Screenshots from a Derann 8mm print of Beauty and the Beast! WOW!
http://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=print_topic;f=2;t=004650
I had contacted a guy in October, and said he has a 16mm Beauty and the Beast with great polyester colors.
Although the language was in dutch.
He was selling it I think for 400 euros.
Anyway, I believe we have 3 votes now for unfiltered Beauty and the Beast.
titanic, screamingtrees and RU.08.
Even if many peope don't like it, I think that a good capture of the LD which sporv did already, should exist, for preservation's sake.
_,,,^..^,,,_ said:
I examined all the feedbacks... I think both versions (filtered Vs unfiltered) have their strenght and weakness, so... why don't use the "best of both world"?
Here you are the screenshot - unfiltered Vs "mix":
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/112945
Opinions?
I don't understand what is the mix, but still preferring the unfiltered one of course.
The filtered version reminds me of the SITS BLuray:
and even if we can't have an HD quality resolution in the original laserdisc, I prefer to see a blurry version of it than the smudged and flat colors.
This is the verical line I was referring to. (from bottom to top of the window)
If you go back and forth in the comparison, it's vanished. (you can see just a bit on the bottom)
Also, look at the shape of the windows.
That is altered too in the filtered version.
Doctor M said:
Do you plan to attempt your own clean up, titanic, or do you figure to watch it completely unfiltered?
No, i wouldn't do anything on that.
I would watch it as it is, as I see in the unfiltered screenshot!
It's the best it could look with the sources we have, to my eyes.
it's much much better than the previous LD rip (if I'm not mistaken that was molly's)
_,,,^..^,,,_ said:
Aspect ratio: Laserdisc 1 from the previous comparison wasn't my capture...
Yes of course. I said so in my post.
I said LD2 is sporv's.
_,,,^..^,,,_ said:
...but I'm sure someone else would STILL like to get the unfiltered version... (^^,)
That would be me! ;-)
And yes. I'm still interested in the unfiltered version.
I prefer it than the filtered one.
Anyone else that still agrees?
By the way, the unfiltered one, even if it is more blurry, it shows more detail!
See for example in the comparison you posted the window on the left. There is a verical line inside the glass that is vanished in the filtered one. well, ok, that's nothing but i just used it to show my point.
(also the line on the dress on Belle's back is vanished a bit)
Also, the filters destroy the haziness of the lights and shadows.. Can't understand how anyone doesn't see it..
Anyway, I hope you're not offended sporv, since you did all that hard work, but i still prefer the unfiltered one.
Yes, this is another reason too I prefer the unfiltered version.
See an upscaled image from the video:
screamingtrees said:
Realizing mine is probably an unpopular opinion--I prefer the unfiltered. There is a warm depth to it that I miss when I watch the right side. Not to belittle your work...it looks miles better than the BD so congrats. So you didn't apply any noise reduction to the unfiltered? I've never seen any Disney laserdiscs, but it's hard for me to believe that it contains that little grain.
I would prefer the unfiltered also, seeing the clip.
The filtered one has better colors, but as I had said earlier, it doesn't have that effect of blurry backgrounds, and characters + backgrounds look like one thing.
So, I would be interested in the unfiltered one because:
1) it is much better than the LD capture that was around the previous years:
(LD2 is sporv's)
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/86496
2) it doesn't alter the blurry look of the backgrounds (see the tree on the right, and the tavern on the left) and also is grainy as much as it can be seen in the medium (while the filtered one is degrained):
_,,,^..^,,,_ said:
Well, unfiltered version will come soon... when? don't know exactly, let's say "rather" soon! (^^,)
OMG!!
Thank you, thank you, thank you!! :-)
My stomach started aching of joy!
RU.08 said:
I would still like to see the unfiltered version if possible
+1000
:-)
Has anyone made a widescreen version eventually with the deleted song?
dvdmike said:
DNR on animation is worse than live action in my eyes, and I hate live action
Completely agree!
Disney is the worst company concerning its Blurays releases, and I don't support them at all!
Thanks for the info.
By the way, both of those HD grainy prints of Mulan and Hunchback come come from the Japanese channel WOWOW.
I wonder if they have or have shown other film prints too of Disney films.
If only they had a film print of Beauty and the Beast!
I would faint at the idea!
Doctor M said:
That's the first I've heard of a Lady and the Tramp HDTV version. I agree. the BD is just wrong.
Nice screenshots, titanic.
As far as grain on CAPS films, the point is the presence of grain or not doesn't indicate any loss of quality from the source. However, the absence of grain in earlier films usually includes a loss of some detail and depth.
If you want grain on your CAPS BD's, it's simple enough to re-encode them adding grain to the image. It would be just as accurate.
Yes, i understand that loss of grain doesn't indicate loss of detail in the CAPS films.
Oh, I hadn't thought of adding grain, although it wouldn't be the same as the original film print, and still may seem artificial..
I have a confusion though about something.
Hunchback has clearly grain in the DVD, meaning coming from the film print.
Also Mulan has grain in the HDTV:
http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/98355
Pocahontas DVD doesn't seem to have grain (as the HDTV too).
So, what's the story here?
They transfered to DVD and HDTV the film prints of Hunchback and Mulan but not Pocahontas?
edit: Does anyone have the Gold Collection DVD? Maybe that one is grainy?
edit2: oh, just found a review that says it's grainy.
And i realised that my PAL dvd has the Gold collection transfer. Well, it looks like it's grainy but I am not exactly sure as it has a very bad compression. I mean it's not evident like it is in Hunchback. There, it is clear that there is grain.
