Doctor M

To be honest, monks19, it seemed like you were dragging your feet sharing that clip when I asked about it.  I understand it's your work, but if you were hesitant to share it, you should have just said so.

I have little expectation that providing you with the VHS cap will prove to be a benefit to me.  As such, I will make the clip available to everyone after I release the completed DVD.

You should know that what you have on YouTube is incorrectly 29.97 fps running at 23.976.  That means it needs to be decimated and re-encoded before it can be used... and you probably painted 20% more frames than you needed to.

Also, not only are you missing all the butt-through-towel action, but also some more side-boob while she's doing it.  (It is easy to miss if your source is small.)

Molly said:

...oy.

Is that a bad 'oy' or good 'oy'?  Is there a good 'oy'?

Nearing completion, so here is a teaser.  While it isn't perfect, it beats hand drawing 100+ frames.  There are many more frames with boobs than you first think.

Top is VHS, middle is the DVD, bottom is my HEAVILY corrected VHS (strictly avisynth work):

Thoughts?

Good eye, SilverWook, my Google-Fu tells me the D-TV video was 'At The Hop' and it has this scene uncensored.  (Nothing better on YouTube though.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=KZJ8fnOLvH4#t=32s

It is also old enough that it lists releases in VHS, Betamax(!) and Laserdisc.

Anyone have a LD of D-TV Pop & Rock?

Considering how late they made the changes though, LD & VHS versions of MMM are probably untouched as well.

Ugh, trying to finish up Make Mine Music and then I saw this:

I knew they removed the side-boobs, but the outline of a butt through a towel?  Zuh?

Unfortunately the source I'm working with is pretty bad as you can see.  My ability to correct this scene is in doubt.

Want to know what's funny?  The top source is a VHS recording from a old Disney Channel TV broadcast.  Yup.  Disney has gone weird.

Found some info on 1.5.  Very very cool.  Dare we hope it'll come as a 1 and 1.5 Special Edition?  No, we don't.

Here's the subs synced for this release: http://www.mediafire.com/download/5ddg0utqhzu255o/Trancers_synced_Subs.SRT

And a heads up.  There are a few music notes that are ¶.  It's a more compatible symbol but anyone adding it to their DVD will want to replace it.

OmegaMattman said:

I haven't yet, but I'll remember to scan through them (or put in a request for someone else to do it) if and when I get the chance to revisit Trancers.  Subtitles have never been my strong suit.

With the various Blu-rays Full Moon has been releasing lately and the announcement of Trancers 1.5: City of Angels on the way, I've been hoping Charles Band would spring to release the original movie in HD and save me the trouble ;)

Is 1.5 some weird extended cut or is old man Thomerson going to stagger through another movie?

As far as the subs I have, they ARE ripped from a laserdisc, and they synced and remuxed just fine to your DVD (I'll def repost the retimed version later).

It's just lines like: "Last January, I finally singed Martin Whistler, out on one of the rim planets."

Is: "Last January, I finally singed Martin Whistler."

Seriously, they cut like half the dialog.  But it may be better than nothing.

I previously posted the English subtitles from the laserdisc uncorrected or retimed.
Looking at them again, they're kind of poorly done (by whoever transcribed it).

Has anyone gone to the trouble of filling in the missing dialog?

I put something together tonight because it seems possible that Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs may never have been on home video unrestored.

While not from anything I would consider reference, it is a good idea of what  it may have looked like before being digital molested.

Anyway, it is a side-by-side comparison of the Diamond Edition DVD with a wartime short containing the same animation: http://youtu.be/gbMQg6kPqDQ

At 720p YouTube doesn't seemed to have damaged it too badly re-encoding, but I'll probably put a better version on MF for the guide.

ww12345: What was the 'crawling fur' release of Bambi? 
Last night I watched the Diamond Edition for the first time and felt that it was plastic and sterile looking compared to my memories of the film.  That said, the Platinum Edition isn't as bad.

As far as Peter Pan, I don't know what to think.  I've reviewed loads of screenshots from a half dozen releases and still couldn't tell you which is right.

