Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.


Photo

So what's the verdict, does the new Peter Pan DVD have improved video?


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 of 27 OFFLINE   rob kilbride

rob kilbride

    Supporting Actor



  • 715 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 12 2001
  • Real Name:Rob Kilbride

Posted February 12 2002 - 09:37 PM

So what do you guys that have it think? The first DVD had several instances of compression pixelization especially in the dark areas of the screen. Has this been improved upon?

#2 of 27 ONLINE   Craig Beam

Craig Beam

    Screenwriter



  • 1,727 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2000
  • Real Name:Craig Beam

Posted February 12 2002 - 11:13 PM

I have both dvds, but it's hard to do an a/b comparison without two dvd players! I did notice that the chapter lists are identical, which makes me suspect that the transfers are identical too....

#3 of 27 OFFLINE   Jeremy Conrad

Jeremy Conrad

    Supporting Actor



  • 530 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 27 2000

Posted February 12 2002 - 11:17 PM

All I know is that it looks great. Not quite as stunning as Snow White, but it's up there.

#4 of 27 OFFLINE   DaViD Boulet

DaViD Boulet

    Lead Actor



  • 8,805 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 1999

Posted February 13 2002 - 07:47 AM

Those of you with both please compare and post. Many of us are waiting to purchase based on this info.



thanks!



dave Posted Image
Be an Original Aspect Ratio Advocate

Supporter of 1080p24 video and lossless 24 bit audio.

#5 of 27 OFFLINE   rob kilbride

rob kilbride

    Supporting Actor



  • 715 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 12 2001
  • Real Name:Rob Kilbride

Posted February 13 2002 - 10:24 AM

Yes please, this is exactly what I'm doing but I'm breaking down and getting ready to get it anyway!

#6 of 27 OFFLINE   Mark Walker

Mark Walker

    Screenwriter



  • 2,704 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 1999

Posted February 13 2002 - 05:13 PM

Well- My eqipment is not good enough to tell you, but I love the commentary track! One of the best Disney has done. Roy Disney hosts you as several people chat about their experiences making the film, including many of "the old nine," which are the animators Uncle Walt trusted, admired and respected above all others it seems. I have listened to the commentary twice, and normally, that is a "one time deal" for me. I am so glad I upgraded! Mark

Paramount, please release DRAGONSLAYER on Blu-ray

Dragonslayer_1981HTF_zps4e370848.jpg

 

 

Vermithrax Pejorative deserves to be seen in high-def.


#7 of 27 OFFLINE   rob kilbride

rob kilbride

    Supporting Actor



  • 715 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 12 2001
  • Real Name:Rob Kilbride

Posted February 13 2002 - 10:26 PM

Since nobody answered, I went ahead and picked it up. Good news, the compression pixelization HAS been corrected. Look at the scene when Tinkerbell first flies down into the hideout and you see the lost boy in the black outfit snoring. The old version had bad pixelization. The new version has none!

#8 of 27 OFFLINE   Chad Gregory

Chad Gregory

    Supporting Actor



  • 631 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 11 2000

Posted February 14 2002 - 10:08 AM

Well, I picked up the new version and the transfer looks great. I agree with you Rob that the compression artifacts are almost completely gone. Much better presentation than the first disc.



If you are to take the review over at Dvdfile, you would get a completely different answer. He seems to think that the presentation is exactly the same as the "limited edition" disc, even though he never fully watched the first disc. I called him on this in this thread, and he responded with an extremely defensive rant on his review style. I just find it unfortunate that some dvdfile reviewers seem to believe that they are the end all be all and no one should question their expertise. It's a shame, I used to trust their opinions without question, now I must check who does the review and adjust accordingly.



Long story short, the new disc looks great.



-Chad

#9 of 27 OFFLINE   DaViD Boulet

DaViD Boulet

    Lead Actor



  • 8,805 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 1999

Posted February 14 2002 - 10:25 AM

Thanks Guys.



Looks like I'll need to be picking this disc up.



At least the DVD file review *did* state that he had never really watched more than a few minutes of the original disc (which was why I wasn't comfortable trusting his comparison) but your point is well taken. Reviewers shouldn't get defensive if someone points out a flaw in their review...their reviews are read by many and should strive for accuracy and completness.



-dave Posted Image
Be an Original Aspect Ratio Advocate

Supporter of 1080p24 video and lossless 24 bit audio.

#10 of 27 OFFLINE   Daniel L

Daniel L

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 179 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 08 1999

Posted February 14 2002 - 11:51 AM

Chad,



Here's the full video portion that you obviously only glanced through:



[quote]

It's has been a while since I watched Peter Pan, and the sad fact is that I bought the original DVD and only watched the first fifteen minutes of it. So it goes when you seen the film five or six times on laserdisc, and they forget to include the supplements the first time around? Anyway, this new DVD presentation appears much cleaner than the previous THX, CAV laserdisc and the same as the previous DVD.



