Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads › Blu-ray › A Few Words About By Robert Harris › A few words about...™ Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs -- in Blu-ray
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A few words about...™ Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs -- in Blu-ray - Page 3

post #61 of 151
10/7/09 at 9:05am
Quote:
FWIW, for some reason, I mistakenly thought the Monsters vs Aliens BD also came w/ the DVD -- and ordered it alongside the Snow White BD.  Had I realized it was just the BD, I would've probably debated on the purchase some more and *possibly* either wait for a better price or just get the DVD for less.  I guess I probably coulda canceled that portion of the order (and maybe still qualify for free shipping from Amazon), but decided I'd just stick w/ it this time since that title seems worthwhile enough to own on BD sans the DVD -- and my daughter really wants it (on whatever format)... 

Monsters vs Aliens is worth it. It's a pretty good movie. It's not up to Pixar standards, but then what is? We saw this in the theatre in 3-D. This reminds me, I haven't ordered this BD yet. Yeah, it'd be nice if it was a BD/DVD combo package. With this way I'll only get the BD and do without the DVD version.
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Limited Edition Collector's Set) [Blu-ray]
$149 at
See it »
Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (DVD/Two-Disc Blu-ray + BD Live w/DVD packaging) [Blu-ray]
$40 at
See it »
Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Collector's Book Set) [Blu-ray]
$53.95 at
See it »
post #62 of 151
10/7/09 at 10:07am

Quote:
Monsters vs Aliens is worth it. It's a pretty good movie. It's not up to Pixar standards, but then what is? We saw this in the theatre in 3-D. This reminds me, I haven't ordered this BD yet. Yeah, it'd be nice if it was a BD/DVD combo package. With this way I'll only get the BD and do without the DVD version.

Buy the BD of MvA at Target.  They have an exclusive DVD/BD set.  I think I paid $24.99 for it last week.  These retailer exclusives are driving me nuts...
Reply
post #63 of 151
10/7/09 at 10:19am
Quote:
Buy the BD of MvA at Target.  They have an exclusive DVD/BD set.  I think I paid $24.99 for it last week.  These retailer exclusives are driving me nuts...  

Thanks. I will have to check it out. I quite agree. These exclusives are crazy, but I do understand them from a marketing perspective. Retailers have to compete with Amazon somehow.
Reply
post #64 of 151
10/7/09 at 11:27am
Bill B: Usually you'd be exactly correct. In this case, however, to get the free shipping I got Star Trek season 2 at 59.99--another loss leader marked down from 129. But, over my lifetime I've ordered a fair number of things from them at small discounts (10-20%) and so they've made some good profits on me overall...Which is good, I want to keep them in business...
Reply
post #65 of 151
10/7/09 at 1:17pm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Angell View Post



This makes me wonder what is the source for this restoration?  It is a restoration isn't it?  If it's the original cells, then they'd have to run them through the multi-plane again, wouldn't they?  If film, how did they get around the softness of lack of definition in Technicolor?

I'll be picking up my copy tomorrow.

 

The source of the restoration is the OCN or preservation elements made from it (please correct me if I'm wrong, RAH), which was a frame sequential negative, with each frame of animation being shot three times: once each for the red, green and blue elements of the Technicolor image. In 1937,release prints would have been made by taking the OCN and generating three internegative strips, which would be used to create printing matrices for the dye imbibation process (I'm skipping steps to make this simple). These would then be used to print the release prints, and softness would result from misregistration of the colour layers. What Disney has done here is to go back to the FS elements and digitally recombine the colour channels, then have Lowry do dustbusting and grain reduction for the Blu-Ray. As such, it's a whole lot sharper than what Technicolor was capable of producing in 1937. It won't be as astounding as Sleeping Beauty was, but it will still be a revelation. 
Reply
post #66 of 151
10/7/09 at 1:43pm
Thread Starter 


