Lads, is there a guide to which Disney home releases are best and which need to be avoided like the plague?

Laserdisc would be better but you know that's kind of absurd.

Laser Disc > DVD > VHS > Golden Book > Blu ray

Don't this also have to do with how modern screens work?

Look at the bad redraw of his button in the bottom.

originaltrilogy.com/topic/Recommended-Editions-of-Disney-Animated-and-Partially-Animated-Features/id/15617

Stop buying pirated tapes:
youtube.com/watch?v=wa9brPtlg_A

No.

Thanks, pretty informative. I wonder if Yea Forums could get a MEGA folder of the best together some day

Yeah grain removal is cancer but you're a retard if you think the color of the VHS release is accurate.

user, did you even go through those images. Multiple details are completely deleted in the digital. Yeah grain removal is fine and so is color touch-up, but the way Disney does it is so lazy it ruins it.

Anything from the Xerox era(101 Dalmations to Oliver & Company) suffers the most from Disney's DNR. However, some of them actually look pretty faithful due to Disney not giving a shit about them, which include The Rescuers '77, The Fox and the Hound and The Great Mouse Detective. Sword in the Stone is the absolute worst of the BDs, avoid that one at all costs and find yourself a copy of the old iTunes WEB-DL.(NOT the current one!)

Aspect ratio is also something to consider. The films between Jungle Book and The Fox and the Hound were animated in 1.37:1 and matted to 1.85:1 for their theatrical release. For modern releases Disney chose the theatrical AR, but that also means these films lose a whopping 1/3rd of the animated image compared to an old 1.33:1 home release on VHS, LD or DVD. Same thing often goes for a lot of non-Disney films from the same period as well like Watership Down, The Secret of NIMH, The Last Unicorn, etc.

The darker one is trash because it removed the light from the flame to downplay the shitty digital recolors. It just looks off to have a flame that size putting out no light on the background and still having the colors on Pinocchio be brightened.

I admit I know nothing about anything but can someone tell me why aspect ratio is a problem at all? Isn't that what the letterbox bars or frames are for? Why the fuck would you ever in a million years chop any of the picture off instead of just reshaping modern screens with black bars?

A non-shit version of this is impossible to find online

Attached: great_mouse_detective_ver2.jpg (510x755, 103K)

So far no home media has given you the option to matte the AR yourself, so you're dependent on the distributor to make that choice. There have been some nice releases like the Shout Factory BD of Transformers: The Movie, which includes both the theatrical 1.85:1 and the better 1.35:1 version on a 2nd disc.

yikes

That sucks. Do you have any more comparisons like this?

Maybe that's why people on eBay are selling those Black Diamond tapes for hundreds of dollars.

>reading comprehension

Naw, the reasons those tapes are listed (not sold) for so much money is because fully 100% mint condition ones are pretty rare. Used ones are almost literally a dime a dozen and the only real problem with them is that it's getting harder to obtain and upkeep VCRs.

>multi billion dollar company
>some of the best known animated movies of all time
>this is the restoration job they do
Jesus fuck why?

Stuff like this has been going on at Disney more and more in the last decade.

Disney has a "grain is noise" policy which leads them to use aggressive DNR. If you look at reviews for these BDs online even on enthusiast sites like blu-ray.com you see them praise DNR'd releases and shit on proper grainy restorations so this practice will continue.
In case anyone is wondering, this is what a proper grain field looks like in old animation.

It started with the Lowry restoration of Snow White in the mid-90s. As far as I know no faithful release of Snow White exists on any format because of this.

Attached: wdown2.png (1920x1040, 3.56M)

Have some more proper grain.

Attached: LT3.png (1920x1080, 2.63M)

>Disney has a "grain is noise" policy
But...why? Surely the people in charge of restoring and preserving their stuff understand that the grain is a vital part of the movies since the were made on fucking film. The Treasures dvd sets weren't DNR'd to death and had the grain intact didn't they?

Sadly it seems even Warner Home Video is going down the DNR everything route if the Batman TAS and Batman Beyond Blu-ray releases are anything to go by. It seems only the based Warner Archive division understands the importance keeping the grain.

Anyone know what version was Netflix? That didn't look bad.

