC clones'...

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  42. i seen this by Stanneh · · Score: 0

    i seen this on the bbc news the other night they showed the whole process and the room for of g5's it was to say the least impressive it was just cutting scenes in to 70mb files and was basically having 1 cpu per scene to revamp it.

    --
    I Predict A Riot
  43. Is this *really* such a good thing? by Fallen+Andy · · Score: 1

    Sit down and think about it for a moment. Consider what the reaction would be if you decided to clean the Sphinx so it looked new, or redo some famous bridge in the latest hitech materials (let's say
    Clifton Suspension bridge in Bristol UK in *titanium* just so it lasted forever).

    Somehow, you've *lost* the original both in spirit and implementation. Somehow, you've *lost* the historical context...

    I could go on. But I won't bore you (have already he says chuckling).

    Even though Movies are in some sense "thought stuff" where is the dividing line between preservation (of the original thought) and re-invention (feels like re-interpretation)?

    Cleaning up stuff can look dreadfully like you're
    trivializing stuff that was in some sense important, (and remember that the bias of the person cleaning it will be the bias of someone 20-50 years downstream of the originator).

    Leave well alone, and be very careful. You want the original "limits" that made magic to stay.

    When the only "print" of Star Wars that is left is
    a 20 times reprocessed thing, can we say we understand the movie?

    1. Re:Is this *really* such a good thing? by Danathar · · Score: 2, Informative

      Have you seen any of the results. Lowry has said that their job is not to IMPROVE movies but to restore them to what they were when they were released. Now I don't know how old you are, but would'nt be nice to see a film like "The Good, The Bad and the Ugly" or "Fall of the Roman Empire" that was as good as when the first print was made?

      THX1138 is the only one of the movies Lowry has done that's been "enhanced"...that's Lucas's Job. All the rest are as close to what they were when first released in the theaters (except for the fact that back then the projectors were not as good).

    2. Re:Is this *really* such a good thing? by danila · · Score: 1

      OK, let's have a though experiment. Imagine that we come to see Sphinx and I climb on it. While climbing, I accidentally push some piece of stone and it falls down. Now, according to your understanding of art, history and its value, would it be better to quickly place the stone where it was or just leave it where it now is?

      Paintings are renovated all the time, statues and buildings are too and noone (not even the die-hard purist art historians) seem to object when the work is done well.

      I think the example of Sphinx is too special, because one of the points is precisely that Sphinx survived all those millenias without any kind of restoration. So whatever we conclusions we come to with regards to Sphinx (and the Piramids) should not be generalised.

      --
      Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    3. Re:Is this *really* such a good thing? by Fallen+Andy · · Score: 1

      I have the horrid realisation that all of you are right in some sense. But I wish we could figure out which rightness is right for which thing...

  44. Actually, MTI (running on Windows) is dominant by Thagg · · Score: 4, Informative

    It turns out that a huge part of the film restoration/cleanup work is done using programs from MTI Right now huge film libraries are undergoing scanning and cleanup using MTI's products in preparation for high-def DVD release (once the standards get, uhm, standardized)

    These MTI workstations might have highest software/hardware cost ratio of any widely deployed system. The hardware costs are a couple of thousand dollars, and the software is well over $50,000 per system. But, they get the job done like nothing else, and it is my experience that studios demand that particular software for their restoration.

    It's not a completely automatic process by any means. The software can do a lot on its own, but it does require an artist to painstakingly review and correct the things that the software misses, or to guide the software to a correct solution.

    A friend of mine who is building a large restoration facility would love to have a Linux solution, but unfortunately none exists at this point.

    Thad Beier

    --
    I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
    1. Re:Actually, MTI (running on Windows) is dominant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lowry uses in-house custom software, though.

  45. fine, fine by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    The important thing is, where can I find a torrent?

  46. Not just the graphics explaining the gap! by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This may be why Star Wars was so popular when if first came out, but when little kids and others watched it many years later in re-release or on video they were somewhat less impressed by the lesser quality film they were watching.

    Or... "Gee it was more fun the first time when I was 10!" Well, that's because it actually was a better-looking film.


    The original versions of the films also didn't have the new editing, new scenes, new shots, all of which greatly diminished the pacing and believability of the film.

