- Joined: May 2001
- Post Count: 3,319
Re: Sleeping Beauty: 2003 Special Edition vs. 2008 Platinum Edition
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chuck Pennington
I've just started watching this movie on Blu-Ray and am noticing some wild differences in color from shot to shot. One scene in particular stands out, and here are 4 captures from the new DVD from that scene. 3 of the 4 shots are back to back, while the last has a different shot in between. Still, should the colors (take notice of her blouse) change so much in between shots? Who did the color timing on this?
|
I believe the color is changing based on how much light is in the scene.
(showing though the trees)
Movies are: "The Greatest Artform".
HD should be for EVERYONE!
- Joined: May 2001
- Post Count: 3,319
Re: Sleeping Beauty: 2003 Special Edition vs. 2008 Platinum Edition
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chuck Pennington
It's animation. There was no light shining through the trees, and the shots are back-to-back. It's poor color timing.
|
Oh right! I forgot... I thought it was REAL!!! :-0
Really (p.i.) watch the movie, not the stills. As characters move though the light and darkness, shades (the tint) of colors change.
The prince riding though the forest is a good scene to "see".
Does the shade of the white horse remain constant?
- - - - - - - -
Too all who posted pics:
BIG thanks for adding too the enjoyment of this flick for me!
Great job.
Movies are: "The Greatest Artform".
HD should be for EVERYONE!
- Joined: July 2003
- Location: Lacombe, AB
- Post Count: 2,675
Re: Sleeping Beauty: 2003 Special Edition vs. 2008 Platinum Edition
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chuck Pennington
Well, they must've figured something out in 1956 because CAROUSEL and THE KIND AND I weren't shot twice as had originally been planned. And 1958 brought about the Todd-AO SOUTH PACIFIC as well as the 2.35:1 35mm 'scope extractions. I did state around the time of ATWI80D, you know.
I'm worried about what the woman in the Disney article linked to above stated, that the new "restorations" that have been done for the past few years will be used on eventual Blu-Ray releases! I sure hope they go back and fix CINDERELLA before then instead of using their existing HD master!
|
The King & I and Carousel were both CinemaScope 55, which was designed for 35mm reduction prints as well as (never done) 55mm projection. South Pacific would have been extracted to 2.35:1, because by that time Todd-AO had abandoned 30fps projection.
I do agree that Disney needs to look @ their masters before porting over directly to BD. Good enough for a few years ago is not necessarily good enough for now. I never got around to getting the most recent release of Cinderella, but it sounds like that was a good thing.
\"My opinion is that (a) anyone who actually works in a video store and does not understand letterboxing has given up on life, and (b) any customer who prefers to have the sides of a movie hacked off should not be licensed to operate a video player.\"-- Roger Ebert
- Joined: September 2002
- Post Count: 3,972
Re: Sleeping Beauty: 2003 Special Edition vs. 2008 Platinum Edition
Yellow Layer Failure, Vinegar Syndrome and Miscellaneous Musings by Robert A. HarrisRAH: What is the proper projected or viewing aspect ratio for Sleeping Beauty, and how was it ascertained?
TG: Well... there were multiple signs pointing us to presenting the film in a 2.55:1 aspect ratio for this Blu-ray release.
First and foremost - once our partners at Lowry Digital scanned the full image area on the Technirama negative and we started viewing dailies it became immediately apparent that we were not looking a 2.35 AR. We normally do not have any crop applied when screening dailies so we knew we were seeing everything possible that is on the negative.
In addition - when we were looking at surviving cels and backgrounds at the Studio's Animation Research Library (which is an invaluable resource), it was quite obvious that the layout design and camera marks were set for 2.55.
Then there is the fact that in a memo dated July 28, 1953, the Studio green lit the CinemaScope version of Lady and the Tramp, while it also established a "Standard Version" and a CinemaScope Version production number for Sleeping Beauty -- #2082 and #2083. As the CinemaScope standard at the time was 2.55, (and that is clearly evident in Lady and the Tramp) Sleeping Beauty too would have been designed at 2.55.
In the end, Lady was adapted for CinemaScope but it was truncated on the left side of the screen when it went out with an optical track since the CinemaScope presentation spec had changed by the time the film was ultimately released in 1955. Sleeping Beauty fared far better as it had been designed to be in CinemaScope and thus could be trimmed to meet the requirements of 2.35 CinemaScope 35mm prints. But in the final analysis, there is animation all the way out to the far edges of the frame that had not been seen. It is this full 2.55 version that is coming out on Blu-ray on October 7.