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen_J_H View Post




The source of the restoration is the OCN or preservation elements made from it (please correct me if I'm wrong, RAH), which was a frame sequential negative, with each frame of animation being shot three times: once each for the red, green and blue elements of the Technicolor image. In 1937,release prints would have been made by taking the OCN and generating three internegative strips, which would be used to create printing matrices for the dye imbibation process (I'm skipping steps to make this simple). These would then be used to print the release prints, and softness would result from misregistration of the colour layers. What Disney has done here is to go back to the FS elements and digitally recombine the colour channels, then have Lowry do dustbusting and grain reduction for the Blu-Ray. As such, it's a whole lot sharper than what Technicolor was capable of producing in 1937. It won't be as astounding as Sleeping Beauty was, but it will still be a revelation. 

The Technicolor printing matrices were exposed directly from the SE negative.  Softness was not a function of the imbibition process, but rather a mixture of the quality of the optical glass available at the time, the mordant, and the metal dyes.  This "softness" was not anything negative.  It is precisely what gave Technicolor its beautiful velvety look.
Reply
post #67 of 151
10/7/09 at 1:59pm
I'd like to know why the opening title and beginning credit sequence of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is less than the full 4:3 frame image?     i.e. It's like a smaller 4:3 image box inside the larger projected frame, surrounded by black bars on all sides. 

This smaller image continues as the storybook is read and the pages are turned.  The castle animation sequence is when the image fills the area of the 4:3 frame, which lasts for the rest of the movie. 

FYI:
The ending credits have the same background design as the beginning title sequence, but it does not lose the full 4:3 area of the projected frame.     i.e. It does not get smaller like the beginning sequence.

Paul
Reply
post #68 of 151
10/7/09 at 3:59pm
The same was done on The Wizard of Oz. It is called windowboxing and it preserves the image from overscan...and is also almost totally useless on a Blu-Ray, when the majority of people with HD have sets with little to no overscan.
Reply
post #69 of 151
10/7/09 at 4:24pm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Scott Richard View Post

The same was done on The Wizard of Oz. It is called windowboxing and it preserves the image from overscan...and is also almost totally useless on a Blu-Ray, when the majority of people with HD have sets with little to no overscan.


Thanks Eric,

IMO it is useless for Blu-ray and destroys the whole idea that one has the original perspective of the classic art of the film.

Very disappointing. 

Wonder who at what meeting decided to implement this for posterity's sake?

Paul

Reply
post #70 of 151
10/7/09 at 5:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Hillenbrand View Post

Wonder who at what meeting decided to implement this for posterity's sake?

Paul
 

The same people who decided to drop some extras like the one finished deleted scene (the only time finished animation was ever cut from a Disney film until 1985), and the original RKO credits. This is one time I may have to keep the DVD as well.
Reply
post #71 of 151
10/7/09 at 5:34pm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Scott Richard View Post

The same was done on The Wizard of Oz. It is called windowboxing and it preserves the image from overscan...and is also almost totally useless on a Blu-Ray, when the majority of people with HD have sets with little to no overscan.

Strangly a fair number of HDTVs still overscan. They shouldn't, but they do and that is the reality of the situation. In addition the final HD masters were also used to create the DVDs. The vast majority of people watching those are watching them on TVs that overscan.

Doug

Reply
post #72 of 151
10/7/09 at 5:56pm
Matthew, from what I understand, the RKO credits have been restored to the film proper. But there is a lot of material missing. The deleted animation is the most egregious to the consumer.
Reply
post #73 of 151
10/8/09 at 5:19pm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Gregorich View Post

Buy the BD of MvA at Target.  They have an exclusive DVD/BD set.  I think I paid $24.99 for it last week.  These retailer exclusives are driving me nuts...

Ooooh...  *THAT* must be why I got confused and thought it was BD+DVD.  Oh well, at this point, I don't really want to jump thru hoops (ie. cancel part of the Amazon order w/ potential problems, make extra trip to Target hoping it's in stock, etc.) just so I can pay the extra $5 to get the DVD included -- and that's assuming it's still just ~$25.