    There's a reason they give Oscars out for editing. --It really doesn't take much to ruin an otherwise good work. A single nail standing up on a water slide can make the whole ride a lot less enjoyable. And the re-release versions of Star Wars had a whole hardware store's worth of junk added!

    Every three minutes while watching that thing, I felt, at best that I was having to deliberately overlook stupidity, (like those new digital droids floating around Mos Eisley which it was clear from the actors' body language, were not really there and thus created a discordant effect), to my feeling like I was being stabbed when Luke Screamed while falling down the throat of Cloud City.

    So yeah, if I was a kid today watching those lousy re-release versions of Star Wars, I'd also think my elders were doddery and out-dated for raving about them; that they needed a patronizing pat on the head and a, "There, there, old timer; I'm sure they seemed like nice films in your day."

    The wide-screen, color and sound restored, but otherwise un-adultered LD copies from the mid nineties are the best versions available of the original trilogy. --There are yet to be any pirate copies of those ripped to DVD floating around, but there damned-well ought to be!

    Some of you out there have the capability to create these. DO IT. Star Wars is a vital part of our culture, and what Lucas is doing to erase it is as insidious as any 'terrorism'. --If Phantom Menace hadn't sucked, there is a good chance we could have avoided being in Iraq today.


    -FL

    1. Re:Not just the graphics explaining the gap! by TrippyZ · · Score: 1

      I am right in remembering that those mid nineties releases were billed in the UK as "The only time you will be able to by them, they will NEVER be on sale again"?

    2. Re:Not just the graphics explaining the gap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, these have been ripped to dvd and floating around the 'net for the past few years... I've got a set myself, which also includes a 4th bonus disc bringing side6 from all movies together into one set of extras. I of course also own the original black box laserdisc set, which still look a bit better than the dvd's, due to less-than-optimal encoding... i still prefer the dvd's however, flipping discs just kills me.

    3. Re:Not just the graphics explaining the gap! by Cowclops · · Score: 1

      I'm doing it right now. I just finished recording empire strikes back. See my other posts for how i'm doing it.

    4. Re:Not just the graphics explaining the gap! by captaineo · · Score: 2, Informative

      There ARE very good DVD rips of the un-altered laser discs already. Look for BitTorrents.

      Also, if you look on IMDB, there were actually a few minor changes already in the early-80s re-release of ANH. They were for the better, like the "close the blast door! open the blast door!" in the chase on the Death Star.

    5. Re:Not just the graphics explaining the gap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      Rips from the LaserDisc versions are already all over usenet, bittorrent, edonkey, and every other sharing medium out there. You can even buy pre-packaged bootleg DVDs with cover art and everything. It's been this way for years. Seriously, where have you been?

      What I'm wating for is for people to use next-frame/previous-frame analysis software to remove video noise from the LD rips, as well as combine some of that video with video from the unaltered portions of the movie from the DVD releases to create higher-than-LD quality rips. I might get on this if I have some time.

      An even more pie-in-the-sky dream is for someone to get their hands on one of the still-surviving 35mm prints from 1977, scan them, and share the resulting raw scanned image data so people can REALLY get to work making their own home video releases . Wait, wait, I know what you're thinking. Those prints must have all faded by now, right? Wrong! There were, at the time, some 35mm dye-transfer prints made of the original 1977 Star Wars. Dye-transfer is a process that uses color matrixes pulled off the original camera negatives and lays down inorganic dyes on top of a silver base B&W print for truly striking color reproduction. And because all the materials are inorganic (metal-based dyes), the color does not fade, EVER! You could lock a dye-transfer print in a time capsule for hundreds of years and it would still have full color after you took it out. Hell there are surviving dye-transfer materials from the old 3-strip Technicolor movies of the 1930s that still have full color today. Search google for "technicolor dye transfer" for more info about this process. Film-tech.com even has some picuters of dye transfer prints in the Reviews section.

      Anyway, I happen to know (although I can't say how) that there still exists at least one 35mm dye transfer print of the orignial 1977 Star Wars in private hands. Perhaps one day someone will sneak it to a film scanning facility and post the resulting 4K hi-res image data to various sharing networks (such data would be HUGE but invaluable). I hold out hope that this may one day happen.

