logo Sign In

Toy Story (1995) 35mm Revival (In progress)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

So this is something that I and someone I know have been working on for a while. Our job was to revive the leaked 35mm scan to make it the ultimate presentation of the film as originally seen in cinemas back in 1995.

So for those who are unfamiliar with the revival, lemme give you the tragic backstory (seriously!).

Back in 2023, TristAndShout64 started a donation project for a 4K scan of an Australian 35mm print of the film, meaning it has the original English version and not from another language (i.e., from the German 35mm preservation of The Lion King and the open matte preservation of the West German print of Back to the Future.). However, during its near completion, along came the leaks and cyberbullying, so in June of '25, he cancelled the project.

However, help is on the way as someone came in to give me the link of the leak so I can go ahead and revive it. When I meant ‘revive’, I meant look frame complete, since even though Trist said there was a splice at the beginning of reel 3, there was also a splice at the end of reel 4, as well as regrading it with the LD footage since the color does look faded to me. In fact, this is how the film was originally going to look based on what the opening night bootleg looks like. Eventually, based on the review copy file I made, his Discord pals approved to let me do it. However, looking back at the review copy, I felt like something is wrong with it, especially with the color grade. I used VEGAS Pro’s Color Match plugin using the LD footage as source. This led to color bleeding with the footage, and it honestly felt very distracting, so I decided to make a LUT file for future cases and when I tested it, it looks way better.

Though I did do a better take, I’m honestly not a fan of the 4K file, since it has alot of rare blocky AVC artifacts, such as the Disney logo at the start, which isn’t the case in the 1080p version. Though I was able to get access to the 1080p version by him recently, which I knew is the exact same file that was leaked on 4chan (no im not joking).

And speaking of the files, let’s talk about the leaked ones. I’ve honestly hated them. Though it is cool it is in 4K, like I said, it uses presumably a variable AVC codec, since MediaInfo couldn’t figure out if it was constant or variable, and I think anyone who processed it went with the lowest average the software can allow with the max of 50mbps, resulting in…well, you already knew, but also:

  • Despite the raw optical audio being cool to have, the Dolby Surround mix from the LD is from the Deluxe CAV release, meaning there was an audio edit to fit with the side transitions between sides 1 and 2. Also, you can still faintly hear the final seconds of the THX “Tex” trailer at the end.
  • The DTS LD mix is only heard on the front channels, and just like the Dolby Surround LD mix, you can still hear the Deep Note fading out.
  • The sound effects-only track has a mix-up with the audio. In any 5.1 format, every channel in order is supposed to be (L, R, C, LFE, Ls, Rs), but this audio stream has the ordering of (L, C, R, Ls, Rs, LFE), making it very uncomfortable for your 5.1 system.
  • And finally, the commentary track, though firstly, the channels are correct, it’s weirdly in 5.1, meaning you can hear nothing except the front channels, and secondly, it’s the version used since the UTB DVD, meaning that references to LaserDisc were cut out.

So, even though I already did make my own reconstruction of the original theatrical mix (if you weren’t aware), I did my own takes on the other audio tracks for my digital theatrical reconstruction, and they were way better than the leaked files, including the Dolby Surround mix, where I used the standard CLV disc as the main source and added patches from the Deluxe CAV release and even used the original unedited 1996 commentary from the latter release, captured by noogai3. Oh, and for the SFX track, it was a direct copy from the UTB DVD, not a FLAC conversion by KBJ Comix.

So for this preservation, I was thinking of doing a much better version than what was officially put out, especially since, like I said, it was cancelled. Though, the first thing I need to do is to find the raw scans of it since they would’ve been processed from either FFV1, ProRes, or AVI uncompressed, meaning it would contain the best video possible, regrade it using the LUT I made, and sync it with the UTB DVD, along with patches from the LD footage I would record. Though since NC-17peter was responsible for the scanning, I don’t know if he still had those raw scans or not (possibly likely to stay away from the fate of the original preservation). Though, since his Discord pals approved this project, I don’t know if Trist and the OT mods are okay with that honestly, because of the drama, and access to replying to his original topic was locked by the mods. If so, I’ll start rolling. If not, I’m sorry.

Though, thankfully, since I’m the only one doing this project, hopefully there won’t be any leaks and drama this time. I will keep you updated as soon as I can, of course. I was thinking of having it be released at the same time as v2 as my digital theatrical reconstruction, since I still need to find a few more audio tracks from various foreign releases I can easily import to the UK. Right now I need to find (presumably) the Japanese voiceover of the commentary track from the Japanese Deluxe CAV LD release, the Egyptian Arabic dub from the French Anthologie DVD set, and various Chinese dubs and Asian subtitles from the bootleg releases (and it has to only be the ones that look like they were done by Disney themselves, not the bootleggers), so it will take a while though.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Peter was not responsible for the scanning whatsoever. You can tell because it’s actually a good scan…

Author
Time

BoingoBanshee said:

Peter was not responsible for the scanning whatsoever. You can tell because it’s actually a good scan…

Okay, thanks. I was just thinking that I need to know if anyone who did the scan still has the raw scans so I can get in touch to get access to them.

