DVDizzy Forum

drfsupercenter, thanks for your post!

Can you please send me the link to that avi too?
Thanks in advance!

To put this to an end and if you want to see what the digital source looks like someone needs to take screencaps from the Hunchback of Notre Dame DVD which has a commercial for the BatB DVD. It's looks just like the VHS colorwise but is obviously a lot sharper and had to have been taken from the source which means you have your proof. Someone just needs to take caps from it and then compare the coloring the the actual DVD caps and I can guarantee it'll show you how big a difference there is.

One other note:

the Enchanted blu-ray. It has that D-file feature which has a hi-def clip of BatB. if someone could get a cap of that, that will tell you what the present hi-def encode they have.

nomad2010 wrote:To put this to an end and if you want to see what the digital source looks like someone needs to take screencaps from the Hunchback of Notre Dame DVD which has a commercial for the BatB DVD. It's looks just like the VHS colorwise but is obviously a lot sharper and had to have been taken from the source which means you have your proof. Someone just needs to take caps from it and then compare the coloring the the actual DVD caps and I can guarantee it'll show you how big a difference there is.

Disneykid already did that a few pages back.

As for the CAPS port, yes we don't know specifically what Beauty would look like but from other CAPS ports we know it would not look blurry like the laserdisc. It would be sharp and "flat" like in the preview on Hunchback's DVD.

As for you drf, you're at leas doing something to get what you want instead of just moaning on the boards. By doing what your doing, you're not giving Disney the money they could get from adding on the true CPS port on the future disc. It's these kinds of actions they take notice too.

As for begin a blu-ray fa boy, that may bother you but there is little point in arguing the difference in colour on DVDs and Blu-rays of the same transfer. Or else this board wouldn't have argued about which had better colours for Sleeping Beauty. I can see both from my DVD and Blu-ray copies of the film that there are major differences in colour as a result of the format itself and since this restoration (their words not mine, see the DVD insert) was meant to be seen in HD the blu-ray will obviously show what the directors were really after when they did it.

Flanger-Hanger wrote:

nomad2010 wrote:To put this to an end and if you want to see what the digital source looks like someone needs to take screencaps from the Hunchback of Notre Dame DVD which has a commercial for the BatB DVD. It's looks just like the VHS colorwise but is obviously a lot sharper and had to have been taken from the source which means you have your proof. Someone just needs to take caps from it and then compare the coloring the the actual DVD caps and I can guarantee it'll show you how big a difference there is.

Disneykid already did that a few pages back.

As for the CAPS port, yes we don't know specifically what Beauty would look like but from other CAPS ports we know it would not look blurry like the laserdisc. It would be sharp and "flat" like in the preview on Hunchback's DVD.

Hunchback wasn't taken from the digital source. The transfer is very grainy and not like BatB's.

Flanger Hanger wrote:As for begin a blu-ray fa boy, that may bother you but there is little point in arguing the difference in colour on DVDs and Blu-rays of the same transfer. Or else this board wouldn't have argued about which had better colours for Sleeping Beauty. I can see both from my DVD and Blu-ray copies of the film that there are major differences in colour as a result of the format itself and since this restoration (their words not mine, see the DVD insert) was meant to be seen in HD the blu-ray will obviously show what the directors were really after when they did it.

I assume you mean the 2003 version? Because the DVD that comes with the blu-ray shows little(if any) difference in the colors between the two formats. Otherwise, I've seen you're point first-hand.

So, I watched Beauty and the Beast recently on DVD. I know B&TB backwards and forwards. I've probably seen it about 200 times on VHS (I'm not sure if I'm exaggerating or underestimating, sadly enough.) and about 5 times on DVD. (Explanation really just being that by then, I'd grown out of my phase where I have to watch one movie 50 times in a year.) So I recently re-watched it. I know the colors are brightened up and all, but ten minutes into the movie, I forgot to care about that detail. I was too engrossed in the film to care about lighter colors and such. True, I'd love to have a DVD copy of the original VHS/laserdisc release of the film so I can at least have a copy of its original darker colors and such. But when I was watching it on DVD, I was too busy quoting some of the lines along with it, even doing some of the hand gestures, and singing along with it to really give a rat's ass about the lightened colors. (No I'm not joking - I get really into the movie viewing experience with some films. )

my chicken is infected wrote: when I was watching it on DVD, I was too busy quoting some of the lines along with it, even doing some of the hand gestures, and singing along with it to really give a rat's ass about the lightened colors. (No I'm not joking - I get really into the movie viewing experience with some films. )

Im the same way, especially with musicals.

ajmrowland wrote:Hunchback wasn't taken from the digital source. The transfer is very grainy and not like BatB's.

