Beauty & the Beast DVD vs. VHS discussion

SpringHeelJack · Post by **SpringHeelJack** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 11:19 am

Are you sure you're not just confusing "warmth" and "hand-drawn animation" with "fuzzy VHS quality"?

I mean, no one can say they truly remember with 100% certainty what they saw in theatres in 1991.

Lars Vermundsberget · Post by **Lars Vermundsberget** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 2:29 pm

I tend to think the same thing. And even if I did remember, how am I to tell that the colours looked just right in _my_ movie theater?

Jack Skellington · Post by **Jack Skellington** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 4:10 am

I agree, the colours in the VHS are more true to the darkness of the story.
Especially during the prolouge , I liked it more when it was darker during the scene of the beast and the rose, light plays an important part in the story telling, so it was better to see the beast's chamber darker and mysterious in the VHS, than bright and easily seen in the DVD.

Jules · Post by **Jules** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:08 am

...

Where's Escapay when I need him?

Marky_198 · Post by **Marky_198** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 9:07 am

I absolutely agree on the light/darkness issue.

And I've been studying both versions for the last few days.

The vhs and laserdisc versions look so different from the dvd, you won't believe it. I tried to put my finger on what exactly it is.
Not only the colours, but also the lightness, thickness of the lines, contrasts and realistic look. The dvd version looks so much more "cartoonish", it's unbelievable.

It's like the difference between Bambi and Bambi 2.
The Little mermaid and The Little mermaid tv series.

While the vhs/laserdisc versions look like Bambi and The Little Mermaid.
The dvd version looks like The Little mermaid tv series, Bambi 2. Nice colours, but much more cartoon like and childish.

SpringHeelJack wrote:Are you sure you're not just confusing "warmth" and "hand-drawn animation" with "fuzzy VHS quality"?

I mean, no one can say they truly remember with 100% certainty what they saw in theatres in 1991.

No, I've seen the laserdisc too and I have a book with screenshots of the movie when it first came out. It looks absolutely brilliant there too.

Like I said, there it looks like a Disney Classic. The BATB dvd looks like The Little Mermaid tv series.

Escapay · Post by **Escapay** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 8:48 pm

Jule, Lee, and Anne went to the Car to have some Ter...iyaki chicken wrote:Where's Escapay when I need him?

Watching Beauty and the Beast on both DVD and VHS and essentially laughing at the concept of the VHS looking better than the DVD. If people are so uppity about getting the VHS quality and colors, adjust the picture controls on the TV to make it darker and fuzzier.

Scaps

Lars Vermundsberget · Post by **Lars Vermundsberget** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:17 am

The optimal compromise is the laserdisc, of course.

Marky_198 · Post by **Marky_198** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:20 am

Escapay wrote:
Jule, Lee, and Anne went to the Car to have some Ter...iyaki chicken wrote:Where's Escapay when I need him?
Watching Beauty and the Beast on both DVD and VHS and essentially laughing at the concept of the VHS looking better than the DVD. If people are so uppity about getting the VHS quality and colors, adjust the picture controls on the TV to make it darker and fuzzier.

Scaps

That your VHS is worn out is a different story.

It's about the movie. Not about your old tape.
Let's take the laserdisc and screencaps of the version as it first came out as a reference.

There's nothing fuzzy about that.

Compare those with the dvd and you'll laugh again. Only this time on how funny the dvd looks.

Marky_198 · Post by **Marky_198** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:27 am

If someone took an original Rembrand painting and restored it with the computer, made it brighter, clearer, remove all the original feeling and atmosphere, made lines thicker etc, they would go to jail.
And the painting wouldn't be worth a penny anymore.

That's what has happened here too.

Of course there will be people saying; it like it the new way! But they don't have the slightest idea of the masterpiece it was.

ichabod · Post by **ichabod** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 4:09 am

Marky_198 wrote:If someone took an original Rembrand painting and restored it with the computer, made it brighter, clearer, remove all the original feeling and atmosphere, made lines thicker etc, they would go to jail.
And the painting wouldn't be worth a penny anymore.