Author
Time

You ain’t getting the raw scan LMFAO

Author
Time

UPDATE (12/08/25): Honestly, I don’t know if I may want to cancel the project since I am honestly stuck, especially to pay respect to Tristan, but the raw scans are the only way to get the best quality possible since the 4K version’s bitrate is problematic. Though I do want to grab an update though since I’m not a fan of the LUT I did. Turns out I think there’s some color and luminance bleeding in there, and it seems every reel is of a different film stock, meaning the red fade is easily more distracting when using the same LUT based on reel 1, and since the color grading in my second attempt feels extremely hard for me, I felt like something who knows how to handle color grading very well to help me with it to match the LD and to also make sure there’s no noticeable color and luminance bleeding on it. I will PM the leaked print and my recorded LD footage for reference so you can message me the LUTs of all 5 reels so I can use them. Also, I was thinking that I want to merge the 1080p with the 4K footage to patch out parts that has a very low bitrate, though I was able to spot two, some parts of it are really confusing as it could be either from the 1080p version, or the 4K version. I just think this project can be too much for me, hence the drama and all, but honestly, I need to see if there will be any either fate or hope to it as time goes on, though I don’t know if there is a high chance it will be cancelled.

Author
Time

Change of plan. I’ll see if I can do the LUTs myself. I already done the first reel, so I’ll do the rest.

Author
Time

UPDATE (12/08/25): To be fair, I’m just not in a good mood last night since this is the most difficult project I might have done, so hopefully I’ll find a way to get this completed. It’s just how I’m not allow to mention my collaborator’s name again, and maybe because EPho3nix was trolling me or hopefully he was just joking around, as you can see from the last few posts. We’ll see if it will go on or not.

Author
Time

wrap it up buddy you not getting shit

Dylan

Author
Time

UPDATE (12/08/25): I have done the new LUTs, turns out maybe reel 2 is the only one from a different stock since the rest do look the same when commparing the regrade of the first LUT to the LD.

Author
Time

BoingoBanshee said:

Peter was not responsible for the scanning whatsoever. You can tell because it’s actually a good scan…

Yet my scans are playing in Art house cinemas & film makers are getting me to scan their work. But I don’t know shit 😛

Author
Time

Sambarker04 said:

BoingoBanshee said:

Peter was not responsible for the scanning whatsoever. You can tell because it’s actually a good scan…

Okay, thanks. I was just thinking that I need to know if anyone who did the scan still has the raw scans so I can get in touch to get access to them.

That’s if they did it in raw could be DPX…

Author
Time

Sambarker04 said:

UPDATE (12/08/25): To be fair, I’m just not in a good mood last night since this is the most difficult project I might have done, so hopefully I’ll find a way to get this completed. It’s just how I’m not allow to mention my collaborator’s name again, and maybe because EPho3nix was trolling me or hopefully he was just joking around, as you can see from the last few posts. We’ll see if it will go on or not.

EPho3nix is not a troll.

Sambarker04 said:

So this is something that I and someone I know have been working on for a while. Our job was to revive the leaked 35mm scan to make it the ultimate presentation of the film as originally seen in cinemas back in 1995.

You should leave Trist’s scan alone, I think he made his preference pretty clear.

There’s nothing to stop you from collaborating with someone else and scanning another print, then you can do whatever you want as it’s your project.

Eventually, based on the review copy file I made, his Discord pals approved to let me do it.

No they haven’t, otherwise you would already have the original prores files to work from.

However, looking back at the review copy, I felt like something is wrong with it, especially with the color grade.

That’s what everyone says when they see how Disney’s animated films originally looked, especially the digitally animated ones. The final color grade is done to the film after the digital film-outs and the choices made when animating were based on the filmout process.

I used VEGAS Pro’s Color Match plugin using the LD footage as source.

A LaserDisc is not a color grading source. Here are some videos that recreate the telecine process using a retired Mk3:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7m3CfxR6bI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvh-oPAI-mo

With telecines you don’t even know if the telecine prints were struck off the color-timed negatives or not. Those low-contrast telecine prints were expensive to strike costing several times more than regular projection prints and it was expected that the telecine operators would transfer them how they preferred.

The operator was called a colorist because he decides the color timing on-the-fly and he can do it scene-by-scene. All the preferences for color timing the entire film can be reviewed and saved before the “actual” transfer to broadcast/master tape. That’s why a LaserDisc, a VHS or a DVD can come out completely different each time it is released, why it comes out different each time the movie is broadcast, and why it typically looks totally different to the original theatrical prints. The preference now with professional restorations is to use a reference print supplied by the rightsholder for the color timing of the original negative scans. The gold standard is to set up the screening room to the director/DOP’s specs - or as closely as possible to it.

So long-story short there, the way that TS was scanned it does not require a lot of color grading in post to be theatrically accurate.