Guess the kids just won't have that particular flick to choose for the occasional roadtrip, etc. until we own some sort of portable BD device (like a laptop w/ BD drive) at some point in the future -- they're spoiled enough as it is anyway...  

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Hillenbrand View Post

I'd like to know why the opening title and beginning credit sequence of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is less than the full 4:3 frame image?     i.e. It's like a smaller 4:3 image box inside the larger projected frame, surrounded by black bars on all sides. 

This smaller image continues as the storybook is read and the pages are turned.  The castle animation sequence is when the image fills the area of the 4:3 frame, which lasts for the rest of the movie. 

FYI:
The ending credits have the same background design as the beginning title sequence, but it does not lose the full 4:3 area of the projected frame.     i.e. It does not get smaller like the beginning sequence.

Paul

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Scott Richard View Post

The same was done on The Wizard of Oz. It is called windowboxing and it preserves the image from overscan...and is also almost totally useless on a Blu-Ray, when the majority of people with HD have sets with little to no overscan.

In this particular case, are you sure it's not an artistic effect intended to show a transition from the smaller "real" world of reading the book to the fantasy world of immersing into the actual story?

I haven't seen either BD yet, so I don't really know.  But that's what it sounds like based on Paul's description above.

_Man_
Reply
post #74 of 151
10/8/09 at 8:27pm
No, it's not...to put it simple!
Reply
post #75 of 151
10/9/09 at 7:00am


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Frezon View Post

Is that what you have to do, Travis?  E-mail them to correct the pre-order price?  I haven't been in this situation before. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Frezon View Post

Question #2. 

The $5 drop (from when I ordered @ $24.99) means my total of the order drops to $24.98--effectively screwing up my Free Super Saver Shipping.  What do I do then?

Just wanted to report that amazon contacted me on their own to credit my $5.  They also kept the Free Shipping intact despite the fact that the lower price dropped my order total below their standard. 
Reply
post #76 of 151
10/9/09 at 12:25pm
Now having watched the entire film (JVC DLA-HD350 projector, filling a 120" 4x3 screen), I first want to say that I'm in full agreement with Robert Harris's assessment of the quality of the Blu-Ray image, so my comments are about the the way in which that quality affected my reaction to the cinematic experience of the film. I've seen it countless times over the past 50 years, both theatrically and in just about every video incarnation. Despite my familiarity with the film itself and, particularly on video, an awareness of the technical aspects of its presentation, it's never failed to involve me in the story, its characters and its narrative flow. The Blu-Ray, though, brought something new to my experience, something I wasn't quite prepared for. I won't go so far as to say it was disturbing, but I did find that it had a tendency to take me out of the film in a way that nothing had before.
 
The best way I can describe it is that the very clarity with which the transfer rendered the cels often made me feel like I was perusing a gallery of animation art rather than watching living, moving images - I didn't get this feeling from the backgrounds or the various multiplane paintings, just the cels, and those primarily in more static or slowly-moving actions. Their very crispness heightened the awareness that the cels were indeed discrete shapes inhabiting their own dimension, rather than being objects moving about in the overall space of the scene. Undoubtedly, this spatial disconnect is something that the softness of the original Technicolor prints (and for that matter, standard-definition video) would have helped mask.
 
So on the one hand we have a wonderful presentation of artistry and technique of the Disney studio in the late 1930s, one which I'm thrilled to have on those terms, make no doubt about that, but on the other, one which introduces a new element that, at least for me in this initial viewing, tended to distract me from the full involvement in the film itself. Maybe that will change over subsequent viewings - or maybe I'll try de-focusing the projector lens! Anyway, it's an interesting new wrinkle in how we're able to perceive older films with new technology.
 
On a separate note, I continue to be annoyed by Blu-Ray programming gee-gaws; for example, the navigation graphic that lingers over the bottom of the image for several seconds after releasing from pause. What purpose that serves, I don't know.
Reply
post #77 of 151
10/9/09 at 5:11pm
Re: Windowboxing of the credits. The reason this still occurs on the credits is probably for some legal "no name can be covered by potential overscan" reasoning.
Reply
post #78 of 151
10/10/09 at 11:01am
 i was credited an additional $ 5 since they lowered the price even more on day of realize

You saved $5.00 with Amazon.com's Pre-order Price Guarantee!

