The Little Mermaid 4K UHD (1989) (30th Anniversary Edition)

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Had the exact same reaction to Lion King. Might look decent in itself, but there's virtually zero benefit in terms of resolution vs the BD, this kind of line art just doesn't have anything over and above 2K (if that!). I know I'm the one usually crowing about how resolution doesn't matter and that HDR's the thing but, well, when the HDR isn't overly amazing either (Lion King I mean, not Little Mermaid as my copy's en route) then it makes me question the whole package.

Some of the older Disney hand animated films could benefit from 4k detail as they tended to almost look like paintings made to move, especially the background art. They weren't going for ultimate realism back then, but a more surrealistic water-color effect. I miss that style of animation. It's beautiful.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

I thought the colors were bolder and more stable. No egregious banding that I was able to detect, etc.

TLM was inked and painted rather flat without a lot of deep shadow and strong specular highlights like some of the Disney Golden Era films or modern CGI based titles to really take advantage of HDR grading.

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Had the exact same reaction to Lion King. Might look decent in itself, but there's virtually zero benefit in terms of resolution vs the BD, this kind of line art just doesn't have anything over and above 2K (if that!). I know I'm the one usually crowing about how resolution doesn't matter and that HDR's the thing but, well, when the HDR isn't overly amazing either (Lion King I mean, not Little Mermaid as my copy's en route) then it makes me question the whole package.

It's not necessarily resolution, I just didn't see HDR doing anything with the colors and highlights. I could tell Lion King looked different/better, but with this one, even stuff like Poseidon's trident glowing or Flotsam/Jetsam's glowing eyes didn't have the punch I expected. But yes, the colors are stable for what they are and I didn't notice any compression issues. The DNR didn't bother me so much, I noticed it but with these animated titles, it's not something that sticks in my craw the way it does for others.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Some of the older Disney hand animated films could benefit from 4k detail as they tended to almost look like paintings made to move, especially the background art. They weren't going for ultimate realism back then, but a more surrealistic water-color effect. I miss that style of animation. It's beautiful.

But does the art itself contain anything that 4K resolution could actually exploit? I'm not so sure. They were limited to what the human eye could resolve and what the human hand could paint, maybe the cels themselves contain a load more detail but that ship has long since sailed.

[bytor]

People sure love to %&@! on this UHD for some reason but I think it looks great. Have you guys even looked at the comparison sliders on the hdnumerique website? There is a clear difference in detail. And no punch with King Triton’s trident? Uh what? The extra punch was immediately noticeable to me on my Z9D, any more and it would have been too bright.

[jala12]

I did an A/B comparison myself and the previous DE blu looks more washed out IMO. The UHD looks sharper and a lot more colorful to me, thanks in no small part to the HDR.

[Brian81]

I don't think it is that much HDR as it is just the colors are better this time around. After spending more time with this, I miss the grain of the Diamond but the colors are better here.

[bradnoyes]

I was more impressed with this than The Lion King, but I think a lot of that had to do with the fact that I've seen the Lion King BD several times within the last few years. I hadn't seen The Little Mermaid since the early 90's so this was a massive jump over any prior viewing. Still, I was happy with how this looked.

[imsounoriginal]

I'm in a similar boat, don't think I ever saw Little Mermaid on BD but I saw Lion King at least a couple of times. Still noticed more of a difference on the latter than the former. Not that either of them is a seismic upgrade, and I'm not trying to say Little Mermaid looks bad -- just underwhelming.

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

But does the art itself contain anything that 4K resolution could actually exploit? I'm not so sure. They were limited to what the human eye could resolve and what the human hand could paint, maybe the cels themselves contain a load more detail but that ship has long since sailed.

I own an X-Men cel and original hand painted background from the '90s TV show. There's a load of detail there, much more than I anticipated. If nothing else, you'd get a lot of texturing from the paint/paper which would be nice to see. The cels themselves only have so much detail to resolve, but sharper line art and better color/contrast with WCG/HDR would be a plus. Doubly so with Technicolor sourced material.

After watching Watership Down on Blu-ray from Criterion, I'm blown away at how much detail can be in backgrounds for traditionally animated material. If Disney would simply release their titles sans all the DNR we could see what is on those negatives. I was about to mention in the above paragraph that a 4K scan and release would yield sharper and tighter grain which gives better depth to animated titles but as it's Disney we're discussing here, that's not likely.

On the traditional animation front, hopefully we will see the Miyazaki films in UHD at some point. Possibly Akira too. I'm going to grab the Popeye shorts.

