Disney’s CAPS Films. Why the claims of DNR and the obsession with grain?

[The_Iceflash]

It seems in every Blu-Ray/4K thread regarding one if the 90s CAPS films that were released directly from the files, there’s someone who makes a DNR claim to a purely CAPS film. Just because there is no grain in a CAPS movie it must be scrubbed. Makes no logical sense. Some have even suggested adding a layer of grain or releasing a film print scan rather than the CAPS files. Why? The direct files look stunning! Way better than any film print of it would look. So why do we see this said in every CAPS thread? Why be that obsessed with grain to want it where it doesn’t belong?

[koberulz]

Were they released in theaters without grain?

[professorwho]

These films are very much limited by their mastering of the era and don’t look that great on a source level. Scanning a filmout negative or at least adding some layer of grain to the digital master helps hide the flaws a bit more, and creates a more cohesive (and IMO, more pleasant) viewing experience. Besides, these were projected on 35mm to begin with, and the grading probably took into account printing to film anyways, so they’d adhere more to the original theatrical release anyways.

[The_Iceflash]

Originally Posted by koberulz

Were they released in theaters without grain?

Digital projection did not exist.

Originally Posted by professorwho

These films are very much limited by their mastering of the era and don’t look that great on a source level. Scanning a filmout negative or at least adding some layer of grain to the digital master helps hide the flaws a bit more, and creates a more cohesive (and IMO, more pleasant) viewing experience. Besides, these were projected on 35mm to begin with, and the grading probably took into account printing to film anyways, so they’d adhere more to the original theatrical release anyways.

Quite the opposite. Beauty and the Beast’s animators actually came out publicly and said the film projections did not accurately reflect the grading they intended. CAPS to film didn’t transfer well in the eyes of the animators, at least in the beginning.

[Rizor]

Originally Posted by professorwho

These films are very much limited by their mastering of the era and don’t look that great on a source level. Scanning a filmout negative or at least adding some layer of grain to the digital master helps hide the flaws a bit more, and creates a more cohesive (and IMO, more pleasant) viewing experience. Besides, these were projected on 35mm to begin with, and the grading probably took into account printing to film anyways, so they’d adhere more to the original theatrical release anyways.

I found CAPS animated titles like Lion King and Aladdin a bit difficult to watch on 4K. Maybe it's combined with the HDR, but I found the picture a bit tough on the eyes. Not enough detail and texture for the eyes to latch onto. But sharp, kinda messy animation lines you end up focusing on. I think grain would help even it out.

I was surprised by how dirty Aladdin looked. There's a fair amount of dirt and noise captured in the CAPS files. I figured anyone reviewing the transfer would have thought to paint them out or use some automated software to remove them, especially given Disney's usual penchant for DNR.

[The_Iceflash]

Originally Posted by Rizor

I found CAPS animated titles like Lion King and Aladdin a bit difficult to watch on 4K. Maybe it's combined with the HDR, but I found the picture a bit tough on the eyes. Not enough detail and texture for the eyes to latch onto. But sharp, kinda messy animation lines you end up focusing on. I think grain would help even it out.

I was surprised by how dirty Aladdin looked. There's a fair amount of dirt and noise captured in the CAPS files. I figured anyone reviewing the transfer would have thought to paint them out or use some automated software to remove them, especially given Disney's usual penchant for DNR.

Adding grain would cover up the intent. CAPS wasn’t perfect or perhaps as detailed but releasing the files as they have is true to the source and shows the creator’s artistic intent. DNR is hated for eliminating detail and detracting from artistic intent and adding it where there was none is messing with the intent just as much. You even approve of painting out errors or noise. Makes no sense to me.

[koberulz]

Originally Posted by The_Iceflash

Adding grain would cover up the intent. CAPS wasn’t perfect or perhaps as detailed but releasing the files as they have is true to the source and shows the creator’s artistic intent.

Originally Posted by The_Iceflash

Digital projection did not exist.

These two statements are incompatible.

[The_Iceflash]

Originally Posted by koberulz

These two statements are incompatible.

Sure they are. I’m not one of those people who think prints in all absolute terms that film prints represent artistic intent. When created on film you can make that argument. Creating a film digitally? Making a film print of that is removing it from the source. Plus, especially in the early years, the animators didn’t account for the changes a film output would make to their source which resulted in a presentation they weren’t pleased with. Beauty and the Beast’s animators stated this publically.