The price of the item(s) decreased after you ordered them, and we gave you the lowest price.

The following title(s) decreased in price:

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo + BD Live w/ Blu-ray packaging)  [Blu-ray]
              Price on order date: $24.99
        Price charged at shipping: $14.99
 Lowest price before release date: $ 9.99
            Amount to be refunded: $5.00
                         Quantity: 1
                    Total Savings: $5.00           

You will receive an additional e-mail when this refund is processed.

Greetings from Amazon.com.

We're writing to let you know we processed your refund of $5.00 for your Order 105-6482764-3268264.

This refund is for the following item(s):

    Item: Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Two-Disc Blu-ray/DVD Combo + BD Live w/ Blu-ray packaging)  [Blu-ray]
    Quantity: 1
    ASIN: B001V9LPWQ
    Reason for refund: Pre-order price protection

    Here's a the breakdown of your refund for this item:

        Item Refund: $5.00
Reply
post #79 of 151
10/10/09 at 1:47pm
I saw the Collector's Edition at Best Buy today. Wow! What a beauty. So classy.
Reply
post #80 of 151
10/10/09 at 8:43pm
 I just picked up this Disney classic today and while one can see how dated the graphics are it is still a very good transfer.  The only question I have is, are all the old classic from Disney in 4:3 ratio?  I have not been reading up on the newer releases on Bluray like I should have been so that is my fault.  Like I was saying above this appears to be a very good transfer but I was a little disappointed that it is pan & scan and not wide-screen.  But because this is an older animated title that will not get alot of viewings on my h/t I can over look that its not widescreen.  But I hate the fact that Wizard Of Oz was not in widescreen and that I have to scale it with the tv to get ride of the black bars on the sides of the picture.  The sound on Snow White is very good for its age and so is the video transfer.  Where these classic titles not done in widescreen ratios back in the day?  Or was this done on purpose?  Would love to hear from someone here that knows about the older film titles, thanks.
Reply
post #81 of 151
10/10/09 at 8:53pm
Movies were typically shot in the 4:3 ratio until the mid-1950s.  Snow White and The Wizard of Oz are both older than that, and are presented on Blu-ray in their original aspect ratio.
Reply
post #82 of 151
10/10/09 at 8:57pm
Dave;

You have over 2,500 posts on HTF  and you have never learned that virtually every film made before 1954 ( the start of the widescreen era ) was in the 4:3 aspect ratio ? It's been discussed in hundreds of threads over the years.
Reply
post #83 of 151
10/10/09 at 9:27pm
Sheesh, I responded as politely in his similar post in the Wizard of Oz thread, but it is surprisingly that someone could have 221 DVDs and 171 Blu Rays, as well as post count of 2500 and never once have seen a movie before 1953 (How to Marry a Millionaire I believe was the first). I guess if you've got 171 copies of Wolverine BD that might explain it.
Reply
post #84 of 151
10/10/09 at 9:28pm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob W View Post

Dave;

You have over 2,500 posts on HTF  and you have never learned that virtually every film made before 1954 ( the start of the widescreen era ) was in the 4:3 aspect ratio ? It's been discussed in hundreds of threads over the years.
He cannot be serious, I don't believe it.

Reply
post #85 of 151
10/10/09 at 10:00pm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Moritz View Post

 I just picked up this Disney classic today and while one can see how dated the graphics are it is still a very good transfer.  The only question I have is, are all the old classic from Disney in 4:3 ratio?  I have not been reading up on the newer releases on Bluray like I should have been so that is my fault.  Like I was saying above this appears to be a very good transfer but I was a little disappointed that it is pan & scan and not wide-screen.  But because this is an older animated title that will not get alot of viewings on my h/t I can over look that its not widescreen.  But I hate the fact that Wizard Of Oz was not in widescreen and that I have to scale it with the tv to get ride of the black bars on the sides of the picture.  The sound on Snow White is very good for its age and so is the video transfer.  Where these classic titles not done in widescreen ratios back in the day?  Or was this done on purpose?  Would love to hear from someone here that knows about the older film titles, thanks.

