Aladdin (1992) (Diamond Edition)

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by Lyris

What makes you say that (that the UK version is NR'd)?

There were missing stroke lines consistent with it, I saw comparison pix somewhere I need to track them down again

[biomerge]

So when do you guys think we'll receive artwork/feature specification for this? I'm eagerly anticipating both; there should ideally be some sort of tribute to the late great Robin Williams which would be really interesting considering the controversy and his legacy.

I really hope the artwork is full and not an oval cut-out; I hate those.

[Malv1]

I really wish they would do the steelbook for this one... Like the older Disney releases, you get the steel free with the preorder.

[FoxRox]

Originally Posted by biomerge

So when do you guys think we'll receive artwork/feature specification for this? I'm eagerly anticipating both; there should ideally be some sort of tribute to the late great Robin Williams which would be really interesting considering the controversy and his legacy.

I really hope the artwork is full and not an oval cut-out; I hate those.

I agree; I thought the oval was okay for 101 Dalmatians, but was not a big fan of The Jungle Book's design. I also personally prefer having the blue frame rather than the gold one, but in Aladdin's case, the gold might work better. Hopefully we get new stuff soon - still a few Disney animated classics without a release window, too...

[John Ross Ewing]

I really hope the sequels get released in their OAR this time around. I don't understand why the DVDs were cropped. Back then they were still releasing fullscreen movies, so they didn't even have the excuse of formatting it for a widescreen television.

[David M]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

There were missing stroke lines consistent with it, I saw comparison pix somewhere I need to track them down again

Very strange. It's not impossible that they could have used dirt and scratch removal algos on it for the purpose of removing dirt that was scanned from the original drawings (obviously not to remove dirt from film, since it's digital!)

If you can dig out the comparisons, let me see 'em. I'd be interested.

I was more concerned with the ringing which suggests some sort of filtering or scaling at some point. It still looked good, though.

[fitprod]

Originally Posted by John Ross Ewing

I really hope the sequels get released in their OAR this time around. I don't understand why the DVDs were cropped. Back then they were still releasing fullscreen movies, so they didn't even have the excuse of formatting it for a widescreen television.

Return of Jafar should have been 1.33, but the second sequel was actually animated at 1.66.

fitprod

[Lnds500]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

There were missing stroke lines consistent with it, I saw comparison pix somewhere I need to track them down again

Originally Posted by Lyris

Very strange. It's not impossible that they could have used dirt and scratch removal algos on it for the purpose of removing dirt that was scanned from the original drawings (obviously not to remove dirt from film, since it's digital!)

If you can dig out the comparisons, let me see 'em. I'd be interested.

I was more concerned with the ringing which suggests some sort of filtering or scaling at some point. It still looked good, though.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...27#post7264327

[monorail91]

Would be cool to see special features related to the Broadway musical, like Darren Criss's performance of "Proud of Your Boy" from that Disney on Broadway special last fall.

[Gabkat2007]

Originally Posted by John Ross Ewing

I really hope the sequels get released in their OAR this time around. I don't understand why the DVDs were cropped. Back then they were still releasing fullscreen movies, so they didn't even have the excuse of formatting it for a widescreen television.

Actually, only the DVD release of Aladdin and the King of Thieves was cropped to widescreen; The Return of Jafar was presented correctly in 1.33:1. I know for a fact that Disney also cropped Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas to widescreen for its Blu-ray release.

[RebelPrince1986]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

There were missing stroke lines consistent with it, I saw comparison pix somewhere I need to track them down again

I just took a look at the screen cap comparisons and while edge enhancement is visible (especially around white eyes) and small amounts of blocking (the red of iago in the shot of jafar putting the scarab together), I don't see these missing stroke lines that you're referring to. Which screen caps show missing lines?

[ChipmunksDad]

Originally Posted by The_Iceflash

They do. http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/top...s/topic/15617/ Pure ignorance.

Of course such ignorance is disgusted under the guise of "high standards". High standards indeed.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by The_Iceflash

WTH? Why do we always assume something looking different means it's faulty and wrong? Some of us really need to get over that one.

If we leave the faulty and wrong arguments, it's certainly cheap looking.
Like a TV show..
Yes, the CAPS films don't have grain but their 35mm negatives have.
I saw a grainy HD version of Mulan and Hunchback and looked great and cinematic comparing to their Blurays.
The Blurays seemed visually uninteresting, flat without any depth and boring..

And I wouldn't call it ignorance, wanting to see beautiful transfers of the original 35mm negatives than recolored, rotoscoped, scrubbed films. (this goes for the old classics).
If this was applied to live action films, they would be the worst releases ever according to most people and reviewers.

Someday, i hope someday, a sensible person goes in the helm of Disney, and releases all these films as they should be!
You have your grain free platinum/diamond editions!
Can't we have our filmic transfers too?
Why being so selfish?
Why release the same thing over and over and over again?

We want the original version as it was presented in theaters.
Why are we being ignorant and you are not for wanting the tampered to a great extent versions? Because they have been tampered with, it is evident in the restoration videos that Disney itself has released.
I wish you would stop calling names.
If we see it logically, who is ignorant?

The one who wants the original thing, or the one who is happy with something that reminds of the original thing?
And you can be happy with it. I have no disagreement with that.
But that doesn't give you the right to call everyone else ignorant!
So, proclaim all people that want the Star Wars UOT ignorant too, the ones that don't want the DNRed Predator UHE too, also the ones that thought the original Patton Bluray was no good etc. etc.

Funny thing is that even the HD versions of films don't match to each other (eg. 2D and 3D version of beauty and the Beast), because the "restorators can't decide what colors they want!
That is enough proof that they don't know what they're doing and these are not the original films, since they're constantly changing their minds.

