Your print?! If you have a copy that looks so much better than why is it in your hands? It should be in their hands. That goes for all private collectors here. If what you have looks better than what the studios have then you should offer them yours. Otherwise there is no room to complain how theirs looks. Especially when one is sitting on prints. (This is why I feel no one, aside from the studios, should own prints. That way, when we get releases, we get it from the best sources possible and not whatever the studios have while private collectors keep theirs hidden.
BTW, Tom and Jerry looks fantastic. They look the best we have ever seen them on home video.
A few things...
To reiterate, for what I hope is the last time: there is a common misconception that only one set of CRI elements exists on the MGM cartoons. This is false. There are two, maybe three, sets of them. One set looks absolutely stunning, the next best thing to original nitrate material. WHV did right and used those for most of the cartoons - except for the noted ten. They goofed and sourced them from inferior CRIs with a decidedly Eastman flavor - bad color and 60s lion logo being the giveaway.
My mention of the modern 16mm prints I own is just to prove the point that superior CRI elements exist on those titles and are alive and well.
(What's funny is that I was just with a bunch of older film collectors Saturday night, and they brought up this release... At least one said they preferred the HD, crummy color transfers to the older, SD, over-saturated colors, so to each his own. All of us agreed that the titles done right were done right, though.)
As for the comments on whether the concept of film collectors should exist or not, you, my friend, are lucky you're in a forum populated by so few of them!
Edited by ThadK, October 14 2013 - 01:56 PM.