    6. Re:Not just the graphics explaining the gap! by michaeldot · · Score: 1

      what Lucas is doing to erase it is as insidious as any 'terrorism'. ...
      If Phantom Menace hadn't sucked, there is a good chance we could have avoided being in Iraq today.

      Someone takes his sci-fi *way* to seriously.

      But at +5 Insightful, it seems you're not alone. The people here scare me sometimes.

  47. Nothing is permanent by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 1

    Film doesn't last forever. Without restoring old media or transferring to new media periodically, the original works *will* be lost. It's already happened to a lot of old movies that were stored away in supposedly safe places. Those films have degraded to the point where they can't even be copied in less than 100 years.

    You can complain about "biased" restorations and lack of historical context all day, but in the end I would rather see a cleaned-up Sphinx than a pile of shattered sandstone with a tour guide standing next to it to describe what the Sphinx used to look like!

    --
    0 1 - just my two bits
  48. Bloody Godamn Propaganda!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just bloody godamn propaganda!!!!

    How this did get through the story lameness filter, I don't know.

    I think some people like to be manipulated!

    1. Re:Bloody Godamn Propaganda!! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      I'm just wondering why they needed that much CPU power.

      A dust spec is on one frame. Therefore it's not on frames before nor after. Therefore, some mpeggish variation should detect a massive change, and erase it, filling in the middle chunk mpeggishly.

      Hardly computationally intensive, compared to what one computer can do. Maybe it's needed for all the disc storage space.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:Bloody Godamn Propaganda!! by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm just wondering why they needed that much CPU power.

      A dust spec is on one frame. Therefore it's not on frames before nor after. Therefore, some mpeggish variation should detect a massive change, and erase it, filling in the middle chunk mpeggishly.


      At 70 MB a frame, we're well beyond your typical "mpeggish" resolutions. I'm not even sure why you bring up MPEG any way, as they're working uncompressed. Doing any sort of cleaning on MPEG files would be. . . just. . . .retarded.

      Hardly computationally intensive, compared to what one computer can do. Maybe it's needed for all the disc storage space.

      Of course you could do this with just one computer, if you were very very patient. The idea is that this is being done as a business, and clients expect results within certain time constraints, known as deadlines.

      Furthermore, it is computationally intensive. Did you even RTFA?

      And lastly, what the heck is "Impiuos"? is this a new line of cars from South Korea?

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  49. How many Macs does it... by DrRobert · · Score: 4, Funny

    to fix all the bad acting in the films... that seems like it would be a worthwhile investment for film restoration.

  50. Re:Star Wars generation gap? Sound Effects- by casuist99 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What Lucas did was to abandon the laws of physics in favor of entertaining the audience. True that sound won't travel through empty or very sparse space, but you could STILL have interesting sound effects. Every time something blows up, as the shock-wave passes the viewer you would expect to hear *something* in real life.

    Now, yes it's much more interesting to hear the explosion as it happens, even though in real life you'd certainly have to deal with the shock-wave carried sound or (assuming space in this far-off galaxy is full of air) a huge delay between the time you see the explosion and the time it takes for the sound of that explosion to reach you.

    The physics of movies has, i fear, spoiled the expectations of all future space travelers. Sound in outer space? Blasters? Deflector shields? And my biggest peeve: 2-D shock waves (a la praxis)? That's some FUNKY distribution of mass there.

  51. Re:Star Wars generation gap? Sound Effects- by Hao+Wu · · Score: 1

    Even 2001 had problems with physics- like stars sweeping by as an astronaught repairs the outside of a ship.

    --
    I suggest you read Slashdot
  52. Strange... by Jugalator · · Score: 1

    OK if they cleaned the dirt, but how do you manage to "upgrade the resolution"? From *which* resolution? I thought the recorded resolution exceeded even that of DVD's.

    Do they mean "we sharpened the image" or what?

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  53. Color Quality in Star Wars DVDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Although the sharpness and lack of scratches/dirt is great, the color quality is pretty awful in the restored DVDs. The saturation is way too high; for example, sometimes it looks like ObiWan is wearing lipstick, the desert sand often looks bright orange, and C3P0 looks like he was painted with a flourescent marker or something. In the Millennium Falcon scene when Luke is training lightsaber, his lightsaber is bright green for some reason - even though it was originally pale blue.