[ Scanning stuff since 2015 ]

Author
Time

The goal in preservation grading isn’t to “reimagine” the look—it’s to remove unnatural fade and leave the rest intact. Stocks have characteristic shifts: Fuji often pushes green/blue; ’70s Eastman tends toward pink/red; Eastman LPP can skew yellow, etc. Identify the stock’s bias, correct the fade, and avoid heavy-handed regrading. In most cases the original color information is still there; outside of minor trims, you don’t need to reinvent it.

On RAWs: nobody is obligated to hand over source files. A single project here can be 3–4 TB. That’s not practical to pass around, and there’s no ethical requirement to do so.

Pre-scan cleaning matters. Older prints often carry projector oil and residue; if you don’t remove it, you’ll see micro-weave and odd background movement that has nothing to do with the scanner.

A lot of the leaks I’ve seen don’t look like true RAW workflows. And when RAW is used, you can tell some folks are unsure how to bring a flat log image to a proper film-density target—the result stays dull and under-shaped.

Our baseline: RAW, 16-bit, 6K, ISO 200, camera set as flat/log as possible. Exports: ProRes 4444 (HQ) at 6000×4000. I’ve used JPEG 2000 before, but it doesn’t offer the same latitude as RAW for nuanced control. For DCPs, we’re careful to avoid crushed blacks or blown highlights—aiming for a projection-accurate look without introducing “projector flicker” artifacts.

Reference: https://x.com/NCseventeen/status/1956399052423147697

Author
Time

Well telecines are a weird thing really. They are two separate processes as all you guys know but the results are generally sub par at beast. But if you ask me a lot of commercial real time scanners are essential hybrid Telecines to me. It’s taking a video real time then separating into dpx… This why I see poor results with most commercial scanners.

Author
Time

Also no one is stopping anyone from grabbing another Toy Story print. If I see one Ill grab it…

Author
Time

Triste was not getting cyber bullied… There was some people pissed… But now its over everyone has moved on… We all make mistakes… No one is perfect…

Author
Time

NC-17peter said:

But if you ask me a lot of commercial real time scanners are essential hybrid Telecines to me. It’s taking a video real time then separating into dpx… This why I see poor results with most commercial scanners.

Not at all accurate.

NC-17peter said:

Our baseline: RAW, 16-bit, 6K, ISO 200, camera set as flat/log as possible. Exports: ProRes 4444 (HQ) at 6000×4000. I’ve used JPEG 2000 before, but it doesn’t offer the same latitude as RAW for nuanced control. For DCPs, we’re careful to avoid crushed blacks or blown highlights—aiming for a projection-accurate look without introducing “projector flicker” artifacts.

Reference: https://x.com/NCseventeen/status/1956399052423147697

Interesting. I would not call that “projection accurate”.

It looks a lot like the early 2000’s scans (off negs) where the dynamic range is limited in that way.

[ Scanning stuff since 2015 ]

Author
Time

Thx for the feedback… its doing a few film engagements one this weekend coming up & more to be announced. Let’s see how it looks on a professional industrial rig. Will keep you posted coach…

https://mayfairtheatre.ca/movie/manhunter/

I’ll post the other upcoming shows as they get announced.

Author
Time

Anyway to check out the ones you have done so I can get a reference for your standards? thx m8

Author
Time

NC-17peter said:

Well telecines are a weird thing really. They are two separate processes as all you guys know but the results are generally sub par at beast. But if you ask me a lot of commercial real time scanners are essential hybrid Telecines to me. It’s taking a video real time then separating into dpx… This why I see poor results with most commercial scanners.
yea everyone with a better scanner who actually knows how to use it produces worse scans than you. Ok retard. Every single scan you’ve ever done looks like complete shit. Nobody who actually knows what a good scan looks like would ever waste space on their hdd to download it. Your scans are for Twitter clankers that don’t know any better. There’s a reason you spit when you talk and cant produce a coherent sentence without chat gpt

Dylan

Author
Time

DylanDrew said:

NC-17peter said:

Well telecines are a weird thing really. They are two separate processes as all you guys know but the results are generally sub par at beast. But if you ask me a lot of commercial real time scanners are essential hybrid Telecines to me. It’s taking a video real time then separating into dpx… This why I see poor results with most commercial scanners.
yea everyone with a better scanner who actually knows how to use it produces worse scans than you. Ok retard. Every single scan you’ve ever done looks like complete shit. Nobody who actually knows what a good scan looks like would ever waste space on their hdd to download it. Your scans are for Twitter clankers that don’t know any better. There’s a reason you spit when you talk and cant produce a coherent sentence without chat gpt

You are not making sense mate.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Literally made perfect sense “mate”. What happened to that Re-Animator scan you were gonna sell that wasn’t yours “mate”

Dylan

Author
Time

DylanDrew said:

Literally made perfect sense “mate”. What happened to that Re-Animator scan you were gonna sell that wasn’t yours “mate”

Did I sell one? How about we start with that simple question. Any proof I sold one? I understand you have a serious hard on for me but do you realize you are a walking contradiction? So let me it get it straight you are upset because I was planning to sell a scan but I didn’t correct?