ww12345

What you don't 

think

that this method

of posting is not

Fun?

The X one says, "This film has been rated X. No one under 17 admitted. Age limit may vary in certain areas. "

Hmm... I wonder if Disney has heard our cries... If the grain is back, with it will come more detail - people seem to forget that the detail hides in the grain.

cain spaans said:

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

You want to be personally notified?

yes please :) all the best to this project and all the hard work put into it

ALOL!

No, I mean that the print is like 12 different stocks but is probably 95% IB Tech. It will be a really good reference for color correction. I'll try to get frames up tomorrow.

I'm not sure it does match the original color scheme. I haven't looked at it too closely on the inspection table, but it looks like the colors more closely match the Kodak SP version I have... (if the SP weren't brown-shifted). The greens don't look anywhere near as green as they do in that screenshot that was posted of Aurora with the spinning wheel...

I guess it has reached poita, but one of his rewinds is broken, so he has to get new ones before he can look at it on the inspection table.

It is different. The quality is much worse (as far as wear and tear on the film) - it has about 12 different film stocks (including IB) patched into it at any given moment. R2 is better; R1 is pretty bad. It should be good for color reference, if nothing else...

nirbateman said:

Actually, you are describing the fullscreen version correctly.

Pan and Scan is the most used process of fitting a widescreen film to a 4x3 picture, which was used here as well.

The "Academy ratio" version of LATT was indeed prepared especially for cinemas not yet equipped with scope.

Oh, duh. Thanks for writing what I meant to say. I was on my way out of the house when I wrote that and wrote it kind of fast (and wrong, as you pointed out). I'll see if I can find the screenshots of the 1.33:1 version compared to the P&S version...

Also - yes, poita and I have Pinocchio, Sleeping Beauty (in IB Tech) and Cinderella (in IB Tech) so they will make great color references for any color correcting that anyone wants to do to the official Disney releases.

I know the P&S of LatT is wrong. It is a made-up thing, done after the fact. Basically, they just cropped the widescreen version and called it P&S. The original version was a drastically altered version, with moved cels, reframed shots, etc.

When my Tech print of SB gets here I'll scan some of the frames around that one you posted. Then we can see what one version might have looked like...

I think Molly was making fun of the fact that '50s-'80s Eastman prints suck as far as color fade and QC. We film collectors lovingly refer to films on Eastman stock as spectacular "Crimsonvision" or beautiful "Magentacolor."

:D

Sounds good. Thanks!

Of course, you could always correct it to Ep. IV standards... :D

Yeah, that's what I could go with - look at the Millennium Falcon, for example: gradual changes to coverings, paint, mods to parts, etc. The CG Tantive IV is like 3/4 of the size of the model Tantive IV, though. That'd be like saying somebody built their car into a stretch limo over time. Just not logical...

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...

That's what it looked like to me, too. Only way to check would be to compare it ourselves to the BD...

I agree with Adywan, then. Whoever they hired to do their CG was just awful. Is the Tantive IV a chia pet? Why did it grow during the time between episodes III and IV? (look at the middle section behind the first turret)

Just awful, if that's what it was meant to be.

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...)

That might be interesting...

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...

Well, it's Mylar, so what's that, '84?

I could look for a date code on Eastman (actually SP) stock...

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!

Could be... What was the running time of the original? This one was only about 20 minutes...

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)...

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/33385

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.