    If not for the wonky color, I might be able to stomach the Lucas changes; as it is, I much prefer watching my bootleg DVDs based on the pre-special edition Laser Disks, which are basically perfect except for slightly lower sharpness than it could be.

    1. Re:Color Quality in Star Wars DVDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, yeah: try turning down the "chroma" or "saturation" on your TV.

    2. Re:Color Quality in Star Wars DVDs by MrMartini · · Score: 1

      (I was the one who brought this up)

      Actually, I was checking it out on a widescreen, high-resolution, color-calibrated LCD. I watch lots of movies on the same setup, I've worked in a photo lab making color-balanced prints, and I can tell lousy color when I see it.

    3. Re:Color Quality in Star Wars DVDs by sunspot42 · · Score: 1

      >the color quality is pretty awful in the restored DVDs.
      >The saturation is way too high; for example, sometimes
      >it looks like ObiWan is wearing lipstick, the desert
      >sand often looks bright orange, and C3P0 looks like
      >he was painted with a flourescent marker or something.

      I noticed that, too. Even the flares of light that come off of CP3O's reflective surface are brightly colored on the DVDs (instead of nearly white, as they should be and were in the original films).

      But it's more than just chroma oversaturation, because white objects seem to remain truly, blindingly white. I'm assuming it's some kind of fancy digital processing trick, probably done intentionally, to make the colors look as vibrant as they do in the digitally-filmed Attack Of The Clones (and as bright as they will in the upcoming Revenge Of The Sith). Now that the color has been pumped-up in Episodes 4 -6 I guess all of the films will have a fairly consistent look between them, although Episode IV in particular will be a bit marred by the occasional odd color artifact.

  54. From the FA, notice anything odd? by spudchucker · · Score: 0

    ..."The issue of how much grain to keep in the trilogy was Steven Spielberg's call. It was really about exact balance, which John has the ability to modulate. Steven wanted a little grain -- that's what he likes and prefers -- and you see that in the end product, but with beautiful clarity and color saturation."

  55. Elegant Design by jamesl · · Score: 1

    The circuit senses capacitance. Do a Google search on "touch light switch" (no quotes) and among the first of 840,000 results will be our friends at X-10.

    1. Re:Elegant Design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck are you talking about?

      Wrong thread?

  56. Unpractical by Jozer99 · · Score: 1

    You know, a wet tissue or paper towel might clean dirt off film better than 600 Macs. Just a thought.

    1. Re:Unpractical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trying to clean dirt off of negatives is pretty dangerous, and generally just results in scratches.

      Tissues and towels, in particular, are paper-based, so they are pretty much the worst thing to try wiping with. Think of cleaning dirt off your laptop display with a dish scrubber.

  57. reasons for going with Macs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I imagine that a strong point of the Macs is that the IBM G5 has two floating point units per core - if your code is properly compiled to utilize both floating point units, that's some seriously kick-ass floating point performance.

  58. All of these 'why can't you just...' remarks by MrMartini · · Score: 1

    It's pretty hilarious how many people are asking, "why can't you just wipe off the negatives, or dunk it all in a photo-wash bath, or ..."

    Wiping off negatives pretty much always scratches them, and even if dunking negatives in a photo-wash bath was perfectly safe on such old film, it would do nothing for scratches.

    Additionally, the BBC article mentions that there were often cases in which a couple of layers of film were bonded together (for special effects), and there was sometimes dirt and/or scratches between those layers.

    Furthermore, the whole problem of the color having faded over the years was not something that simple cleaning could help with - although they did a terrible job with the color (WAY too punchy, sometimes just not the right colors at all).

    Lastly, the way in which they were able to analyze groups of frames to reduce film grain and increase resolution was only possible using computers. So no more of this "why couldn't they just..." silliness!

  59. Different sound mixes by Apotsy · · Score: 1
    The "close the blast door" line was there in 1977, just not in all prints. It was in the 35mm mono mix, but not the 70mm 6-track mix. See here and here for more info.

    The only change made to ANH in the 80s was to add the "Episode IV" text to the opening crawl (references here and here). The rest of the movie was untouched until 1997.

