No, you can see the ribbing quite clearly when projected, unless the projector had very sloppy registration.
But Mike also completely de-grained the image first, and that made fine details more apparent. Perhaps we could see what this looks like before any degraining was applied?
Anyway, I disagree with Steve, he is a capable guy, but he is a DP, and has only really been once since 2002, his experience with actual film is very little.
Yep, I just clicked-through his 1hr second video and he never compares how they look in motion, all he compares is how they look zoomed in on a screenshot. But in-motion is way more important. For example, audiences and critics reacted badly to The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey’s 48fps cinema presentation, even though that should 2x technically superior to 24fps.
Steve never mentions the problems of aliasing or other strobing artefacts caused by lower digital resolutions, for example stripy or patterned shirts. Set and costume designers even took these considerations into account at the time of 35mm filming, for example on the commentary for Scream (or one of its sequels) the late Wes Craven notices the artefact on the DVD version and says something about it noting that the costume was not right, and that the strobing was still a problem at DVD resolution. He also doesn’t specify what film stocks he used, or for that matter how he scanned them (did he do them with a bayer sensor, or with a mono sensor), there are certainly modern stocks he could have used with a very fine grain and razor-sharp image, and I’m not sure that’s what he did for his comparison. Especially given that he had 4 different types of digital sensor, but only one type of 35mm film.