I remember Wendy's nightgown as blue.  That really hasn't been the case since 2002.

Also, the '91 Laserdisc shows colors in the background art and details in the animation that haven't been seen since.  I think some really bad restoration started around there, but it could also be bad caps(?)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing any special love for Peter Pan that it should go to the top of the list, I'm just commenting on the 'hasn't been botched' thing.

Btw, update the first post to correct the link for the downloadable screenshots of Peter Pan.

Unfortunately I don't have a comprehensive comparison for PP. 

There's the '91 LD, '99 LD, '02 DVD one; the '02, '07, BD comparison; and the '91 LD, '99 DVD, '02 DVD and '07 DVD one.
You sort of have to work it out in pieces.

Why would Magic and Music be on film? I mean, yeah, they probably shot it on film, but it wouldn't have been distributed to theaters.

This program was first shown on "Disneyland" in black-and-white when the show aired on ABC, but was repeated in 1962 in color after the show moved to NBC under the title "The Wonderful World of Color".

I'd like to say go for it, but it sound suspicious.

Discussing something altogether different somewhere else, I came across a discussion that led me to this:

Chicken Little:

Disney gave Chicken Little to a 3rd-party to convert the film into 3D. However, they provided original 3D models, so it's nearly a native rendering. This is similar to Meet the Robinsons. Ideally, they would've re-rendered with a second virtual camera.

Meet the Robinsons:

According to this YouTube they appear to have original 3D models. I also talked to a friend of some of the crewmembers, and apparently they projected the original 2D image onto the 3D models because it was faster than re-rendering with a second camera. This is why it appears like a longer conversion process in this article. If you have the original 3D geometry, that's real enough.

Beauty and the Beast:

Since new 3D models are being created to extrude the original 2D objects, this counts to me as new content, and so Beauty and the Beast will technically be "Fake 3D." However, Disney has all the original artwork saved in separate levels, so there may not be much "filling in the blanks" done by the new animators. Instead, the conversion may be more like the process used in Meet the Robinsons (see note 3) which I categorized as "Real 3D." Plus, unlike the other "Fake" films, Beast is neither live action nor 3D animation, and so moviegoers are not being sold an inauthentic experience.

No word if Lion King or Little Mermaid are converted in the manner.

Anyway, I don't need to update the guide for them because it's still definitely not OTV, but Chicken Little and Meet the Robinsons has me scratching my head.   Were the 3D versions released simultaneously?  Are they still considered 'modified' from the original animator's intent?

A heads up, anyone looking for ADM's Aladdin should probably PM me.

@Molly: If you're referring to it being a malware site?  That has supposedly been sorted out... or have you heard something else?

Edit: Oh you mean...

Dunno, there's no proof one way or another.  If it is, it's a really bad one since they already HAVE everyone's information and emails.

@Chewtobacca - I absolutely agree.  My first choice would definitely be for a 4x3 version.  I just question how 4x3 the Gold edition really is if they cropped the sides.

My 16x9 comment was merely that it would fill the screen, but not remove anything they didn't expect to be cropped in theaters.

Do you mean the LD is hard to find or the Limited Issue DVD?

My local library system claims to have a copy of the DVD (they used to have a great selection of LD too), but that doesn't necessarily mean anything.  I plan on trying to get it for a look though.

Considering those era Disney films were meant to work both 4x3 and matted to widescreen, the newer 1.75:1 release is probably just as reasonable (not matted on the left and right)  and better if you have a 16x9 TV.

Also, the old DVD and LD have really washed out colors.

I have some downloadable comparison shots on the other thread.  Still, if I had my druthers, the optimal would be fully open matte 4x3 with colors more like the Platinum Edition.  But that's not being offered. :-(

Btw, if you guys are looking to bittorrent these things, you should take a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonoid#d2

I understand there have been 3 different laserdisc releases, but the only screenshot comparison I found has gone funny (as in all pictures are black and white (useless of course)).

