Doctor M

titanic said:

Doctor M said:

@titanic - SOME Disney films, particularly the 'B' films (less popular) have more grain and look better on BD.  The guide needs some updating in that regards.

What movies are you thinking about?

 Well, the most popular ones.. (Pinocchio, Dumbo, Cinderella, Peter Pan, Lady and the Tramp, SLeeping Beauty, Jungle Book, Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, etc. etc.)

From what it seems the only ones I could buy on Bluray, that  haven't been over-restored and retain grain are:

-The Rescuers

-The Rescuers down under

-The Great Mouse Detective

isn't that right?

I could get The little mermaid, but I don't want to because it has an error with the titles and it makes me furious (the misplacement of the main title which is out of sync with a music effect)

Also, i could get Fox and the Hound, but I want the full screen of the DVD.

So, other than those I don't see anything else..

also, i guess I could buy all the Blurays from Pocahontas and on, right?

Since they were digital or something..

At least I have the HD version of the unrestored Sword in the Stone, and Saludos Amigos, which are great.

My thoughts on these movies as regard to Blu-ray.  This doesn't supersede the original list, so much as this favors HD and makes allowances for overcleaned transfers:

Pinocchio isn't great on BD, they really killed it.  I wouldn't go with that.

Dumbo doesn't seem to have ANY version that's correct outside of a laserdisc.  If that's not an option the BD is probably as wrong as any other digital transfer.

Cinderella, again, unless you are going the laserdisc route, you might as well get the BD.  It's as bad as the rest of the digital releases and is at least HD.

Peter Pan - I'm probably alone in liking the '02 Special Edition DVD, but I can't stand the BD's colors.

Lady and the Tramp - I didn't find the BD to be awful.  It won't have grain any more than the rest of the above, but I don't think they messed it up too badly.

Sleeping Beauty, there are many who would disagree, but while over-clean, this shows better accuracy IN SOME AREAS on BD.  If you must have it on BD, you could do worse.

Jungle Book - No.  Disney hasn't figure out how to properly restore Xerography based animation yet.  I wouldn't go BD on this one.

Beauty and the Beast - Much talk, few answers.  There is a laserdisc preservation to HD in the works... don't expect grain, but it'll at least be the original theatrical version of the film.

Lion King - If you want the un-screwed with animation, you need to go VHS/Laserdisc source.  Otherwise, the BD is a good option.

Etc. etc. - Yes and no.

The Rescuers - I haven't even decided myself.  I originally said yes, studying it I'm not in love with how hard it's been cleaned, but the original DVD is pretty poor too.  The BD probably has a slight edge.

The Rescuers Down Under - Yes, with no reservations.

The Great Mouse Detective - Yes, but WITH reservations.  Scrubbed, but improved over the previous release.  There are compelling reasons to get this on BD as well.

The Little Mermaid - Has Disney ever made good on the promise of a corrected disc?  I've heard nothing following this up.

Fox and the Hound - Scrubbed more than you'd think for that title, but the AR change is more on one side and less on another.  A bit of a wash there.

Pocahontas and on, I don't think there are any issues to worry about.

Sword in the Stone - I'd go for an HDTV version, or the DVD (which is nearly the same quality).

Saludos Amigos - Is this even on BD?  I'd probably still favor the Walt & El Grupo release unless they used that transfer for a recent BD.

@titanic - SOME Disney films, particularly the 'B' films (less popular) have more grain and look better on BD.  The guide needs some updating in that regards.

What movies are you thinking about?

So no DVD, but VHS and laserdisc.  Good to know.

jolennon said:

titanic said:

The DVD changes were also in the VHS?

I have it but can't remember..

 Just in the 2004 (Special Edition/Platinum) VHS

AFIAK, Lion King never saw an untouched home video release... at least as far as the sex cloud goes.

On the other hand, if you mean the repainted scenes, there ARE releases that predate the S.E./IMAX/Platinum.

Maybe that's the confusion going on here.

_,,,^..^,,,_ said:

Doctor M said:

It's the laserdisc cleaned to look like the Bluray.

Nope! It's a laserdisc preservation, with small color correction to remove the pink blanket, that's all! No BD used as a color correction.

 Let me rephrase that...

...cleaned to look like the A Bluray.

It's the laserdisc cleaned to look like the Bluray.

@Handman - I think she is armed with a lot of misinformation.  Disney archiving their films on VHS?  Detail is lost because the source was painted?  The digital alterations are okay because they look better than what the animators intended?  There are many more silly statements.

She's welcome to her thoughts, but her arguments aren't very convincing.

Doesn't say it isn't the same transfer though.

I just noticed that there is a Sleeping Beauty Diamond Edition coming out in a few weeks.

I'm confused, I had thought the last BD was a DE.  Anyone have any knowledge of what to expect from this?  I can't imagine they can "restore" it anymore than they already have.

AntcuFaalb said:

Doctor M said:

AntcuFaalb said:

Doctor M said:

Yeah, something else that probably needs to be updated on the list.  I thought I had heard bad things about it... must start list of the latest releases.

Overall good, but a naive sharpener was used, so the grain is really, really pronounced like the BD release of Earthquake (1974).

 Completely amused by "naive sharpener", but I get your meaning.

Yeah, just a silly 3x3 kernel for sharpening, applied with no grain reduction at all. I love grain, but this is GrainCity™!