[The_Iceflash]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

If we leave the faulty and wrong arguments, it's certainly cheap looking.
Like a TV show..
Yes, the CAPS films don't have grain but their 35mm negatives have.
I saw a grainy HD version of Mulan and Hunchback and looked great and cinematic comparing to their Blurays.
The Blurays seemed visually uninteresting, flat without any depth and boring..

And I wouldn't call it ignorance, wanting to see beautiful transfers of the original 35mm negatives than recolored, rotoscoped, scrubbed films. (this goes for the old classics).
If this was applied to live action films, they would be the worst releases ever according to most people and reviewers.

Someday, i hope someday, a sensible person goes in the helm of Disney, and releases all these films as they should be!
You have your grain free platinum/diamond editions!
Can't we have our filmic transfers too?
Why being so selfish?
Why release the same thing over and over and over again?

We want the original version as it was presented in theaters.
Why are we being ignorant and you are not for wanting the tampered to a great extent versions? Because they have been tampered with, it is evident in the restoration videos that Disney itself has released.
I wish you would stop calling names.
If we see it logically, who is ignorant?

The one who wants the original thing, or the one who is happy with something that reminds of the original thing?
And you can be happy with it. I have no disagreement with that.
But that doesn't give you the right to call everyone else ignorant!
So, proclaim all people that want the Star Wars UOT ignorant too, the ones that don't want the DNRed Predator UHE too, also the ones that thought the original Patton Bluray was no good etc. etc.

Funny thing is that even the HD versions of films don't match to each other (eg. 2D and 3D version of beauty and the Beast), because the "restorators can't decide what colors they want!
That is enough proof that they don't know what they're doing and these are not the original films, since they're constantly changing their minds.

Why would anybody logically want a 35mm film negative of a CAPS FILM?!!!!!! Am I in freaking bizarro world?!!!

I don't buy that looking "cinematic" BS. Warped logic and ignorance is the only way to explain why anyone would chose a 35mm print of a CAPS film over the pure CAPS film itself!

Better yet, why would anyone considered that the best and definitive version?!!!!

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by The_Iceflash

Why would anybody want a 35mm film negative of a CAPS FILM?!!!!!! Am I in freaking bizarro world?!!!

Better yet, why would anyone considered that the best and definitive version?!!!!

I understand your sentiments about the CAPS films and I respect them, but you don't want 35mm negatives of the old NON-CAPS films either!!!

[The_Iceflash]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

I understand your sentiments about the CAPS films and I respect them, but you don't want 35mm negatives of the old NON-CAPS films either!!!

You certainly don't. You have your agenda regarding film restoration and it is so full of inaccuracies, flawed logic, flat out wrong, and very narrow. You view film restoration as a one size fits all and a black or white thing. It isn't. You're dealing with flawed premises on how you think something should look by basing it on bad sources. You're stuck on one mode and you'd rather watch very bad transfers that challenge your very narrow, flawed and narrow philosophies.

[Lnds500]

Originally Posted by RebelPrince1986

I just took a look at the screen cap comparisons and while edge enhancement is visible (especially around white eyes) and small amounts of blocking (the red of iago in the shot of jafar putting the scarab together), I don't see these missing stroke lines that you're referring to. Which screen caps show missing lines?

This is on the bottom of that post..

UPDATE:
Concerning the artifacts in some pictures

Also, concerning Iago's eyes. I don't think that's blocking. It looks like pencil (?) lines or something similar. Jasmine also has them near her eyes here.

[filmmusic]

Originally Posted by The_Iceflash

You certainly don't. You have your agenda regarding film restoration and it is so full of inaccuracies, flawed logic, flat out wrong, and very narrow. You view film restoration as a one size fits all and a black or white thing. It isn't. You're dealing with flawed premises on how you think something should look by basing it on bad sources. You're stuck on one mode and you'd rather watch very bad transfers that challenge your very narrow, flawed and narrow philosophies.

Ok then, yes, I'm narrow because i don't want to see altered , recolored and scrubbed atrocities.
There , are you satisfied?

THIS is how an animation film restored should look like, and i'm really really happy that Ghibli studio (and ALL other studios except Disney) don't follow your pattern of ignorance!!
http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ess=#vergleich
Please don't address to me any more, as I will stop addressing to you.

[RebelPrince1986]

Originally Posted by Lnds500

This is on the bottom of that post..

Also, concerning Iago's eyes. I don't think that's blocking. It looks like pencil (?) lines or something similar. Jasmine also has them near her eyes here.

What is on the bottom of what post? That is not an answer. In which screen cap are line strokes missing from the Blu-ray that are present on the DVD?

And nobody said the blocking was on his eyes... I said the blocking was in the red of Iago, his red feathers have minor blocking.

[RBBrittain]

Originally Posted by filmmusic

Ok then, yes, I'm narrow because i don't want to see altered , recolored and scrubbed atrocities.
There , are you satisfied?

THIS is how an animation film restored should look like, and i'm really really happy that Ghibli studio (and ALL other studios except Disney) don't follow your pattern of ignorance!!
http://caps-a-holic.com/hd_vergleich...ess=#vergleich
Please don't address to me any more, as I will stop addressing to you.

Your problem is you can't see how anyone can restore films in any manner other than yours. The main issue with DNR is not its use to remove dirt & other artifacts, but rather its overuse to remove fine details embedded in a live-action film's grain. That is not an issue with most animation because the original cels weren't that detailed to begin with, or (as with Aladdin, and all Renaissance titles other than TLM) the details are stored in the underlying digital ink files (CAPS), or both. Animation is inherently unnatural, so the usual concern that DNR makes the camera image look unnatural simply doesn't apply.