Disney primarily markets them to children and parents who don't understand grain and see it as noise. They want old animation to look like digital, clean animation.

Labels such as Warner Archive, Criterion and Shout Factory market to collectors and film buffs who will boycott a fucked up release, so they go to great lengths to restore properly.

the hipster idea of ''grain = dirty = bad''

I mean, I get that their marketing divisions and such wouldn't give a shit. But surely there'd be someone on the archive/restoration team at Disney that isn't a complete moron?

Which animated releases feature top tier special features?

They have unaltered 4K+ scans of every film, I'd assume. They just don't release them to the public.

Disney's best special features on a release in my opinion are the ones from the Fantasia 60th Anniversary DVD set, which is a pretty old DVD at this point. Has a ton of unused film material, production photos/sketches and interviews.
aHR0cHM6Ly9tZWdhLm56LyNGIVRuUjJVSUxLIXVodW5aZ0xTZ2QwM3hWTF9SamFUa1E=
Decode with Base64

They don't care what those people think

>But...why?
Did you see Fantasia 2 in theaters?

It all stems from that.

what do you mean?

>Sword in the Stone is the absolute worst of the BDs
Oh yeah, that one got botched horribly.

Seriously? kids and parents are that petty? It's art, you can't modernize an old traditional art style into digital that easily. That's like trying to make the Mona Lisa look digital and clean.
God the average person is a fucking moron. Absolutely no standard or appreciation for old animation.

All of the new sequences in Fantasia 2000 were crisp and beautiful -- and then they spliced in The Sorcerer's Apprentice from Fantasia 1.
The print was pretty badly degraded. It had lots of bad, unintentional noise and grit which originated with the quality of the print which was never part of the original animation. They cleaned it up as best they could but the results were quite jarring, and frankly embarrassing to Michael Eisner.
He invested hard in DNR because he was concerned their older films weren't going to restore right for DVD. Alas, that trend continues to this day....

(Eisner wasn't wrong. The Sorcerer's Apprentice print was in horrible condition and actually did need noise and grit removal. But now Disney is removing ALL noise from prints which are in good condition and the entire process is just out of control.)

Show the layman a clip from a faithful restoration to a Disney-esque DNR job and they will prefer the latter unless it's a complete travesty like what they did to Sword in the Stone.

Even the supposed enthusiasts rate these releases highly, just look at this:
blu-ray.com/movies/Cinderella-Blu-ray/7650/#Review
If BD Cinderella gets 4.5/5 there is no hope for change.

Thanks user

Attached: Perfection.webm (1122x1080, 1.08M)

I don't think it's fair to say people are making a choice. They just like Cinderella so they're giving the shitty Cinderella DVD could reviews.

the blu-ray.com reviews for all the disney blu-rays are insane. Even when they sometime go back and amend them they still barely take it down like half a point. Gotta stay on good terms with the mouse I guess.

Come to think of it, is there ANY reviewer or review outlet that calls Disney out on their shitty remasters?

Because home releases of popular Disney properties always, always sell because of normies, and those normies don't care about the same things restoration nerds do.

Why would you spend more money and effort just to appeal to 1% of your audience and lower your own profits? It would violate capitalism to do otherwise.

Cinderella's 2K digital restoration (the one used for all home media since the 2005 DVD) was, for some reason, a particularly bad restoration (probably the worst of Disney's iconic films). Most of Disney's iconic films end up restored like , ridden of grain and changed in color palette (the color changes, according to Disney, are meant to "reverse" color degredation that film stocks go through) but not blatantly ridden of detail.

The top image is from the 1999 DVD (based on the partially digital 1992 Lowry restoration) while the bottom image is from a 2009 DVD based on a later, fully digital restoration.

Disney claims the earlier restoration, as a result of using a print "a generation removed" from the original master film, had a palette inaccurate to the film's original palette (an issue supposedly corrected in the new restoration). However, certain Disney fans claim the later restoration is an overly restored hatchet job to what Pinnochio is supposed to look like.

Are you genuinely retarded? Do you have an honest-to-God mental deficiency or hanicap?

Toy Story is also a completely fucked home release, the colors are all so wrong

>still have it on vhs
Thanks, Jupiter.