Clone brush operations are used to pull detail from one place in one print to the same place in another, in order to find the best information among all of his prints. Rotoscoping is used to isolate elements in a shot which exhibit a different channel misalignment than other elements in a shot, in order to bring all of the elements into alignment. These techniques could be considered manipulation, and it would be true to say that this isn’t a preservation of his 35mm prints. It could be seen as a restoration of a mythical Original Negative. Since we don’t know what channel misalignments occurred on the negative itself, he’s using this as an opportunity to fix all of these problems in his project. It could very well be that he’s surpassing the quality of the original negative in some places by doing this, but whether you consider this good restoration work or evidence of simply another Special Edition is open to interpretation. As for myself, I think that as long as you don’t change something which was intended to be that way by the original artists, and your changes aren’t anachronistic, it isn’t a special edition. So for example, I can’t imagine any effects artist wanting a channel misalignment in their work, and it was possible to make an effect with no misalignment in the 70’s, so fixing that wouldn’t be a change to the intent. However, altering a composite to remove its matte lines, although probably within the intent of the artists, would be anachronistic. Therefore matte lines should stay.