I assume you mean the 2003 version? Because the DVD that comes with the blu-ray shows little(if any) difference in the colors between the two formats. Otherwise, I've seen you're point first-hand.

I wasn't talking about Hunchback itself but the preview for BatB on it. But I know Pocahontas, Mulan and Tarzan 'aint blurry like any laserdisc.

No I actually wasn't talking about the 2003 version, go see the comparison caps on DVDbeaver. I also noticed a major difference in colour when viewing the DVD on my standard def TV and the Blu-ray on an HD laptop. On my regular Tv the colours were much stronger then the Blu-ray in addition to the obvious difference in sharpness.

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDRevie ... lu-ray.htm

Take note of the first comparison for the "Hail to the Princess Aurora" number. The major difference in reds is obvious on top of the blue's in the banners and even the greens on the outfits. Since reds differ the most on each format and since a redish tint seems to be the colour of choice for the newer version, it likely the blu-ray will offer a much different look than the current DVD in terms of colour (and sharpness of course).

Having sad all this, I'm still reluctant to re-buy this title (and other DACs) in 2010. Don't know if I want to spend another decade replacing the same titles on a new format.

Flanger-Hanger wrote:

ajmrowland wrote:Hunchback wasn't taken from the digital source. The transfer is very grainy and not like BatB's.

I assume you mean the 2003 version? Because the DVD that comes with the blu-ray shows little(if any) difference in the colors between the two formats. Otherwise, I've seen you're point first-hand.

I wasn't talking about Hunchback itself but the preview for BatB on it. But I know Pocahontas, Mulan and Tarzan 'aint blurry like any laserdisc.

Okay, I missed the part where nomad mentioned the preview, so I'll give you that.

Flanger Hanger wrote:No I actually wasn't talking about the 2003 version, go see the comparison caps on DVDbeaver. I also noticed a major difference in colour when viewing the DVD on my standard def TV and the Blu-ray on an HD laptop. On my regular Tv the colours were much stronger then the Blu-ray in addition to the obvious difference in sharpness.

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film2/DVDRevie ... lu-ray.htm

Take note of the first comparison for the "Hail to the Princess Aurora" number. The major difference in reds is obvious on top of the blue's in the banners and even the greens on the outfits. Since reds differ the most on each format and since a redish tint seems to be the colour of choice for the newer version, it likely the blu-ray will offer a much different look than the current DVD in terms of colour (and sharpness of course).

Having sad all this, I'm still reluctant to re-buy this title (and other DACs) in 2010. Don't know if I want to spend another decade replacing the same titles on a new format.

Okay, I notice the color difference, but that's pretty minor compared to other major jumps to blu-ray( and the old DVD, for that matter).

And I probably won't rebuy all my DVDs, either. There are some I could sell, and others I could just take advantage of the miracle of Netflix for(I already have been using it for movies like Enchanted and Black Pearl).

ajmrowland wrote:Okay, I notice the color difference, but that's pretty minor compared to other major jumps to blu-ray (and the old DVD, for that matter).

Yes of course, but it does show that DVD does have it's limitations when accurately displaying colours of image files.

You want a good example of a major jump to Blu-ray look up Nightmare Before X-Mas. It's like night and day! Dr. No, The Pink Panther (1964), and others have shown major differences too in colour alone.

Flanger-Hanger wrote:Nope, no new sideburns, they just go more visible in the restoration. Besides your not even comparing the same frame or angle of his face.

uhm, I was comparing the small VHS screenshot and the small DVD screenshot silly.

I really don't the colors are going to make it more dimensional as long as it's being viewed on a higher resolution format than vhs or laserdisc. Half of that look was created by blurriness. My only complaint is with Belle's hair color. I'm just happy I can actually own it on Blu-ray, since I missed out on the DVD, and I don't have a VHS player anymore, only the tape.

Flanger-Hanger wrote:

ajmrowland wrote:Okay, I notice the color difference, but that's pretty minor compared to other major jumps to blu-ray (and the old DVD, for that matter).

