Doctor M

Sorry if I wasn't clear before.  What I meant was the magiclean froze the grain in clumps and it made the picture look like you were viewing it through a dirty screen.

The analoclean didn't produce the same effect.  It left grain as grain, that is small moving particles.  That is more desirable.

The analoclean+magicup2 seemed to scrub all grain, and I'm just not a fan of that.

Can you calarify, is this correct:

generic deghost script 1 + AnaloClean + MagicUp = analoclean+magicup(1)
generic deghost script 2 + AnaloClean + MagicUp = analoclean+magicup2

Or is the deghost a new addition to the previous scripts?

Molly, I believe the MKV version is not a re-encoding but the mpeg stream repackaged in an MKV container.

I just got to looking at the test4-analoclean+magicup2 version and don't like it as well as the first version.  The original preserved some grain and looks more natural with less digital artifacts.

How do those versions relate to the ones tagged as deghost?  Is that just the analoclean+magicup and analoclean+magicup2 again or something new?

My thoughts on the sample clips.

Best is the Analoclean with magicup.  The Magiclean turns the noise into a frozen noise pattern that looks like your watching it through a screen door.

You may want to find out what upscaler Dark_Jedi using on his SW project since he is getting great results.

I certainly wouldn't use bicubic when a superscaler is needed.  Spline36 in a pinch.  I've never heard of magicup, I'm assuming that it is a superscaler.

The other thing is the ghosting.  Not as in DNR, but as in the old analog noise.  There is a double image around everything.  Is that in the master or is it something in the analog equipment/wiring?

Seriously though, if the analoclean+magicup was your final release I'd be pretty damn happy with it.  It's really clean but looks like there is still some grain.

Finally, and I know it's only a short clip, but the black levels (and possibly the white level) need a bit of a tweak.  It doesn't quite bottom out at 16 like it probably should.

How are you unpainting the art work that has been changed twice before getting to BD?

I thought you were using the LD as the video source.

That VHS2DVD version was done by someone called Andrea Dodgers: http://classiccartoons.blogspot.com/2008/07/return-of-sunflower.html

If that helps anyone track it down.

SRestore: http://avisynth.nl/index.php/Srestore

The quality of your output will be dependent on the quality of the deinterlacer you use before it.

Of course slower isn't always better.  I've found some of the more top end ones to work worse on animation.  You'll need to do a little trial and error there, but Srestore is about the only game in town.

Little Mermaid updated again. Spent a lot of time looking at different editions.

The Limited DVD is now the only purist recommendation until someone makes a custom from the Diamond Edition.  This is based on colors, image detail, previously unnoticed digital changes and OAR.

Okay, I mentioned something in the guide but got it backwards.

Apparently the Diamond Edition reverses a PE change, but I need to pick brains since this one is new to me.

Is the following an instance of "OMG! His hand is on her ass!" or "OMG! We accidentally have the cells in the wrong order and his arm looks like it was drawn by Escher!"

I've never heard mention of this change (which was why I didn't fix it in the Restored Edition), but it only appears on the Platinum Edition.

Correction or censorship?

Edit: Btw, totally starting to get on board with the Limited Edition's colors over the Platinum Edition.  The LE is the closer of the two to the Diamond Edition.

I think the LE wasn't wrong, but maybe it just doesn't come across as well on a non-anamorphic DNR'd single layer DVD as well as it does on the Blu-ray.

Edit 2: Other musings.

The supposed inside of clam shells being the wrong color shown in the YouTube comparison clip is another instance of the Diamond Edition reversing a PE change (the DE and LE are the same).

The Platinum Edition does suffer from being less vibrant and a bit overscrubbed (in a different way than the LE), but the BD is occasionally over-bright with some detail being clipped in the brightest regions.

Also the PE and LE have the closest color match for Arial's tail.  The Diamond Edition is apparently doing it's own thing.  (I have only a few shots to compare though.)

Seriously considering changing to Purist: Limited and Reasonable Alternative: Diamond.

I didn't even know this was a thing.

Is the first film the only one that is different?

Okay, two updates.  The Great Mouse Detective Mystery in the Mist DVD/BD are no longer recommended at all.  I tried to watch it and found the over scrubbing to be a terrible experience.  Certainly not worth the trade off for the 'cleaner' look and original title card.  (I'm also not convinced that the new color scheme is any more accurate).

The Little Mermaid has been revised.  Phew, it could now possibly be the longest entry in the guide.

I've given 3 'purist' recommendations only because everyone has their own opinion.

The Diamond Edition is being tentatively called an 'Acceptable Alternative' contingent on what is repaired in the replacement discs Disney is offering.

That said, I doubt they will be fixing some of their color/lighting changes or additional censorship.

Unless someone goes through and fixes what Disney doesn't and adds any type of theatrical audio mix, it will never be a purist choice.  (Honestly, I'm having a hard time calling it acceptable, but you guys are.)

I don't know if this has been previously posted, but here is a good comparison of Diamond vs Platinum.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_4135981063&feature=iv&src_vid=Ft642v9AioM&v=qXpk-YHH03o

ww12345, feel free to disagree.

My opinion was based on the grain and the more muted colors.  It feels more like I remember it.

Btw, don't you already have Snow White on Fuji stock ('84?)?