The film is presented in its original full frame aspect ratio, thus anamorphic enhancement is not an issue. While the print on the LD was really nice, this new DVD just seems to be a bit cleaner and sharper. The colors pop off the screen with great vibrancy. Blacks and contrast are the best I've ever seen for Peter Pan, and there are no marked signs of edge enhancement nor compression artifacts. This is the finest presentation of Peter Pan yet released on home video, period.

[quote]


Taking me to task about only watching 15 minutes of the previous DVD is a slightly valid point, but would you rather I lie and not admit it?



Since it seems some people don't go outside of the HTF for thier DVD information, you should post a link to the review so they can judge it themselves. But don't pop off in a rant by misconstruing my words to fit your own rant.



As for not being thouroug enough, what more can I do? The only time I point out specific scenes with an image is faulty, or outstanding. As for the audio... 5.1 & 4.0 are no different when the rear channels are in stereo and repeat the same audio infomation. I also broke down the supplement to it's finest points, even mentioning what had been left off from the previous LD.



When I write these reviews, I write them from a perspective of a collector who has been into high end video formats since 1982. (Optical disc formats didn't start with DVD.) I've gone through four versions of Peter Pan, and I write assuming many of DVDFile's readers have also. Not only do they expect an honest opinion about the DVD's picture quality, but if it really worth plunking down an additional $20 to $30 bucks after they invested $40 to $100 in the previous releases of the film.



Daniel L

#11 of 27 ONLINE   dpippel

dpippel

    HTF Premium Member



  • 3,435 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 2000
  • Real Name:Doug

Posted February 14 2002 - 12:05 PM

[quote]

As for the audio... 5.1 & 4.0 are no different when the rear channels are in stereo and repeat the same audio infomation.

[quote]


Not to be nit-picky, but a DD 5.1 audio track contains a discrete LFE channel. A 4.0 track does not. I'd say that's a pretty big difference.



DP

Careful man, there's a beverage here!


#12 of 27 OFFLINE   Chad Gregory

Chad Gregory

    Supporting Actor



  • 631 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 11 2000

Posted February 14 2002 - 12:26 PM

Well Daniel,



There are two distinct audiences looking at your review for insight.



The first type has the special edition laser and would want to know what, if anything, is missing from the laser to this dvd as well as the probable upgrade in picture and sound. This type was only one catered to in your review.



The second type does not own the laser, but owns the first DVD. These people most likely were disappointed in the video presentation of the first disc and wanted to know whether the SE was an improvement over the "Limited Edition". This audience was completely ignored by your review, and even further you decided to throw it in their faces by saying the you own the limited edition, but weren't going to make any comparisions. An unfortunately lazy copout on an otherwise decent review. Therefore we have a thread like this one asking for comparisons to the other dvd, since your review is clearly overlooking a large audience of readers.



Sorry Daniel, but the first rule in writing is knowing your audience. If you assume that the only people that read Dvdfile are those who want knowledge [quote]

from a perspective of a collector who has been into high end video formats since 1982

[quote] you are behind the times and frankly someone whose superiority should be questioned. I don't go to dvdfile, to get condecending commentary from someone who only wants to cater to people who have been able to collect for 20 years, I want good solid complete information and would assume I am in the majority.



-Chad

#13 of 27 OFFLINE   Ken_McAlinden

Ken_McAlinden

    Producer



  • 6,124 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 20 2001
  • Real Name:Kenneth McAlinden
  • LocationLivonia, MI USA

Posted February 14 2002 - 12:45 PM

Chad, Daniel was writing it from his own perspective, for which he provided a description. I was not a fan of Daniel's response in the other thread, but geez Louise, I think it is time to give it a rest. His review was up front about what he did and did not do and from where he was coming. That's good enough for me. I would be more concerned if he claimed to have watched something falsely. It also seems kind of disingenuous to accuse someone of doing a "poor" review saying that he "does not have a leg to stand on" and then also accuse him of being "extremely defensive" when he responds. What would one expect? Why bring it back into this thread other than to express your disagreement with the assessment? Hasn't this axe been ground sufficiently? Regards,
Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

#14 of 27 OFFLINE   Chad Gregory

Chad Gregory

    Supporting Actor



  • 631 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 11 2000

Posted February 14 2002 - 01:01 PM

Ken, I agree with you, almost.



[quote]

What would one expect?

[quote]



I guess I expect that commenting on reviews from dvdfile if I believe they are lacking, will possible cause a rude lashing out on the forum. I find that to be unfortunate. This all started from me pointing out, what was a glaring flaw in the review. Not a personal attack on Daniel.



What is said is said, and I guess I'll back away slowly.