Yes of course, but it does show that DVD does have it's limitations when accurately displaying colours of image files.

You want a good example of a major jump to Blu-ray look up Nightmare Before X-Mas. It's like night and day! Dr. No, The Pink Panther (1964), and others have shown major differences too in colour alone.

I own Nightmare on blu! and that's a real difference. And i only saw the old DVD a couple times, far apart, and it still made my jaw drop at the blu-ray.

cms382 wrote:I really don't the colors are going to make it more dimensional as long as it's being viewed on a higher resolution format than vhs or laserdisc. Half of that look was created by blurriness. My only complaint is with Belle's hair color. I'm just happy I can actually own it on Blu-ray, since I missed out on the DVD, and I don't have a VHS player anymore, only the tape.

I still have a VHS player, but am down to one or two tapes. Anyway, you still might wanna get the DVD as well as the BD, 'cause you don't know quite yet what features from the DVD(that aren't games) won't make the port to Blu. There's bound to be something worthwhile that'll be lost.

Edited for this:

The Blu, however, will be capable of having all three cuts of the film fit more comfortably than on the DVD. If the original OTV is still in existence, they'd have enough space on the disc to have it as an entirely separate encode, rather than the seemless branching used for the DVD(the only explainable reason why the OTV isn't there).

As for you drf, you're at leas doing something to get what you want instead of just moaning on the boards. By doing what your doing, you're not giving Disney the money they could get from adding on the true CPS port on the future disc. It's these kinds of actions they take notice too.

As for begin a blu-ray fa boy, that may bother you but there is little point in arguing the difference in colour on DVDs and Blu-rays of the same transfer. Or else this board wouldn't have argued about which had better colours for Sleeping Beauty. I can see both from my DVD and Blu-ray copies of the film that there are major differences in colour as a result of the format itself and since this restoration (their words not mine, see the DVD insert) was meant to be seen in HD the blu-ray will obviously show what the directors were really after when they did it.

Well I own the DVD as well... I have both the VHS and DVD. But yeah, I don't just complain about stuff, if it's at all possible I try to make my own DVD versions of stuff (like the widescreen releases in foreign countries, for example)

And I need to test out a theory of mine - that the color differences on Sleeping Beauty was Disney's own fault. I don't think there's any inherent limitation on VOB format as far as colors go... If I ever do get a Blu-Ray drive on my PC (Or if I can hack my PS3 to rip ISOs for me ) I will take the 1080p and encode my own 480p mpeg-2 video to see what it looks like. As I have a theory that it'll look the same (just not as high resolution obviously).

And I probably won't rebuy all my DVDs, either. There are some I could sell, and others I could just take advantage of the miracle of Netflix for(I already have been using it for movies like Enchanted and Black Pearl).

That's what I'm doing. I only bought a couple on Blu-Ray... Transformers, Iron Man, and Eagle Eye. (And Terminator 2 but only because it's like $13 LOL) Most of them, to me, don't look all that much better from my couch and since I can do more with DVDs I still buy them. And then if I want to watch a movie in HD I'll just go to Blockbuster and rent it. I'm only buying ones that are really really good or that I can get for cheap (Iron Man and Eagle Eye were both $16.99)

The Blu, however, will be capable of having all three cuts of the film fit more comfortably than on the DVD. If the original OTV is still in existence, they'd have enough space on the disc to have it as an entirely separate encode, rather than the seemless branching used for the DVD(the only explainable reason why the OTV isn't there).

Yes and no. Everyone keeps saying how "Blu-Ray has more space" yada yada. But you also need to realize that the 1080p video is just that much larger size-wise than 480i/p. I've seen some Blu-Rays where the movie proper is like 26GB... that's more than half the space right there. So yes they could probably fit both the SE and OTV but putting all 3 versions on one disc might be a stretch. I still like my idea of having the OTV and SE on one disc, then having a separate disc with the work-in-progress along with bonus features.