As far as the blurry bird, there are many frames in Snow White like that.  I don't think it was the restoration, but a flaw in the original photographing of the cells.

I previously posted a similar frame: http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/The-Vaultbreakers-Collection-Disney-Preservations/post/642540/#TopicPost642540

Note that Snow is the ONLY thing in the frame not blurry.  Probably some sort of double exposure.

Thanks for the info.  I'm sure I just missed it when I read it before.

Glad Rigid Tools is getting fixed too.

Really need to get a BD burner soon.

AntcuFaalb said:

nirbateman said:

Came across these:

A beautiful 35mm of Snow White

http://www.ebay.com/itm/SNOW-WHITE-AND-THE-SEVEN-DWARFS-reissue-35mm-LPP-Fuji-feature-Disney-/400591418733?pt=US_Film&hash=item5d451bf56d

WOW!!!

I'll say.  THAT'S what SW is supposed to look like.

Two things.

First, and I didn't see this mentioned elsewhere, the spot on the paper towel is actually on the DVD as well.

Second, what was the final method for repair of this?  From my reading it sounds like it was a straight up frame replacement.  Isn't there too much of a difference in quality?

Is it full shots being replaced or just single frames?  Has anyone considered some sort of rotoscoping/painting-in of the missing bits?

Screenshot 4 shows exactly what is wrong with the Platinum Edition restoration.

There was no R1 release in 2003, but the screenshots appears to be very similar to the 1999 Limited Issue/2000 Gold DVD.

Also, with Disney replacing TLM Diamond BDs, are we actually calling this an actual successful restoration?  I'm finding it really hard to believe.

I will be updating the first post when I can find my notes.  Most importantly I will be demoting the Great Mouse Detective Mystery in the Mist disc.  Got to watch it recently and it is an eyesore.

And a follow up... might be just a temporary limitation for GetFLV, but it strongly urges you to use the Safari/iPad kernel for Vudu and then you can only get the flavors of SD or worse.

Using the IE kernel you can get as far as being asked which stream up to 9000k you want and where to save it, but then it does nothing with it.

Might be a temporary thing, might not be.  I haven't tried TubeDigger on Vudu.

Vudu lets you view trailers for free in HDX, and I know GetFLV lets you demo the program.

I believe Vudu works with programs like GetFLV/Tubedigger.  You won't have dropped frames using a program like that.

I don't know about netflix though.

Has anyone with skillz tossed together a 2-disc Restored Edition Melody Time/Make Mine Music cover?

I've tried to link in the first post any preservations that have a home here on OT.

There is an analog preservation site that several members here belong to with additional projects.  You might want to check it out.

I don't know to what degree Disney animators took into account film stock once they started using CAPS.

TLM was made in a fairly bleak period for Disney's animation department.  A lot of the really experienced animators had left.  It doesn't strike me that they went through all the same things as they did with their Technicolor collaboration days with answer prints and all.

Besides, by the 90's film stock was a much different (better) beast than in Disney's early days.

Considering that fully CAPS produced films look fairly identical in nearly all their DVD and BD releases, I don't think ANY adjustment is being made (or is needed) when Disney digitally transfer those films.

Several DVDs that did have an intermediate film stock before DVD don't look significantly different (color-wise) from the later all digital transfers from CAPS.

Either they have been REALLY good at matching the film prints or the CAPS could be as accurate a reference as plain cells at this point. Rightly or wrongly.

BUT the CAPS segments are at least stable and already digitized.  I'd rather they went that way than adjusting colors and brightness because they'd be too dark while you're wearing 3D glasses.

The Platinum Edition's several mini flaws being corrected at least shows that people familiar with the film were at least involved in the restoration.

At this point, it's probably just a bunch new college grads hacking away with Photoshop or something making the adjustments with no real knowledge of the film.

Seriously, would you leave real obvious flaws (hand out of place, shirts changing colors, etc.) in a new restoration from a new print, but still take the time to paint a KNEE out?!

Fidelity to the original film was not their agenda.  3D eye candy for a new generation well timed to tie into Once Upon a Time's Ariel appearance, the Magic Kingdom's Little Mermaid ride and whatever else TLM branded stuff IS the goal.

They're probably using some annoying buzzy word like Synergy.

What really puts me off is we know that this films has Disney's first use of CAPS for the wedding scene.

This means that there is footage in the film that is available purely digital and can be used as a reference for the rest of the film.  Every indication is that they aren't doing that though.  This is the third or fourth color scheme for the film.

So far, I honestly don't get everyone's excitement.  From what I've seen/heard so far it looks like Diamond-Edition-Business-as-usual.

Hmm.  Will check that on the last two releases now...

Edit: Saw it... also very glad they fixed it.  Like the teleporting raccoon in Bambi, once you see it, you can never un-see it.

It sure doesn't look like it was the animators intent.  If it wasn't fixed in the Diamond Edition, it's because no one who worked on the film was involved in the restoration and the error has been forgotten.

I'm just waiting for the wonderful people at the Blu-ray.com to put out comparison screenshots of all the releases.

What is a Grimsby error?

I maintain these changes are deliberate not accidental.  Left in their original state, I think it would cause problems when viewing in 3D.

What disturbed me most is that Ariel is repainted to look like her grotto is in full daylight.

I am Flounder's sigh.