That's what has happened here too.

Of course there will be people saying; it like it the new way! But they don't have the slightest idea of the masterpiece it was.

What are you talking about? Beauty and the Beast was not restored. The film was made on a computer in the first place using the CAPS system. The colours on the DVD look no different from other film like Aladdin, Pocahontas, Tarzan etc.

The VHS looks bloody awful. The only reason the VHS looks like it has more texture and shadow too it is because *newsflash* it's an old VHS! That's what VHS does, it makes everything look slightly fuzzier.

This has got to be one of the stupidest discussions I have ever taken part in!

Marky_198 · Post by **Marky_198** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:41 am

ichabod wrote:
Marky_198 wrote:.
What are you talking about? Beauty and the Beast was not restored. The film was made on a computer in the first place using the CAPS system. The colours on the DVD look no different from other film like Aladdin, Pocahontas, Tarzan etc.

The VHS looks bloody awful. The only reason the VHS looks like it has more texture and shadow too it is because *newsflash* it's an old VHS! That's what VHS does, it makes everything look slightly fuzzier.

This has got to be one of the stupidest discussions I have ever taken part in!

"Let's take the laserdisc and screencaps of the version as it first came out as a reference" so forget about the VHS" like I said before.

The difference is huge. And it has lost all the feeling and atmosphere.

If you don't see facts, it's better you quit this discussion anyway.

And they did use modern techniques to make the film look different from when it first came out. Techniques they didn't have back then. And that shows.
I've seen an interview about the restorations and one of the men told that they DID add colours and added brighter shades of pink etc. To make it more modern and interesting for the current youth.
So did they with Cinderella.

2099net · Post by **2099net** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:04 am

Marky_198 wrote:If someone took an original Rembrand painting and restored it with the computer, made it brighter, clearer, remove all the original feeling and atmosphere, made lines thicker etc, they would go to jail.
And the painting wouldn't be worth a penny anymore.

That's what has happened here too.

Of course there will be people saying; it like it the new way! But they don't have the slightest idea of the masterpiece it was.

Actually, that's exactly was oil painting restoration does.

See http://www.alamrestorations.com/images/painting.jpg

Marky_198 · Post by **Marky_198** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:41 am

Nice try

But they do that by hand. Not with the computer.

If they would scan the painting to a computer, put it in the program "paint" and just change the lightness, hue and saturation, and then print it out again and try to sell it as the "original painting", then you can compare it to the BATB dvd.

Jules · Post by **Jules** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:03 am

ichabod wrote:This has got to be one of the stupidest discussions I have ever taken part in!

Someone sees the truth!

Albert Balbert Bumpkin Guttikins wrote:Watching Beauty and the Beast on both DVD and VHS and essentially laughing at the concept of the VHS looking better than the DVD.

Yeah!! That's my Escapay! Hey ... do you think Marky_198 could be some JVC CEO seeking to resurrect the company's now obsolete format?

Marky_198 wrote:"Let's take the laserdisc and screencaps of the version as it first came out as a reference" so forget about the VHS" like I said before.

The difference is huge. And it has lost all the feeling and atmosphere.

I hate to break it to you kid, but the laserdisc version of BatB was probably taken from a film print and not the direct digital source, as in the DVD. Now, if you transfer a movie to home video from a print, then you get everything that comes with it, i.e. grain and possible scratches and blemishes, especially if the film was in bad shape. Take a look at the Hunchback DVD. It's not taken from the digital source - hence you can easily detect film grain.

Marky_198 wrote:But they do that by hand. Not with the computer.

If they would scan the painting to a computer, put it in the program "paint" and just change the lightness, hue and saturation, then you can compare it to the BATB dvd.

This has got to stop. I apologise in advance for the all caps you're about to see.