[Geoff D]

Aye, the backgrounds themselves will often have more time and attention lavished upon them while the actual animation -as impressive as it may seem in itself - can seem quite rudimentary in terms of detail.

[Dailyan]

Originally Posted by singhcr

On the traditional animation front, hopefully we will see the Miyazaki films in UHD at some point. Possibly Akira too. I'm going to grab the Popeye shorts.

Well we are getting Miyazaki’s debut on UHD soon:

[fallofparadise]

Ariel's hair looks darker, almost brown and not red on the 4k version, at least with my tv and setup. Is this normal for everyone else or do I need to adjust some settings?

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by bytor

People sure love to %&@! on this UHD for some reason but I think it looks great. Have you guys even looked at the comparison sliders on the hdnumerique website? There is a clear difference in detail. And no punch with King Triton’s trident? Uh what? The extra punch was immediately noticeable to me on my Z9D, any more and it would have been too bright.

Less grain = less detail. Grain management can give the illusion of more detail. But it's just that, an illusion.

Originally Posted by singhcr

If Disney would simply release their titles sans all the DNR we could see what is on those negatives.

I go even further. I wish they didn`t source CAPS films from digital files, but from film, like they did with The Rescuers Down Under. That looks way more filmic. Furthermore, the final product should be the film, not those CAPS files. The film should be the source.

CAPS Blu-rays look so digital and plastic...

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Aye, the backgrounds themselves will often have more time and attention lavished upon them while the actual animation -as impressive as it may seem in itself - can seem quite rudimentary in terms of detail.

Depends on the production -- you need look no further than the cel work in Pinocchio, with fine white-brush ink-strokes on Figaro's fur and whiskers and Pinocchio's red feather on his trademark hat, or gentle blush on cheeks, eye highlights, on and on it goes. Fantasia also a tour-de-force for intricate cell detail. That sort of costly, intricate, painstaking labor fell by the wayside, with some notable exceptions, as a result of economic realities. I wouldn't go looking for that in, say, Robin Hood.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Depends on the production -- you need look no further than the cel work in Pinocchio, with fine white-brush ink-strokes on Figaro's fur and whiskers and Pinocchio's red feather on his trademark hat, or gentle blush on cheeks, eye highlights, on and on it goes. Fantasia also a tour-de-force for intricate cell detail. That sort of costly, intricate, painstaking labor fell by the wayside, with some notable exceptions, as a result of economic realities. I wouldn't go looking for that in, say, Robin Hood.

I bet Robin Hood and Oliver would look waaaaaay better without that massive DNR. It's not about detail, but having an organic and filmic look. There's a couple shots of Oliver without DNR somewhere (i'ts on the extras of some Disney film, but I can't remember which), it's so prettier than the Blu-ray...

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Bernardo A.

I bet Robin Hood and Oliver would look waaaaaay better without that massive DNR. It's not about detail, but having an organic and filmic look. There's a couple shots of Oliver without DNR somewhere (i'ts on the extras of some Disney film, but I can't remember which), it's so prettier than the Blu-ray...

I think Oliver and Co. is Disney's most visually unappealing movie in the first place, on top of being a fairly lousy movie. Bottom ten, one of those "hold your nose and buy it" films just for collection completionists sake. Speaking of, Robin Hood has its own...issues.

[fighthefutureofhd]

I actually quite like Oliver and Company. I remember really digging it in theaters when I first saw it. Then when it came out on Blu-ray I watched for the first time since theaters and I wasn't as enamored with it, but I still liked it quite a bit. I find it's better than a lot of the "renaissance" films, such as Rescuers Down Under and Hercules. And certainly much better than a lot of the animated fare coming out today. I would relish a chance to get this on 4K.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I think Oliver and Co. is Disney's most visually unappealing movie in the first place, on top of being a fairly lousy movie. Bottom ten, one of those "hold your nose and buy it" films just for collection completionists sake. Speaking of, Robin Hood has its own...issues.

You totally missed my point, but whatever...

[Ernest Rister]

I heard you, you want CAPS films to come to home media sourced from an interpositive, and the same with traditionally photographed films. I understood you fine, I see good arguments for both, don't feel like writing an essay about it today, but I get where you're coming from.

[Bernardo A.]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I heard you, you want CAPS films to come to home media sourced from an interpositive, and the same with traditionally photographed films. I understood you fine, I see good arguments for both, don't feel like writing an essay about it today, but I get where you're coming from.

And I don’t see how that has anything to do with Oliver’s aesthetics... Just wanted to watch a film, not a saturday morning TV cartoon.