As for the Hunchback DVD and Enchanted Blu-Ray... I can easily get Hunchback, but if screenshots have already been posted I don't see the point.
As for Enchanted, there is seriously part of BatB in HD on it?! I can rent the Blu-Ray and play it and stuff... but I didn't know it had that! However, I can't yet rip Blu-Rays, unless you want me to use my DVD recorder and then we're back to square 1 about coloring

drfsupercenter wrote:


Well I own the DVD as well... I have both the VHS and DVD. But yeah, I don't just complain about stuff, if it's at all possible I try to make my own DVD versions of stuff (like the widescreen releases in foreign countries, for example)

I hear ya. I'm, myself, am not a real "make my own stuff" kinda guy, unless it's baking, or art. I just go out and buy everything else.

drfsupercenter wrote:

And I probably won't rebuy all my DVDs, either. There are some I could sell, and others I could just take advantage of the miracle of Netflix for(I already have been using it for movies like Enchanted and Black Pearl).

That's what I'm doing. I only bought a couple on Blu-Ray... Transformers, Iron Man, and Eagle Eye. (And Terminator 2 but only because it's like $13 LOL) Most of them, to me, don't look all that much better from my couch and since I can do more with DVDs I still buy them. And then if I want to watch a movie in HD I'll just go to Blockbuster and rent it. I'm only buying ones that are really really good or that I can get for cheap (Iron Man and Eagle Eye were both $16.99)

Out of the thirteen Blu's I own, 6 are movies I already have on DVD. They are National Treasure(got it cheap at a used media place, called Sonic for 18$), Pirates: AWE, Sleeping Beauty, Ratatouille, Cars, and March of the Penguins. For the record, the ones I don't already own are Madagascar 2, Kung Fu Panda, Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D, Wall-E, and Dark Knight. I have odd taste in movies for an 18 yr. old, but again, I refer to Netflix.

drfsupercenter wrote:

The Blu, however, will be capable of having all three cuts of the film fit more comfortably than on the DVD. If the original OTV is still in existence, they'd have enough space on the disc to have it as an entirely separate encode, rather than the seemless branching used for the DVD(the only explainable reason why the OTV isn't there).

Yes and no. Everyone keeps saying how "Blu-Ray has more space" yada yada. But you also need to realize that the 1080p video is just that much larger size-wise than 480i/p. I've seen some Blu-Rays where the movie proper is like 26GB... that's more than half the space right there. So yes they could probably fit both the SE and OTV but putting all 3 versions on one disc might be a stretch. I still like my idea of having the OTV and SE on one disc, then having a separate disc with the work-in-progress along with bonus features.

I know that. I'm downloading the HD rental of Matrix: Reloaded to my PS3 now. 8gigs is a lot, but what I'm saying is that if it were just the film(and commentary, and BD-Live) on Disc 1, with all the other Features on Disc 2 I don't see too many setbacks, as opposed to what they crammed into the current SE. I wouldn't mind having the 3D menus again, though. You're idea's a pretty good one. All I'm saying is there'd be less compression issues.

drfsupercenter wrote:As for the Hunchback DVD and Enchanted Blu-Ray... I can easily get Hunchback, but if screenshots have already been posted I don't see the point.
As for Enchanted, there is seriously part of BatB in HD on it?! I can rent the Blu-Ray and play it and stuff... but I didn't know it had that! However, I can't yet rip Blu-Rays, unless you want me to use my DVD recorder and then we're back to square 1 about coloring

Yes, the Enchanted feature is sweet, and the BatB clip looks fantastic, as well as the others. HD really is the way to see these movies. Not to mention how they got that one guy(forgot his name) to stand in front of a blue screen and interrupt the film quite seamlessly is nice.

And you can only rip Blu-rays off a PC with a Blu-ray drive. Using a DVD recorder is somewhat out of the question.

Well, it's possible to play Blu-Ray at lower resolutions, including 480i through composite RCA cables. It just defeats the purpose of high definition. It would, however, be useful if you're trying to make a DVD of say the "picture in picture" mode on some of these movies.

drfsupercenter wrote:Well, it's possible to play Blu-Ray at lower resolutions, including 480i through composite RCA cables. It just defeats the purpose of high definition. It would, however, be useful if you're trying to make a DVD of say the "picture in picture" mode on some of these movies.

Yeah, to play at lower resolutions, just not on DVD players. We got our HD DVD format disc player before our new TV even arrived a year and a half ago. We had one arrive in about a week after ordering it, but it was internally damaged(loose bulb or something), so I took the time to learn about the connections. Meanwhile our HD DVD payer was in our basement, hooked up to a 10" tube, so I could try out the features. Now we got a 47" 1080p LCD, and I refuse to go back.