Been messing with Flux Capicitors again, eh? You're outatime. It's October, not April 1.

Reply
post #86 of 151
10/10/09 at 10:19pm
Nah.  I'm not buying either.

I don't understand his point, but...

Curious. 
Reply
post #87 of 151
10/10/09 at 11:32pm
I haven't looked at the disc to know: did Disney not include the optional side art panels to fill the unused black space on 1.78:1 TVs on Snow White like they did on Pinocchio?
Reply
post #88 of 151
10/11/09 at 12:18am


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Conway View Post

I haven't looked at the disc to know: did Disney not include the optional side art panels to fill the unused black space on 1.78:1 TVs on Snow White like they did on Pinocchio?

Yes.  However, I don't think they're as effective as they were in Pinoccho.  Though painted by Toby Bluth, just as the Pinocchio panels were, they seem to blend less well with the artwork than they did with Pinocchio.  Sometimes, they seem intrusive to me, as with the PERPETUAL red curtain during the first three scenes and the white birch tree panels for the "Smile and a Song" sequence.  During the latter, there are several shots that are bright towards the center of the frame and darker at the edges.  The white tree trunks contrast too sharply with the darker edges of the frame and draw attention to themselves.  There also seems to be a strange sort of light "sputtering" effect with the side panels on fade-outs and fade-ins.  But, they are optional, of course.
Reply
post #89 of 151
10/11/09 at 3:19am
While certainly not a reason to panic or demand a recall, I noticed a weird jump in the image at the beginning of the Dwarfs' (or is that "Dwarves'" ) "Work Song".  I went back and frame by framed it and discovered it was two aliased frames.  It looked like for two consecutive frames, two adjacent frames were superimposed on each other like you used to see on old SD presentations with 3:2 pull-down aliasing.  It occurs right after the initial zoom in on the mining dwarves around 21:40 or so.

The seemingly errant frames were present on the previous "Platinum Edition" DVD and the laserdisc released before that as well, although I never noticed it before.  This suggests that it is a production artifact.  Apologies if this has been discussed before.

Regards,
Reply
post #90 of 151
10/11/09 at 6:00am


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Moritz View Post

 I just picked up this Disney classic today and while one can see how dated the graphics are it is still a very good transfer.  The only question I have is, are all the old classic from Disney in 4:3 ratio?  I have not been reading up on the newer releases on Bluray like I should have been so that is my fault.  Like I was saying above this appears to be a very good transfer but I was a little disappointed that it is pan & scan and not wide-screen.  But because this is an older animated title that will not get alot of viewings on my h/t I can over look that its not widescreen.  But I hate the fact that Wizard Of Oz was not in widescreen and that I have to scale it with the tv to get ride of the black bars on the sides of the picture.  The sound on Snow White is very good for its age and so is the video transfer.  Where these classic titles not done in widescreen ratios back in the day?  Or was this done on purpose?  Would love to hear from someone here that knows about the older film titles, thanks.

Wow, that really blows my mind. Its like, when you ask a question, and then realize...man...why did i ask! 

Just cause its Blu-ray doesnt mean it has to be widescreen! In this case, it SHOULDNT BE! Widescreen came about because of people staying home to watch TV. As you might know, i hope, not many TVs around in the 30s.  :)
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home

Gear mentioned in this thread:

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Limited Edition Collector's Set) [Blu-ray]
$149 at
See it »
Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (DVD/Two-Disc Blu-ray + BD Live w/DVD packaging) [Blu-ray]
$40 at
See it »
Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Collector's Book Set) [Blu-ray]
$53.95 at
See it »
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads › Blu-ray › A Few Words About By Robert Harris › A few words about...™ Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs -- in Blu-ray