Yeah, it's pretty bad that the Diamond edition really IS the best the film has looked.  It's just wrong for other reasons.

In case you guys aren't sick of Dumbo discussion and screenshots.  I've got three more that blew my mind last night. 

Not exactly the same frame, but the audience?  The ringmaster's pants and cummerbund?  The lighting?  Yikes, are these even the same film?  (Added these to my downloadable comparison in the first post.)

Lighting and contrast comparison:

60th Anniversary

Big Top Edition

70th Anniversary

The Limited Issue Jungle Book is 4x3, but not fully open matte either.

For some reason they cropped the left and right sides which should have been unnecessary.  Since the source would have been 1.33:1 that probably means it was cropped on 4 sides.

It's the same master as the laserdisc though, so that's good.

Just a note, a couple minor changes have been made to the guide including Dumbo comments, mentioning some upcoming BD release dates (not that we expect much from them) and that the Platinum Edition of Bambi includes a digital fix of the teleporting raccoon.

I'm not aware of any other continuity fixes in the digital releases of Bambi.  The raccoon being the most well known anyway.

Just rewatch the first 30 seconds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-z0o26HD40

"In fact, Sleeping Beauty, was the second film in history to undergo this extensive computer restoration process."  (The first being the 1994 release of Snow White.)

Maybe not entirely... but 'extensive' is a troubling word.

Edit: I think the point they are making is the restoration was DONE for the 1994 release, not started in 1994.

@penguinofgreatness - Thanks, link fixed.

I've also been thinking about doing something using the 60th video with the 70th audio track.

The 60th is a mix of progressive and interlaced and every reel change needs a resync.

But first I'm looking in to trying to deepen the colors so they are less pastel and darken the night scenes.

HBP is available.  For the moment, PM me for more info.

Newbies and lurkers need not apply.

The Little Mermaid: Seriously, do yourselves a favor and look at this comparison of the laserdisc and DVD releases: http://www.mediafire.com/download/0eb1209t913t4mx/The_Little_Mermaid.htm

I've since back pedaled on a lot I've said about the Platinum Edition (except the censorship and awful remix thing).  The colors for each scene pretty well match at least one of the previous releases (most often the first LD).

I can't imagine that TLM was in such terrible condition that they had to restore it as far as something like Snow White or Pinocchio.  The fact is, the colors of the Platinum Edition are just not that wrong.  It seems the first DVD may have been the problem.

I'm pretty happy with my restored version, but I certainly wouldn't fault anyone who felt that a better preservation was needed.

Aladdin: ADM's fixed edition of this will be on the loose again.  Fear not.

Dumbo: Disney you make me sad!  I took these snaps tonight.

60th Anniversary Preservation vs Bit Top Edition vs 70th Anniversary Edition

OMG! They all suck!

(downloadable screenshot comparison available in first post)

My suggestions?

Snow White.  While the restorations are pretty, they are that freaky rotoscope thing which they supposedly did in 1994!?  No laserdiscs were made before then.  AFAIK there are no releases that pre-date it except maybe some VHS.

Dumbo is a head scratcher.  There have been 3 DVDs, none are right, but someone with some advanced color correction skills could probably fix the 60th anniversary release.

Cinderella was pretty much destroyed by the time it hit DVD.  The laserdisc isn't awful, it could just be better.

If the screenshots of the 1991 laserdisc of Peter Pan are to be believed, there are colors and detail in that film that have never been seen since.

Lady and the Tramp academy ratio... I just don't know how much interest there would be.

Beauty and the Beast... yeah, probably important.  The problem when you get this modern is that it would be best synced to the BD restored audio track, not whatever is on the film.

The Lion King suffered serious reanimation of scenes, possibly worse than BatB ever did.  Someone would need to do a LDrip for that otherwise.

Of course there is the question, what versions of Fantasia exist.

While Aladdin has been poked and prodded in the audio department, I've seen screenshots of the EU Blu-ray and it looks pretty much identical to the old DVD.

Wait so you are outputing from BDSup2Sub and then doing something to uncrop?  I must have missed that bit.