Here is that Animated Views article I mentioned:
"Beaumont and Kerry: Peter Pan’s Leading Ladies"
Animated Views Reviews and Interviews Discussion
Great job as usual.
And, though I posted it elsewhere too, my panning of the Pan DVD:
http://animated-views.com/2007/peter-pa ... m-edition/
http://animated-views.com/2007/peter-pa ... m-edition/
I wanted to talk briefly about the "Have a Laugh Volumes 1 and 2" review.
The video quality was given a 9 out of 10. But it praised the video quality so highly, as even to say that there was a very, very fine grain that made the shorts look like they were actual film, and the backgrounds didn't look static. And that this wasn't used for the Blu-ray animated features, which are scrubbed completely clean.
But don't you think that that's better than scrubbing the whole things clean? Don't you think the films should look filmic and not have static backgrounds? Don't you think the animated features should get the same treatment?
Grain holds image detail, so removing the grain, I believe, removes some of the very fine detail...isn't this right?
The video quality was given a 9 out of 10. But it praised the video quality so highly, as even to say that there was a very, very fine grain that made the shorts look like they were actual film, and the backgrounds didn't look static. And that this wasn't used for the Blu-ray animated features, which are scrubbed completely clean.
But don't you think that that's better than scrubbing the whole things clean? Don't you think the films should look filmic and not have static backgrounds? Don't you think the animated features should get the same treatment?
Grain holds image detail, so removing the grain, I believe, removes some of the very fine detail...isn't this right?
Not the way Disney handles their feature animation classics, which go in and isolate the backgrounds to keep the detail and the intended static nature.
There's no way they could do this for the shorts, so the backgrounds are not isolated, hence why the "grain" remains, although it is very fine. As such, the video score, although highly praised, had one point knocked off, for not being quite as rock solid technically as the features, and for being standard definition. Had these been Blu-rays, I would imagine giving these restorations a 10 in terms of the level they have been cleaned up: however, tram lines on one short and the poorer than expected (though still good) presentation for the new Goofy short also contributed to losing one point here, hence the 9.
There's no way they could do this for the shorts, so the backgrounds are not isolated, hence why the "grain" remains, although it is very fine. As such, the video score, although highly praised, had one point knocked off, for not being quite as rock solid technically as the features, and for being standard definition. Had these been Blu-rays, I would imagine giving these restorations a 10 in terms of the level they have been cleaned up: however, tram lines on one short and the poorer than expected (though still good) presentation for the new Goofy short also contributed to losing one point here, hence the 9.
Oh. So, are you saying that for the features, you do know for sure that they keep all the image detail, but remove all the grain?
I remember the interview you did here about Sleeping Beauty's restoration had the interviewee say they knew reasons to leave grain in but they removed it because "it just looked like noise", and I thought that was a rather unprofessional sounding answer.
I'm worried mostly about the image detail for animated films because animated films can't have as much detail as live-action films, so losing any detail is a big loss, and also, it's so easy to just remove all the grain and make everyone think it looks fine. For those two reasons I'm worried.
I remember the interview you did here about Sleeping Beauty's restoration had the interviewee say they knew reasons to leave grain in but they removed it because "it just looked like noise", and I thought that was a rather unprofessional sounding answer.
I'm worried mostly about the image detail for animated films because animated films can't have as much detail as live-action films, so losing any detail is a big loss, and also, it's so easy to just remove all the grain and make everyone think it looks fine. For those two reasons I'm worried.
Um...last point I'm going to make here before I move on...
You haven't been worried about all the lost detail that you never ever saw on ANY VHS or DVD edition of Snow White, Pinocchio, Fantasia, Bambi, Sleeping Beauty, Alice In Wonderland, etc...so why start now?
The HD masters provide MUCH more detail than those editions EVER did or could do, so for a start you're seeing much more inherently in these new editions. Also, as I understand it, Disney freezes the backgrounds, meaning that whatever grain was in that image is still there...it's just not moving and creating dot crawl and "noise" that was referred to.
Get your DVD player and freeze frame any grainy Disney film. No detail lost, but the grain doesn't move/isn't there. That's how they do it. So, ultimately, no image loss and, if anything, more detail than anyone has seen even in original release, since they go back to the negs or interpositives which are bt nature of higher resolution than any stock prints that went out to theaters (and were probably not perfectly focused).
So...HD provides more detail than could ever be seen before. The grain (and image detail) are not "gone", they're frozen, to prevent loss of info and crawl.