  60. old news by pbjones · · Score: 1

    been on slashdot before, but they may not have mentioned the Macs.

    --
    There was an unknown error in the submission.
  61. Another part of the story by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    URL:http://www.electricimage.com/

  62. ...look there's a Mac!! by Matt_Joyce · · Score: 1


    Why is it, people jump up and down, wave and point, and strut around proudly when macs are used ?

    They're just computers, niche ones at that.

    As for crapping on about 32bit fpu and, oooh, 3.5gb ram, seriously, does anyone care ?

  63. Adding compression... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Then you take the "1"s and lay them parallel starting from the inside of the disk. Then you put the "o"s down nearer the outside of the disk where there is more room."

    But then, take the number of "1"s and "0"s and represent each as binary numbers, which would result (on an average CD) in a compression ration of around 3.67^8 to 1. Then, arrange the compressed "1"s and "0"s in the pattern originally described, and repeat the process.

    Using this compression technique it is possible to compress an entire 4 hour film (such as "Waterloo") to a mere 2 bits without losing any entertainment value.

    It should be noted that this technique was developed for Hollywood, who have been producing 2-bit films for years.

  64. ObscenelyHugeMegaUltraVGA by mg2 · · Score: 1

    The question is, then, will the 70mb/frame version of the movie fit on Blu-ray media or HD-DVD?

  65. Too cool for this. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Someone takes his sci-fi *way* to seriously.

    But at +5 Insightful, it seems you're not alone. The people here scare me sometimes.


    And thank-you for being the smart-alec who sits in the back row and prevents good patterns from evolving through the constant application of smarmy remarks. --Hiding your painful level of low self-esteem by trying to transfer your feelings of self-consciousness to others.

    Go get not-laid somewhere else.


    -FL

  66. Plus high performance FPU by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

    The article also mentions the high floating point performance of the Mac which isn't down to Apple but actually thanks to IBM and Motorola's PowerPC CPU.

    I think many of us would like to build and run a PowerPC computer, but I'm not paying megabucks for a Mac simply to replace the OS with Linux.

  67. Clever comment, but are you just being funny? by beetle496 · · Score: 1
    If Phantom Menace hadn't sucked, there is a good chance we could have avoided being in Iraq today.
    FL, please explain your reasoning.
    --
    I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
  68. Seriously. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2, Insightful
    (And please pardon the abrasiveness of my previous response. I was chiding myself seconds after hitting the 'submit' button.)

    Here's what I mean. . .

    There are very few instances in our culture when nearly everybody is focusing on a single event with such openness and enthusiasm as when Phantom Menace was nearing release.

    During a time like that, it is possible, (it has happened before), to put across messages which everybody will hear at the same time, and react to by possibly adjusting their behavior at the same time. The mass consciousness of the entire industrialized world had turned the static way down, and was listening.

    The messages in Star Wars are important and several. . .

    1) The idea of Big Government being evil. The good guys in Star Wars were, very literally, the 'terrorists'.

    2) The Phantom Menace was a story about how a democratic government can quickly be manipulated into fascism. --The means by which it was done in the Phantom Menace were nearly identical to how it was done through 9-11. --That is, a deliberately manufactured attack was used to create an emotional reaction among elected officials so that dangerous measures could be quickly pushed through and voted into power; measures which later caused the downfall of democratic government. (This is what happened with 9-11, patriot act). Had the story been properly told, it could have done its job in alerting the populace to the possibility and dangers of such manipulations.

    But this didn't happen. Lucas dropped the ball. I suspect, given the stakes today, he was possibly influenced; there was a time twenty years ago when he understood and indeed created many of the rules he broke in making the Phantom Menace.

    There were several other layers as well which could have created positive effects on our populace but did not. --The films could have reinforced standards of moral behavior, (through the actions of the Jedi). Instead we now have American soldiers, (kids in their twenties), acting like savages, performing torture on other humans.

    Myths and Stories are perhaps the most powerful way to teach behavior to a culture. Star Wars was one of the pillars of our society, but it has been corrupted.


    -FL

  69. Re:Star Wars generation gap? Sound Effects- by Electric+Monk · · Score: 0

    How does one get a shockwave when there is no medium for such a wave to pass through? The only noise I think you should hear, would be the remnants of the object raining down on your cabin.