- Time
- Post link
And now, Ludwig van Beethoven!!!
Where were you in '77?
Info: Recommended Editions of Disney Animated (and Partially Animated) Features — Page 8
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
someone made a comparison of the itunes movie store version (1080p at 1.33:1) vs the blu-ray.
please note that the itunes version has been resized for a closer comparison.
- Time
- Post link
Alas, no uncensored footage... :(
Lots of cuts through the Beethoven. I don't know if that's how it was cut for TV, or if that's how it was cut for the Educational Digest version. Either way, bummer...
I'll post pics later - decent color, but nothing we haven't seen.
- Time
- Post link
Wow, tons more grain and info in the itunes version! Here's the link again for people who had trouble with it (like I did)...
- Time
- Post link
Sorry to hear it wasn't uncut. Maybe it was censored separately for educational prints?
- Time
- Post link
Could be... What was the running time of the original? This one was only about 20 minutes...
- Time
- Post link
Wow. Having a high-quality source that's *not* mangled makes it much easier to see that these new releases are ultimately tragedies. :/
A Goon in a Gaggle of 'em
- Time
- Post link
ww12345 said:
Could be... What was the running time of the original? This one was only about 20 minutes...
As it was originally a Walt Disney Presents episode, I presume 50 minutes?
Here's an old press photo with caption...
Where were you in '77?
- Time
- Post link
Well that was in there, but during the Bacchus sequence. No "second movement" sequence at all (the censored portion). Matter of fact, the zebras were cut from the Bacchus sequence entirely!
- Time
- Post link
Wow. Somebody wasn't taking any chances of offending anyone. Any clues to the age of the print?
Where were you in '77?
- Time
- Post link
Well, it's Mylar, so what's that, '84?
I could look for a date code on Eastman (actually SP) stock...
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
I know when Vault Disney was running the episode in the late 90s, it just spliced out the offending parts.
I have no idea if there's any truth to the rumors that the Disney Channel unwittingly ran the uncut version in the early/mid 80s. They certainly made fewer cuts to their cartoons than they would in the 90s, but they still cut out racial stereotypes (the Donald Duck short "Spare the Rod" was only ever seen in a heavily abridged version at the end of one episode of "Donald Duck Presents," that removed the entire section where Huey, Dewey and Louie disguised themselves as pygmies).
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
We need to take a closer look at the Snow White LD.
I'm still having trouble believing that it was reanimated. It makes no sense.
(It was, of course, the first film to ever be 100% remastered in a computer, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it was reanimated ala Sleeping Beauty.)
Why, after going through the whole reanimation process, would they do one of the following?
- leave the gate-weave in
- re-insert the gate-weave
- print to film and then to LD
A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.
I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!
—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
The 1993 digital restoration was output to film because it was done for theatrical re-release, as was the case with the Star Wars SEs.
Even uncritical accounts say they used digital paintbox technology to clean up dirt, scratches, etc. I don't even know if the technology existed to directly convert a 2K DI to D-1 or D-2 or whatever the storage medium was at the time.
- Time
- Post link
TServo2049 said:
I thought it was a combination photochemical/digital restoration like the Star Wars SE.
That makes more sense.
Some here think it was SleepingBeauty-level reanimated. That just doesn't make sense to me.
A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.
I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!
—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Antcu, I revised my post, it was a fully digital restoration - I believe the first of its kind: http://articles.latimes.com/1993-07-31/entertainment/ca-18865_1_snow-white
I was getting mixed up with the YCM Labs photochemical restoration done for the 50th anniversary re-release. But yes, each frame of the 1993 digital restoration was output to film after completion, as the New York Times article describes: http://www.nytimes.com/1993/06/30/business/business-technology-snow-white-is-made-over-frame-by-frame-and-byte-by-byte.html
As I said before, the technology to produce a direct-digital transfer either didn't exist, was in the experimental stages, or would have been prohibitively expensive. It was major news when Pixar did a direct-digital transfer of A Bug's Life, in 1999.
And as far as The Sword in the Stone, Disney does have HD masters of quite a few of their catalog which have still never been released on physical media. To name a few; Honey, I Shrunk the Kids, Honey, I Blew Up the Kid, Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey, A Goofy Movie. But this surprises me because it IS on Blu-ray, yet has an iTunes version that is superior! How often does THAT happen?
- Time
- Post link
Yeah, whatever stuff they did to Snow White, step 1 was output to film. They ran off copies of it on both 35mm and 16mm, and my guess is they made the LD from a telecine of a print. Remember, this was before DI, so people were a lot more comfortable handling and telecining prints. I don't know that it had as drastic a reanimation (like Sleeping Beauty) but there can be digital enhancements without that level of computer work...
- Time
- Post link
I have the Snow White DVD which has a restoration featurette that touches on the 1993 restoration.
If anyone's interested, I'll post it to the group.
- Time
- Post link
That might be interesting...
- Time
- Post link
nirbateman said:
I have the Snow White DVD which has a restoration featurette that touches on the 1993 restoration.
If anyone's interested, I'll post it to the group.
It would certainly clear things up if you could.
Dr. M
- Time
- Post link
I wonder if they used something like CAPS to isolate elements?
Yeah, that documentary would be interesting to see, provided it's not just a "glossy" picture of the restoration process (sometimes the Disney releases are like that...)
- Time
- Post link
zeropc said:
someone made a comparison of the itunes movie store version (1080p at 1.33:1) vs the blu-ray.
please note that the itunes version has been resized for a closer comparison.
Is that legit? It makes the blu-ray look like somebody used temporal noise reduction, an edge enhancer and pushed it out the door. It's doesn't look like real HD at all.
Dr. M
- Time
- Post link
That's what it looked like to me, too. Only way to check would be to compare it ourselves to the BD...
- Time
- Post link
ww12345 said:
Alas, no uncensored footage... :(
Lots of cuts through the Beethoven. I don't know if that's how it was cut for TV, or if that's how it was cut for the Educational Digest version. Either way, bummer...
I'll post pics later - decent color, but nothing we haven't seen.
If the film stock changes in the middle of the reel, I would think it has been re-edited. Is it possible someone cut it out on their own? Do you see any physical splices in the film?
Dr. M
- Time
- Post link
No, I don't think that's the case. The edit was very, very professionally done, with brand new leader on the front. It was an ex-library print, and sometimes what would happen is a clueless projectionist would misthread the print and pull all of the sprocket holes for the first 300 feet or something...
My guess? Some idiot pulled all of the sprockets sometime in the late '80s or the early '90s, and the library requested replacement footage (which happened a lot), and spliced it in themselves. There are no physical splices in the film except for the one in the middle of "Bumble Boogie." There are lab splices/crossfades in the middle of the Pastoral and Once Upon a Wintertime, though...