10th Anniversary DVD vs. Bluray:
Here, since I love grain, a database for the CAPS and on films.
I think we agree that all the films pre-Beauty and the Beast had grain in their respective DVDs, before restorations.
Now, for the others:
(I have written a "?" in some, because due to the bluriness of the DVD I'm not so sure.)
So, it seems only Hunchback, Hercules (?) and Mulan have grainy-filmic versions around.
EDIT: By the way, I just watched the HDTV version of Hunchback of Notre Dame and it was an EXPERIENCE!
I know 99% of people don't like grain at all, but to my eyes the Bluray looks flat, lifeless and without depth, like any recent TV cartoon while the grainy version is full of life, organic, cinematic and multi-dimensional. It was the closest to seeing a 35mm film print, and it was amazing!
Yes, I didn't suggest that they scrabbed grain.
I used the word "de-grained" in comparison with the film print.
I understand that they originally didn't have grain.
However still, when i watch a Bluray I would like to watch it as a film, as it was projected at cinema WITH grain, and not as a video file as the animators saw it on their computers.
By the way, here's some comparisons of HDTV vs. Bluray from Lady and the tramp!
The HDTV looks exquisite!!!
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=9957252&postcount=364
Doesn't the BLuray look ugly to you?
I don't know how they do it, but the lines seem like they have retained the grain, and it has been wiped off of all the rest.
Does anyone know of any wider HDTV version?
Doctor M said:
Pocahontas and on, I don't think there are any issues to worry about.
well, just browsing again in the internet and searching about Disney films.
To tell you the truth, I prefer the DVDs that retain the grain, even if they are compressed.
They look much more cinematic to me.
Here in the NTSC DVD of Hunchback, the grain is still visible, but on the Bluray it's non-existent.
(strange, my PAL DVD, isn't as good as this NTSC DVD, it looks a bit de-grained. I guess it's the compression)
NTSC DVD vs. Bluray
By the way, I don't understand why HDTV versions have grain and Blurays don't.
If they wanted the HD to look grainless, why they retained it when they showed it on TV?
Anyway, that means that grainy HD versions exist, and I hope they will be released when the new format (4K) comes along.
Thank you very much!
If you could upload this it would be great!
Although, to tell you the truth, I wouldn't be watching the whole film, I'd prefer to buy the Bluray and watch it, and watch only the deleted scenes from this one.
have you identified all the deleted scenes that were included here with timecodes etc.?
I don't know the film so well, so I'm not sure I would be able to do it.
Croweyes1121 said:
On the plus side, mitch was *awesome* and did get this dubbed for me, and I appreciate it more than he knows. If there's still interest (and with mitch's permission, of course), I may upload it to the spleen...if that's not too "blow-by-blow" of me to say. ;) j/k
Oh, of course there is still interest, if it would be possible from both ends!!
Although I don't understand what's the story with the dubbing..
Ok, my mistake..
I thought you had already an upscaled LD rip kept, before you put on the filters.
then the 480i would do just fine, reduced to a small file size. (meaning again eg. 10 GBs from 40)
Does that need work?
I still think it would look much better than the previous LDrip in circulation.
Don't want it so much for the grain, but because the filtered one lacks depth, and the picture seems very flat. Like they are all one thing together (characters and backgrounds).
Anyway, just thought to try.
If it does involve a lot of work, I can understand that you can't do it..
Doctor M said:
titanic said:
Doctor M said:
@titanic- That's smoke alright.
@_,,,^..^,,,_ - Maybe that's a communication thing. Is he asking for an SD lossless capture or just a version that is less cleaned?
Are you talking about me?
When I said initially "raw capture", I didn't mean the 40Gbs file.
I meant a smaller file size of this LD capture (possibly 1080p), without the filters.
That's what I thought. The confusion is 'raw' means uncompressed video which can be huge. Although unfiltered means a new project for _,,,^..^,,,_.
I dunno how that would look since you have to contend with upscaling and analog noise, but that doesn't sound bad in theory.
You got me confused there again..
How can this be a new project?
Doesn't sporv have the original file (without the filters) he grabbed from the LD?
I'm talking about that same file, just in smaller size.
here's his screenshot from the LD:
http://postimg.org/image/yn36kta1f/full/
and here's a comparison with the filtered one:
monks19 said:
MS = MySpleen
T3C = The 3 Caballeros
You have a pm.
I see T3C is also released in itunes, but i don't know of its quality.
By the way, does anyone know if the Fancy Free on itunes is the same DNRed HD used for the BLuray?
Doctor M said:
@titanic- That's smoke alright.
@_,,,^..^,,,_ - Maybe that's a communication thing. Is he asking for an SD lossless capture or just a version that is less cleaned?
Are you talking about me?
When I said initially "raw capture", I didn't mean the 40Gbs file.
I meant a smaller file size of this LD capture (possibly 1080p), without the filters.
10-15GBs out of 40Gbs, I think would be quite good..
What is MS and T3C?
@DoctorM
Yes, the Saludos Amigos is uncut. It has Goofy smoking.
@_,,,^..^,,,_
what if you did a 1080p mkv or something, of 10-15 GBs?
Like they do in Bluray rips of the original Bluray discs which are 40GBs.
Sorry, I don't want to seem that I'm putting pressure on you or make you do extra work.
It's just that the BATB is my favourite animation film of all time, and that unfiltered LDrip you grabbed, seems the best looking option to me of the film.
(we've talked about how certain things are vanished in the filtered version)