It makes me wonder if it is just an HD transfer of the same Lowry restoration that they've been using.  The sharpening was unpleasant on the DVD releases as well.

AntcuFaalb said:

Doctor M said:

Yeah, something else that probably needs to be updated on the list.  I thought I had heard bad things about it... must start list of the latest releases.

Overall good, but a naive sharpener was used, so the grain is really, really pronounced like the BD release of Earthquake (1974).

 Completely amused by "naive sharpener", but I get your meaning.

Yeah, something else that probably needs to be updated on the list.  I thought I had heard bad things about it... must start list of the latest releases.

SilverWook said:

On a side note, would there be any interest in a preservation of this?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Beta-Disney-Snow-White-Live-at-Radio-City-Music-Hall-Betamax-/191311970208

This aired on HBO many times in the early 80's. The production values were pretty good for the era, and the plot of the movie was expanded a bit. AFAIK, there has never been a DVD release.

I've seen a DVD transfer of this on Cinematik.  I didn't think to get it when it was posted and it is now dead.  Probably still floating about though.

MattMahdi said:

Where'd Bianca's whiskers go?!

That's true throughout the film and consistent with the movie posters for Down Under.

Looks like she had some electrolysis between the films.

Discussion was sparse regarding the Rescuers Blu-ray back when I was working on the guide.

I thought maybe it wasn't restored because the reviews talked about it not looking great, but I recently viewed some screenshots and I'm thinking they did hit it with some unfortunate digital cleanup.

Rescuers Down Under definitely looks good on BD with the great look you'd associate from being struck from film.  I'm just not so sure about the original film.

Anyone have more info?

ALSO, I want to ask you guys what you all see, don't see, or care about in releases.

When I look at digitally scrubbed frames from Disney, I see what I call a 'licked candy stick' appearance.  I don't know if there is a real term for it.

Ink lines that should taper off or thin out like a brush stroke get eroded, smoothed and sometimes rounded.  Sketch lines are pretty much gone as well.

I can tell you it looks 'unnatural' as a frame, I'm not sure how well I could pick it out in motion.  It may simply be an effect of the grain being missing that would normally hide the line ends.

The point being, do we reject this sort of digital clean up from the guide or not?  The Rescuers has never looked great on home video.  Is the overscrubbed look an acceptable our trade off for a better transfer of the film?

Below are screenshots from Blu-ray.com comparing the Rescuers and Rescuers Down Under.  I know they came from different eras, but I still feel like the original film has been poorly treated.

(Right click and select 'View Image' for full size.)

@Space Kaijuu,

You can use tsMuxeR to create a Blu-ray folder with the new video you want to add in.  (Do the movie and short separately.)  You'll want to make sure you have the same number and order of audio and subtitle tracks as well (even if you blank them later).

Under the Blu-ray tab, there is an area that says 'Options'.  Here you can set the first MPLS and first M2TS.  Set these numbers to correspond with numbers on the Blu-ray you are rebuilding.

Next you need to copy the .M2TS from new STREAMS folder, the .CLPI from new CLIPINF folder (will be the same number as the .M2TS), and the corresponding .MPLS from new PLAYLISTS into the old BD structure.

The .MPLS isn't usually the same number as the .M2TS and if you don't know it you can use BDEdit or various other tools to find it.  (If you want info on this let me know.)

You'll also want to replace the same CLPI & MPLS files in the BACKUP folder as well.

It's... not really simple.

Sorry, I'm overdue updating this guide, and I will get to it.  Largely it seems the recent slate of 'dumped on market' blu-ray films are in better condition than the top releases.

I do want to mention ahead of this that the just released 'Bedknobs and Broomsticks' BD contains the theatrical cut only.

This is good because it is the first digital release of B&B in it's original theatrical form.  Of course it is also 22 minutes shorter than any release put out in the last 20 years.

I predicted this because the restored scenes are in quite poor condition.  I figured if they had it in a quality that would hold up to HD, it would have looked better to start with.

Hang on to your DVDs if you like the extended cut, you may never see it anywhere else again.

I don't remember a lot of VHS tapes being anything but 1.33:1.

Nice upgrade.  Needs a little work (the sky is darker), but that is better in just about every way.

The problem is the DVD almost looks pastel, which is suggestive of the same issue that the early Dumbo release had.  The DVD could be just as wrong, just for different reasons.

titanic said:

Screenshot comparisons of Ichabod release (Bluray Vs. DVD):

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/85922/picture:0

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/85924

 Huh.  I'd swear they didn't scrub all the grain, but what is with the color changes?  I'm not sure what's right.

Derp. Speaking of getting old, yes, I was looking at the wrong screenshot.  That would explain it.

Wow, just wow.  Your source is just a steaming pile, isn't it.

I cannot believe what you got out of it.

Now I'm curious about the grain that was present in the other screenshot:

It certainly doesn't look like it came from the source.  Is that some sort of debanding addgrain sort of thing going on?

Don't get me wrong, I like grain, but it's too fine to have been present in the raw capture.

(And yes, I was calling you Catman, since copy-pasta-ing your username gets old fast.)

I wanted to ask, Catman Scruthers, what your script looked like for the 'raw' screenshot you posted before.

It's already been resized and I'm curious if that's all or what filter(s) you used to enlarge the frame.

It's on the BD from the looks of it.  (And also on BitHQ.)