[sherlockjr]

Originally Posted by The_Iceflash

Sure they are. I’m not one of those people who think prints in all absolute terms that film prints represent artistic intent. When created on film you can make that argument. Creating a film digitally? Making a film print of that is removing it from the source.

Those films were made and intended for a theatrical release on film, which is where Disney had made their money since the 1920s. Film prints were certainly the intended audience release format.

[Areyakiddin]

Technicolor film labs were able to adjust the color timing of prints back in the 1930s. I'm not an expert, but it seems weird to me that whatever lab Disney was using in the 90s was unable to calibrate the colors for prints to correctly match what the artists wanted (especially since Disney movies made big money!)

[The_Iceflash]

Originally Posted by Areyakiddin

Technicolor film labs were able to adjust the color timing of prints back in the 1930s. I'm not an expert, but it seems weird to me that whatever lab Disney was using in the 90s was unable to calibrate the colors for prints to correctly match what the artists wanted (especially since Disney movies made big money!)

Don Hahn explains it here. It was a new technology going from one medium to another. The CAPS films clearly represent intent more than the film transfers did.

https://www.awn.com/animationworld/d...east-going-blu

[The_Iceflash]

Originally Posted by sherlockjr

Those films were made and intended for a theatrical release on film, which is where Disney had made their money since the 1920s. Film prints were certainly the intended audience release format.

Don Hahn disagreed with you in that what was portrayed on film wasn’t necessarily their intent.

https://www.awn.com/animationworld/d...east-going-blu

[sherlockjr]

Originally Posted by The_Iceflash

Don Hahn disagreed with you in that what was portrayed on film wasn’t necessarily their intent.

https://www.awn.com/animationworld/d...east-going-blu

Well, in the linked piece he literally says:

It looks great on film,

The discussion about BD vs film are all about color correction not grain:

but this gives us the option to go back to the original color palette.

There's not one word at all in that piece about film grain. There is a few words about one particular color of red used for a tunic.

What he likes about the BD release was an opportunity to change the color grading to his preferred version. Color grading is a creative function that isn't finalized until the end of the film production process. As can be seen on hundreds of threads on br.com, color grading can be discussed endlessly and differing creative members of a film's team can have very different opinions on how the final theatrical version should look.

In this case the color grading was also limited by the film out technology, film negative characteristics, and high speed film printing technology of 1991.

[Kyle15]

This one's easy; even digital productions get hit with the DNR stick. They upscale and recomposite these movies and sloppily attempt hiding certain aspects of how that looks. Then u get smeary looking digital animation. Not that the CAPS films are a mess on 4k, but still. DNR ain't just a grain reduction trick.

[aladdin123]

It's not just about color really. Going back to the digital files allows the directors and producers behind the films to tinker with them. The early CAPS films have lots of revisionism, with the directors openly saying they wanted to change animation that they weren't happy with back when the films came out. Color is the least of revisionisms, it is them wanting to do colors that the limitations of the filmout process didn't allow them to achieve on film back then, though they tried.

[The_Iceflash]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

This one's easy; even digital productions get hit with the DNR stick. They upscale and recomposite these movies and sloppily attempt hiding certain aspects of how that looks. Then u get smeary looking digital animation. Not that the CAPS films are a mess on 4k, but still. DNR ain't just a grain reduction trick.

The 4K CAPS films haven’t had DNR used on them though.

[The_Iceflash]

Originally Posted by sherlockjr

Well, in the linked piece he literally says:



The discussion about BD vs film are all about color correction not grain:



There's not one word at all in that piece about film grain. There is a few words about one particular color of red used for a tunic.

What he likes about the BD release was an opportunity to change the color grading to his preferred version. Color grading is a creative function that isn't finalized until the end of the film production process. As can be seen on hundreds of threads on br.com, color grading can be discussed endlessly and differing creative members of a film's team can have very different opinions on how the final theatrical version should look.

In this case the color grading was also limited by the film out technology, film negative characteristics, and high speed film printing technology of 1991.

Regardless if he was talking about grain or not, it illustrated that the CAPS files represent artistic intent and truthfully, a film out of these films didn’t really look better than the actual CAPS filmed themselves. It’s common here for random posters to disagree with artistic intent and to stick with one view for all types of films but movies made with CAPS need to be released that way.

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by The_Iceflash

The 4K CAPS films haven’t had DNR used on them though.

Didn't say they did.