My DVD/BD CollectionCriterion DVD/BDs Owned: 60, Total DVDs Owned: 533, Blu-ray Discs Owned: 242
- Joined: January 2002
- Post Count: 1,052
Re: Sleeping Beauty: 2003 Special Edition vs. 2008 Platinum Edition
Despite some people's reservations about the new Platinum Edition release, I've seen the new release on DVD on a LG 52LG70 LCD panel at Circuit City recently and wow, the color quality is outstanding and even using an upscaling DVD player, the sharpness was excellent, too.
Raymond in Sacramento, CA USA
- Joined: May 2001
- Post Count: 3,319
Re: Sleeping Beauty: 2003 Special Edition vs. 2008 Platinum Edition
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chuck Pennington
The colors didn't change like this in any previous version. If I'm looking at a character and individual colors change in shots that are back-to-back, my eyes is drawn to it and it pulls me out of the movie.
|
Don't know what too tell you; cause the shades of colors are supposed to change during scenes. Thanks goodness the colorist knew this; even tho you are bothered by it & thought it was because of bad or improper work.
When you say: "The colors didn't change like this in any previous version", does that mean you have recently gone back & checked? Or, are you only going by memory?
(your saying the horse only remains one shade of white in all previous releases?)
The 'changing' colors actually pulls me into the movie.
Makes it more real for me that the characters are actually in a realistic environment.
Too each his own.
Hope now you do realize there is indeed "light" in this animated feature. :-)
And thanks for my newest catch phrase: "There was no light!" ;-)
Movies are: "The Greatest Artform".
HD should be for EVERYONE!
- Joined: March 2000
- Post Count: 1,677
Re: Sleeping Beauty: 2003 Special Edition vs. 2008 Platinum Edition
IT IS interesting that no one has commented (that ive seen) on the fact that the stylized 'Roman' Script used in the title "Sleeping Beauty" at the start of the 2003 disc has various little designs decorating the inside of each of the letters (as was the fashion in Mediaeval Times) that are totally blown out on the 2008 disc. They are just gone.
On the other hand the marked difference between the 2003 and 2008 version where we see Aurora on a floor so bright, youd swear it was from a just-shot Spic-n-Span™ commercial, vs 2003s dark -little detailed floor....which I suspect may be more correct.
And the end titles background details/scrolls/banners are again blown out chroma wise on the 2008 edition and the credits lettering is not at all sharp-while the those banners and end credits lettering on the 2003 disc look "crisper" and certainly more visible and desirable to my eyes.
Unbelievable that this is 2008s version of a 'UE'
Thus, the 2003 looks 'correct' (ie not just subjectively, but 'objectively' better -and was highly likely as Walt would have wanted these details seen. I havent studied all the comparisons but these two stood out glaringly-and it concerns me that no one seems to have noticed.
Is this a case of 'Its new so it must be better?'
Not if youve an objective eye and mind.
I dont know about the floor, but thats a huge contrast/brilliance jump from 2003 to 2008.
And I think Walt would have wanted the script used in the starting titles to have the little designs and decorations visible-which they are are not in the 2008 disc
So its the 2003 disc i'll be a 'keeping-thought the 2008 has some compelling things about it
The Official HTF 'elitist'
"War is God's way of teaching Americans Geography"-Ambrose Bierce
- Joined: July 2003
- Location: Lacombe, AB
- Post Count: 2,675
Re: Sleeping Beauty: 2003 Special Edition vs. 2008 Platinum Edition
Chuck, would you mind enlightening us on how your captures were accomplished? We know that Gary Tooze over @ DVD Beaver is using the wrong colorspace for his captures, and I'm not saying that's the case with yours, but for curiosity's sake I'd like to know what you're using and the processing path. Thanks.
\"My opinion is that (a) anyone who actually works in a video store and does not understand letterboxing has given up on life, and (b) any customer who prefers to have the sides of a movie hacked off should not be licensed to operate a video player.\"-- Roger Ebert
- Joined: July 2003
- Location: Lacombe, AB
- Post Count: 2,675
Re: Sleeping Beauty: 2003 Special Edition vs. 2008 Platinum Edition
I have the BD release, but no BD player as of yet. I figured it was a better investment than buying the new DVD release, as it comes with disc 1 of the DVD release attached.
\"My opinion is that (a) anyone who actually works in a video store and does not understand letterboxing has given up on life, and (b) any customer who prefers to have the sides of a movie hacked off should not be licensed to operate a video player.\"-- Roger Ebert