For an animated feature that will recoup those costs on new DVD and HD editions (not to mention TV sales and reissues), it's viable to do it with all the A-list Disney features, but it wouldn't be feasible to do it with the hundreds/thousands of shorts, not only for time but because shorts don't make any money (especially catalog). Hence why there's a fine level of grain left in the images: to prevent image loss.
Okay...we're done on that subject. But just to get you worried about something else of much more importance, I'll just mention the color tinkering that goes on with every new edition...haha!
You haven't been worried about all the lost detail that you never ever saw on ANY VHS or DVD edition of Snow White, Pinocchio, Fantasia, Bambi, Sleeping Beauty, Alice In Wonderland, etc...so why start now?
The HD masters provide MUCH more detail than those editions EVER did or could do, so for a start you're seeing much more inherently in these new editions. Also, as I understand it, Disney freezes the backgrounds, meaning that whatever grain was in that image is still there...it's just not moving and creating dot crawl and "noise" that was referred to.
Get your DVD player and freeze frame any grainy Disney film. No detail lost, but the grain doesn't move/isn't there. That's how they do it. So, ultimately, no image loss and, if anything, more detail than anyone has seen even in original release, since they go back to the negs or interpositives which are bt nature of higher resolution than any stock prints that went out to theaters (and were probably not perfectly focused).
So...HD provides more detail than could ever be seen before. The grain (and image detail) are not "gone", they're frozen, to prevent loss of info and crawl.
For an animated feature that will recoup those costs on new DVD and HD editions (not to mention TV sales and reissues), it's viable to do it with all the A-list Disney features, but it wouldn't be feasible to do it with the hundreds/thousands of shorts, not only for time but because shorts don't make any money (especially catalog). Hence why there's a fine level of grain left in the images: to prevent image loss.
Okay...we're done on that subject. But just to get you worried about something else of much more importance, I'll just mention the color tinkering that goes on with every new edition...haha!
Re:
Want to discuss Sleeping Beauty?Ben wrote:But just to get you worried about something else of much more importance, I'll just mention the color tinkering that goes on with every new edition...haha!
I don't understand why you're so mad at me. Maybe I'm annoying because I have lots of questions. Maybe I'm confused. But I'm just someone who wants to learn, and wants to get to the truth. If I see something that people tell me isn't there, I'm going to keep wondering about it until it really seems like they proved nothing's wrong. I consider these films precious art I don't want to see ruined in even the tiniest ways.
Anyway, so if that's how they do it, then why would she say they "got rid of the grain because it just looks like noise"? That doesn't make sense with the practice you described.
Also, I have worried about the loss of detail in many DVDs I've seen. In removing the grain, or whatever it is, they also seem to be making the picture look flatter. Brush strokes are often smoothed out, sometimes it looks like shades or even lighting is gone, though this wouldn't have anything to do with the grain removal but, I dunno, some other digital tampering.
But some detail removal actually seems related to the re-coloring issue.
It seems that some outlines on characters are thinner and sometimes even disappear, like they are being digitally painted over. The digital painting over seems to be a way of "fixing" the color and cleaning the color in the same strokes. But I'm just worred they are painting over some details, not to mention the correct original colors that they don't think are really the correct ones.
Anyway, so if that's how they do it, then why would she say they "got rid of the grain because it just looks like noise"? That doesn't make sense with the practice you described.
Also, I have worried about the loss of detail in many DVDs I've seen. In removing the grain, or whatever it is, they also seem to be making the picture look flatter. Brush strokes are often smoothed out, sometimes it looks like shades or even lighting is gone, though this wouldn't have anything to do with the grain removal but, I dunno, some other digital tampering.
But some detail removal actually seems related to the re-coloring issue.
It seems that some outlines on characters are thinner and sometimes even disappear, like they are being digitally painted over. The digital painting over seems to be a way of "fixing" the color and cleaning the color in the same strokes. But I'm just worred they are painting over some details, not to mention the correct original colors that they don't think are really the correct ones.
Re: Animated Views Reviews and Interviews Discussion
I sent an E-mail about this already, but it didn't get responded to.
I am not sure, but I thought I saw a headline for a review here about a film that "had no conflict" and I was wondering if I remembered correctly and if anyone wrote such a thing here. And then if anyone did I would like to know what it was so I can read it.
I am not sure, but I thought I saw a headline for a review here about a film that "had no conflict" and I was wondering if I remembered correctly and if anyone wrote such a thing here. And then if anyone did I would like to know what it was so I can read it.
Re: Animated Views Reviews and Interviews Discussion
Perhaps it was Return of the Jedi .. 