LISTEN! DISNEY DO NOT FRIGGIN' TRANSFER THEIR FRIGGIN' ANIMATED CLASSICS TO FRIGGIN' MICROSOFT PAINT!! THERE'S STUFF CALLED FRIGGIN' STATE-OF-THE-ART SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE WHICH YOU'LL FIND A LOT OF AT FRIGGIN' DTS DIGITAL IMAGES. WHEN FRIGGIN' VINTAGE DISNEY FILMS MUST GET FRIGGIN' RESTORED, THEIR FRAMES ARE NOT IMPORTED INTO FRIGGIN' MICROSOFT PAINT! WHAT DO YOU THINK FRIGGIN' FILM ENGINEERS USE TO MIX A FILM'S SOUNDTRACK? FRIGGIN' MICROSOFT SOUND RECORDER!!? OR YOUR GRANNY'S FRIGGIN' TWENTY YEAR-OLD PREHISTORIC CASSETTE PLAYER (complete with auto-stop mechanism)!!?

Oh, and by the way, BatB needn't be restored. So why Disney would recolour it with Pai.. *ahem* - restore existing filmstock is beyond me.

rodis · Post by **rodis** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:24 am

Julian you should really snap out of it. I was merely starting a discussion about a freakin' restoration of an animated film. You react as if we were encouraging a racial segregation.

BTW, you can argue your point without using CAPS LOCK.

2099net · Post by **2099net** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:24 am

Marky_198 wrote:Nice try

But they do that by hand. Not with the computer.

If they would scan the painting to a computer, put it in the program "paint" and just change the lightness, hue and saturation, and then print it out again and try to sell it as the "original painting", then you can compare it to the BATB dvd.

But Beauty and the Beast was coloured on the Computer. It was made with CAPS, no colours have been changed. This is a direct digital transfer of the original colours.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_A ... ion_System

Jules · Post by **Jules** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:47 am

rodis wrote:BTW, you can argue your point without using CAPS LOCK.

That's why I apologised in advance.

Netty wrote:But Beauty and the Beast was coloured on the Computer. It was made with CAPS, no colours have been changed. This is a direct digital transfer of the original colours.

Exactly. And the transfer has been approved by the directors, if I am not mistaken. If Marky_198 prefers the video quality exhibited in that trailer, then I guess he can always ask Disney to reissue BatB from its most beaten up film print.

All of UD wrote:Why are you getting so mad, Ju?

Well ... I don't know. I'm not really that mad - I guess the text makes me seem madder. I myself am not sure what's gotten over me. I've never been so aggressive and quick-tempered on UD.

Marky_198 · Post by **Marky_198** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:17 pm

Ok Julian, you say:

"I hate to break it to you kid, but the laserdisc version of BatB was probably taken from a film print and not the direct digital source, as in the DVD."

Probably?
So you're not sure. I agree it's hard to tell for some movies.
But with what they did to the dvd version, the laserdisc version looks like a masterpiece. Even if it was taken from a film print.

And you say:

"LISTEN! DISNEY DO NOT FRIGGIN' TRANSFER THEIR FRIGGIN' ANIMATED CLASSICS TO FRIGGIN' MICROSOFT PAINT!!"

It's just a comparison. I use that program a lot and resemblance with the 2nd batb screenshot is just huge. I don't know the name of the programmes they use.

"Well ... I don't know. I'm not really that mad - I guess the text makes me seem madder. I myself am not sure what's gotten over me. I've never been so aggressive and quick-tempered on UD"

Perhaps because you realize deep down inside you're not so happy with the batb transformation after all?

SpringHeelJack · Post by **SpringHeelJack** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:31 pm

Marky_198 wrote:
Julian Carter wrote:"Well ... I don't know. I'm not really that mad - I guess the text makes me seem madder. I myself am not sure what's gotten over me. I've never been so aggressive and quick-tempered on UD"
Perhaps because you realize deep down inside you're not so happy with the batb transformation after all?

Yes, I'm sure that's it. You have probed deeply into Julian's psyche and found the most likely reason as to why he sounds mad. Brava.

Marky_198 · Post by **Marky_198** » Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:40 pm

"Yes, I'm sure that's it. You have probed deeply into Julian's psyche and found the most likely reason as to why he sounds mad. Brava.

"

And you're doing exactly the same thing to question my post and think to know what he feels too.

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

Beauty & the Beast DVD vs. VHS discussion