-Chad

#15 of 27 OFFLINE   DaViD Boulet

DaViD Boulet

    Lead Actor



  • 8,805 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 1999

Posted February 14 2002 - 01:11 PM

Hey Daniel,



Thanks for your awsome reviews! Sorry if I offended by what I said. While it is true that we shouldn't consider dvdfile as some sort of Bible to decide our DVD fates, at the same time realize that we take your reviews very seriously because of their consistent high-quality and attention to collector/videophile details (aside from thebigpicture, how many other sites notice things like EE or focus on lack of 16x9 anamorphic?) This is not meant to diss other good review sites like digitallyobsessed.com or thedigtialbits.com. I just mean to point out that dvdfile reviews most of their DVDs in such a way that lets someone with large-screen front projection system really know what that image will look like when it's 100 inches wide.



Because of this, we expect a lot. Your Peter Pan review was great...it just left one obvious question unanswered..."did the new disc provide a better transfer than the previous DVD". Keep in mind that many of us with the laserdisc also bought the first edition DVD as well.



You didn't have to compare it if you didn't want to. But the ultimate review would have compared it to *both* the laserdisc *and* the first-edition DVD. Is it so bad for us to say that?



It didn't ruin my day that your review didn't make this comparison, and I appreciated you stating that you hadn't had time to compare it so I would know to seek the information else where before making a purchase. Hope we can all get along now and thanks again for the great reviews.



-dave Posted Image



p.s. it would be great if at some point you guys would update your reivew of "BARAKA" to reflect the new (incredible) 16x9 anamorphic disc that is now available. thnx
Be an Original Aspect Ratio Advocate

Supporter of 1080p24 video and lossless 24 bit audio.

#16 of 27 ONLINE   Craig Beam

Craig Beam

    Screenwriter



  • 1,727 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2000
  • Real Name:Craig Beam

Posted February 14 2002 - 01:16 PM

Since MANY more people are collecting dvds than ever collected laserdiscs, comparing the two dvd editions would seem to take priority over comparing the "version 2.0" dvd with its counterpart from an entirely different (and older) format. But laserdisc comparisons are nice too.... I'd say both would be ideal, since both camps would be satisfied. Daniel, instead of getting defensive, why not simply ammend your review with a more thorough comparison?



Or, if nothing else, why don't you OTHER reviewers (I know you're out there!) get crackin'? Posted Image

#17 of 27 OFFLINE   Cees Alons

Cees Alons

    Executive Producer



  • 18,857 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 31 1997
  • Real Name:Cees Alons

Posted February 16 2002 - 11:14 AM

[quote]

This all started from me pointing out, what was a glaring flaw in the review

[quote]
No, Chad, you pointed it out properly, but it cannot be construed as a "glaring flaw". It is told us by the reviewer himself and clearly he himself wants to point out that his review shouldn't be used to compare the two DVDs. Fine. Glad we know that now.



And period.



Cees

#18 of 27 OFFLINE   Mike Frezon

Mike Frezon

    Studio Mogul



  • 31,870 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 09 2001
  • LocationRensselaer, NY

Posted February 16 2002 - 06:57 PM

I agree with Jeremy. Not quite a Snow White quality transfer, But Peter, Tink & Co. never looked better. Posted Image

There's Jessie the yodeling cowgirl. Bullseye, he's Woody's horse. Pete the old prospector. And, Woody, the man himself.Of course, it's time for Woody's RoundUp. He's the very best! He's the rootinest, tootinest cowboy in the wild, wild west!


HTF Rules | HTF Mission Statement | Father of the Bride

Dieting with my Dog & Heart to Heart/Hand in Paw by Peggy Frezon


#19 of 27 OFFLINE   Ken_McAlinden

Ken_McAlinden

    Producer



  • 6,124 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 20 2001
  • Real Name:Kenneth McAlinden
  • LocationLivonia, MI USA

Posted February 17 2002 - 05:10 PM

The video on the new DVD appears to be from the same master as the previous DVD and THX laserdiscs with improved compression since the previous DVD. This transfer is the cleanest and sharpest it has ever looked, but has some strange instances of color variation, especially when compared to previous video editions. One scene that looks especially strange is the scene where Wendy sings the "Your Mother" song. Her dress is very pale compared to other scenes and the skin tones are so pale that the characters look ill. Posted Image Color is also slightly inconsistent throughout the sequence. Previous video versions had the dress looking much more similar to other scenes and the characters had a ruddier complexion. I think Joe Caps mentioned this in an earlier thread.



I have no reference besides other other videos and laserdiscs, so I can't say definitively whether this look was intended, but it does look odd to me.



Regards,
Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

#20 of 27 OFFLINE   Josh_Hill

Josh_Hill

    Screenwriter



  • 1,051 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 2002

Posted February 18 2002 - 02:11 AM

I tried looking at every single place I could think of to buy this DVD, but alas everyone was sold out. Tis s shame.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users