CampbellzSoup wrote:Is it me or did the platinum blu ray trailer look 'off' I kept seeing a lot of white spots in the background, I'm sure it will be crystal clear upon release, but it looks like quite a project to restore it.
It's called grain, friend, and it's part of the movie.
CampbellzSoup wrote:Is it me or did the platinum blu ray trailer look 'off' I kept seeing a lot of white spots in the background, I'm sure it will be crystal clear upon release, but it looks like quite a project to restore it.
It's called grain, friend, and it's part of the movie.
It appears as the film ages... I prefer cleaned restorations... HATE GRAIN!
Will Barks wrote:
It's called grain, friend, and it's part of the movie.
It appears as the film ages...
No, it's not. It's an inherent part of film and has been ever since the medium started. It's part of the natural development process for film negatives and prints. What appears as the film ages are dirt and artifacts. Grain is already part of the film. LOVE THE GRAIN!
albert
WIST #60:
AwallaceUNC: Would you prefer Substi-Blu-tiary Locomotion?
WIST #61:
TheSequelOfDisney: Damn, did Lin-Manuel Miranda go and murder all your families?
Actually, if you compare the trailers for SB and Pinocchio, you'll find that Pinocchio looks a hell of a lot clearer, so this can only mean that the restoration for Pinocchio is probably gonna turn out to be better than SB.
I wouldn't necessarily go that far. Remember that Sleeping Beauty's trailers were taken from the 2003 restoration (which was really just a minor tweaking of the 1997 one). Pinocchio's restoration has been done since 2002 and was a lot more exhaustive than Sleeping Beauty's first DVD. That footage is not only being used for the trailers, but it's going to be the same master used for this new Platinum Edition.
So while I'm expecting Pinocchio to look fantastic, I'm not expecting it to look as immaculate as Sleeping Beauty. Remember that we're talking about films 19 years apart, the latter of which has the benefit of a sharper, more detailed animation style and an anamorphic widescreen process.
It'll be interesting to see comparisons of both the 2002 UK SE the restoration was done for and the 2009 PE to see if any further tweaks were made.
if you really want an idea of what the film will look like in high def go to the official site, http://adisney.go.com/disneyvideos/anim ... pinocchio/ , go to downloads, click on the bottom left wallpaper and you will see what appears to be a high def screencap. now I can guarantee you it will be sharper because of screen resolution but this should give a good example.
nomad2010 wrote:if you really want an idea of what the film will look like in high def go to the official site, http://adisney.go.com/disneyvideos/anim ... pinocchio/ , go to downloads, click on the bottom left wallpaper and you will see what appears to be a high def screencap. now I can guarantee you it will be sharper because of screen resolution but this should give a good example.
Uh... that's still just a wallpaper image. I wouldn't necessarily base your idea of what a high-def screencap of the movie will look like. There's no reason to think they will necessarily resemble each other that much.
"Ta ta ta taaaa! Look at me... I'm a snowman! I'm gonna go stand on someone's lawn if I don't get something to do around here pretty soon!"
I don't think we'll ever get a restoration as perfect as Sleeping Beauty - wasn't the reason why it was so strong because of the way it was filmed? Something to do with three strips of film put together nitrate something never deteriorated something or rather. I don't think any of the other films were filmed in the same manner.
I mean, technology for restoring films will get better, but the material they have to work with counts as well, and Sleeping Beauty just happened to be filmed in a way that was very dandy.
I don't think we'll ever get a restoration as perfect as Sleeping Beauty - wasn't the reason why it was so strong because of the way it was filmed? Something to do with three strips of film put together nitrate something never deteriorated something or rather. I don't think any of the other films were filmed in the same manner.
You mean the three color process that is known as Technicolor? The same process used for ever animated feature made during Walt's lifetime? Every Disney animated short was made in the three strip process as well. In fact, Flowers and Trees, the first cartoon in color, was the first film to use that version of Technicolor. That was 1934. So what you say makes zero sense.
If anything, the reason why it looked so strong is probably because it isn't as old as films like Pinocchio and hasn't had as much time for the negatives to deteriorate.
But being scoped widescreen, Sleeping Beauty made use of larger film stock, meaning for example grain was reduced. Pinocchio most likely suffers from grain because it was shot on normal 35mm film.
It also made the final filmed image have more resolution too - but academy 35mm should still have comfortably more resolution than a 1080p image.
There's also an argument that by the late 50's, people understood how to preserve negatives more - when Pinocchio came out, people didn't know how fast or what form decomposition would take, or understand what exactly were the best conditions to store it, so I can see Sleeping Beauty's negatives being in better condition than Pinocchio's.
Disneykid wrote:...Sleeping Beauty. Remember that we're talking about films 19 years apart, the latter of which has the benefit of a sharper, more detailed animation style and an anamorphic widescreen process.
But I've always thought that Super Technirama 70 is a non-anamorphic process.
Anamorphic lens is only used when widescreen image is "squeezed" into horisontal 35 mm film frames (e.g. CinemaScope). Super Technirama 70 as used in Sleeping Beauty has a vertical 35 mm film as its original. Right?
I actualy found the "Expanded" verison of S.Beauty quite pleasing along with the restoration. I recall Lenoard Maltin discussing the restoration issue on WDT: Oswald The Lucky Rabbit that Disney has the best track record of taking care of their films to the best of their ability and he suggest that Disney tried their best to restore the Oswald Shorts to their finest.
So far I'm pleased with every restored film that Disney's done, though I wonder if Peter Pan's Restoration was "rushed" to be released with Tink's movie. It confused me when they show the "dirty" clip during the "Restored to its orignal brillance" section of the platinum trailers, I can tell the Dirty/Clean clips apart from the 30s/40s film but it's partialy hard to tell on the 80s/90s film for the negitaves.
Can't wait for LightHouseMike's Platinum Preview thread. Should be up by the end of Feb hopefuly.
Mason_Ireton wrote:I wonder if Peter Pan's Restoration was "rushed" to be released with Tink's movie.
The whole frickin' DVD was a rush job that I still haven't forgiven Disney for. It's a joke of a two-disc set and the lack of the Walt Disney Christmas Show, a new making-of documentary, well-known deleted songs ("Never Smile at a Crocodile" and "The Boatswain's Song", both found on the frickin' soundtrack), and trailers are just damn inexcusable.
albert
WIST #60:
AwallaceUNC: Would you prefer Substi-Blu-tiary Locomotion?
WIST #61:
TheSequelOfDisney: Damn, did Lin-Manuel Miranda go and murder all your families?
marlan wrote:
But I've always thought that Super Technirama 70 is a non-anamorphic process.
Anamorphic lens is only used when widescreen image is "squeezed" into horisontal 35 mm film frames (e.g. CinemaScope). Super Technirama 70 as used in Sleeping Beauty has a vertical 35 mm film as its original. Right?
No, Technirama IS an anamorphic process, infact it is a process combining Vistavision horizontal 35mm negative with an anamorphic lens that squeezes slightly the image to obtain a Cinemascope format image in a panoramic 1,85:1 frame. In the case of Sleeping Beauty the horizontal negative was also filmed with the successive exposure method (the three red, blue and green images are filmed on the same strip one after another, using special filters). The horizontal negative can be "unsqueezed" printing a flat 2,21:1 70mm vertical positive, or the negative image can be more squeezed in a normal vertical 35mm print that can be projected with a normal Cinemascope lens, obtaining a supersharp image projected thanks to the bigger negative.
Pinocchio was also filmed with the successive exposure system and so rest assured that the blu ray will have razor sharp grain free images that will retain all the original technicolor hues.