No, I don't think you get what I'm saying.

I have a settop DVD recorder with RCA inputs. I have a PS3 that can do RCA outputs. I can RECORD it to a DVD.

drfsupercenter wrote:No, I don't think you get what I'm saying.

I have a settop DVD recorder with RCA inputs. I have a PS3 that can do RCA outputs. I can RECORD it to a DVD.

Okay, the PS3 makes it clear.

On a side note, I hear that Sony's working on a Blu-ray/Ps3 game hybrid disc that allows the movie to be ported to a PSP. If it's not too expensive and has the movies I want, I'll take that over Digital Copies any day. I can never get DC's for movies I actually buy onto my PSP until I get a Sony BD.

drfsupercenter wrote:

Note: NTSC has never been able to show full RGB. Most computer monitors do (i.e. 0-255). Most screen captures from DVDs are done on computers, and most software defaults to full RGB. Meanwhile, analogue inputs, even on computers, are configured for NTSC.

Again looking at this picture, which has THE EXACT SAME DIGITAL IMAGE, but with different RGB setting, can you see how it compares to the LD screencaps? The actual image itself was not altered in any way.

If it makes you happy, then, I can just take the unaltered DVD frames and save them as bitmaps. It's not an issue of screencap software. DVDs are essentially a series of compressed bitmap images played back at a certain speed. Since all of Disney's animated DVDs are progressive, there's not even interlacing to worry about. I can just save each frame as a bitmap and there won't be any of that RGB crap you're talking about.

[Bangs head on wall]

What will saving them as bitmaps do? The computer is still using 0-255 for the colour intensity, while most TVs will still compress this to 32-216 when connected to a TV with an analogue connection (and some digital connections too using legacy analogue values).

The "RGB Crap" as you call it is central to the whole colour debate! I don't know why people aren't listening to this! You present people with factual evidence, and it gets ignored by 90% of the posters. It's as close as anyone can get to show that the VHS/LD colours will NEVER have been correct. Now I'm not saying the DVD colours are "correct" but I'm sure that they're closer then the majority of people here think.

The PS3 scene in the image I posted twice was also just one from a series of identical images played back. Yet it looked totally different when not displayed in full RGB. Note how it looks "older" and more "worn". Computer Bitmaps all use 0-255 for the levels of Red, Green or Blue. Screen grabs or direct dumps or anything done on computers mean Jack, because its a different colouring scheme no matter how they are obtained. Being as we don't know how the DVD was mastered, and if it was tweaked for full or limited RGB, all screen grabs are irrelevant when presenting information.

It's interesting that Dottie (from PAL-land*) says she watched the VHS a lot, and didn't notice the colour change - becuase PAL has a different colour encoding and this a large colourspace than NTSC see Wikipedia

The name "Phase Alternating Line" describes the way that the phase of part of the color information on the video signal is reversed with each line, which automatically corrects phase errors in the transmission of the signal by cancelling them out. Lines where the color phase is reversed compared to NTSC are often called PAL or phase-alternation lines, which justifies one of the expansions of the acronym, while the other lines are called NTSC lines. Early PAL receivers relied on the imperfections of the human eye to do that canceling; however this resulted in a comb like effect on larger phase errors. Thus, most receivers now use a chrominance delay line, which stores the received color information on each line of display; an average of the color information from the previous line and the current line is then used to drive the picture tube. The effect is that phase errors result in saturation changes, which are less objectionable than the equivalent hue changes of NTSC. A minor drawback is that the vertical color resolution is poorer than the NTSC system's, but since the human eye also has a color resolution that is much lower than its brightness resolution, this effect is not visible.

* Although Marky's from PAL-Land too, but he says now its not about the colours.

I think we all get that the VHS presented the movie to be slightly darker than intended.

But one cannot watch the dvd and say with a straight face that it looks good. It's not just the vhs. Going back to the 90s, from every commercial to every stickerbook or poster or promotional image, the IMAX print looks nothing like the film did back in '91.

My guess is they updated and changed the colors to match the updated systems that they used creating the 'Human again' sequence. Because it blends in beautifully.

I hope they keep this IMAX version for future dvds, but when they include the original version, I want it to be the real original version. Not the IMAX minus Human Again version.