CINDERELLA - digital "restoration" gone awry.

[drsd2kill]

I apologize in advance if this is the wrong place to share this, but...

I was severely disappointed with Disney's 2005 DVD release of CINDERELLA. The "digital restoration" was more like completely re-coloring and re-imagining the film. There were so many inconsistencies and errors, such as the whites of the stepmother's eyes often being blue and how whites were quite dulled and gray. Granted, the image is much sharper, cleaner, and reveals far more detail in the background, but I'm not so sure it is a fair tradeoff. The lines on characters appear to be thinner as well, and the animation appears less fluid to my eye in the "digitally restored" version now on DVD. Granted, they fixed a few things (as shown in two of the screen captures below), but I can't help feeling CINDERELLA was badly treated during this process. BAMBI and LADY AND THE TRAMP don't appear to be as altered as poor CINDERELLA, but perhaps I should take a closer look at those titles as well.

Anyone else think things have gone too far?

-Chuck

Below I put the 1997 Laserdisc transfer next to the 2005 DVD transfer for comparison. I have many more comparisons between the two transfers at http://s46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/ if anyone is interested.

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/20A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/20B.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/16A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/16B.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/1A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/1B.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/2A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/2B.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/3A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/3B.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/4A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/4B.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/6A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/6B.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/9A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/9B.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/10A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/10B.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/19A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/19B.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/40A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/40B.jpg

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/39A.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDERLLA/39B.jpg

[Patrick McCart]

How do we know the colors on the 1997 transfer are accurate?

I do find it annoying that they replaced the original RKO logo.

[drsd2kill]

The 1997 transfer color balance was similar to the 1987 or 1988 (can't remember) video transfer save for the fact that it was cleaner and sharper. I don't remember what it looked like at the theater, but I would think colors wouldn't change so drastically on the third video release. Some shots look almost identical in color balance, and others look so different. Sometimes only a few colors are affected. Maybe this was part of some effort to make the color more consistent, but this new digital restoration is anything but. I highly doubt the whites of the stepmother's eyes are supposed to be sky blue when they were white previously. What is sad is that this is how the film is being preserved and digitally projected.

[Vdubdavid]

Are we sure that this "new" transfer is all there's going to be? For the near future sure, but I would think that the original negative for such a noted fillm would still be in existence and that that would be what's used for the next remastering when the time comes.

P.S. Thank you, drsd2kill, for allowing me to finally see the original RKO title card for this movie! I was beginning to think I'd never see it. I'd honestly like to see someone give a rational explanation for why it's been removed. I mean, people aren't suddenly going to think Cinderella is an RKO film once "Walt Disney Presents" is flashed on the screen!

[Tom Stathes]

I don't have much to chime in about other than a friend of mine says these new "restored" versions don't look like they way they did in the theater. They look too "improved."

[Leviathan]

The case with Cinderella looks like it could've been a victim of the computer assisted "color correction" technology John K. and Stephen Worth incessantly talk ill about (I could've sworn either John or Steve actually mentioned the restoration woes of Cinderella in one of their internet posts).

Although the differences between the laserdisc and DVD versions of Cinderella aren't as blatant as, say, those of A Gruesome Twosome, thery're still there, so i definately think there's some truth to the "color correction" theory. How much truth is still up in the air, and it's possible that, if the laserdisc of Cinderella is a cleaned-up version of an existing video master, and not a version restored from an early-generation print, the colors of the Cinderella laser may not be right either. I'd have to leave this to other, more knowledgable GAC-ers.

[drsd2kill]

The 1997 Laserdisc released was digitally transferred from a restored element created from the original negatives, or at least that is what it says in the book that came inside the box set. It said that the reel containing Cinderella at the ball was damaged inadvertantly in 1949 when the film was being readied for release and that this restoration overcame that damage and those 7 or 8 minutes are now being seen from the original neg - and not a dup neg - for the first time ever. I no longer own the 1987 Laserdisc, but the color on that unrestored print was similar to the 1997 Laserdisc, albeit perhaps a bit brighter and less print damage.

I posted this info to ultimatedisney.com and it's amazing how some people rush to defend whatever Disney puts out! I mean, how can someone say the whites of stepmother's eyes are supposed to fluctuate throughout the film, often being turquoise? CINDERELLA's poor color and the loss of line thickness caught my attention immediately on the new DVD, but all the reviews I could find only raved about it. :-( I didn't notice anywhere near as big a problem on BAMBI or LADY ANJD THE TRAMP - why did CINDERELLA suffer such a fate? After spending big $$$ for the new Lowry digital restoration, I'm sure that version with its incorrect color will be used/has been used to make the future hi-def version.

[nickramer]

Speaking of the recent Bambi DVD, I did notice they corrected a blooper from the original released that they didn't corrected before that. After the fire, we see a mother raccoon licking her baby which disappears after a few seconds. Walt decided not to correct this scene since the studio was tight on money. However, in the DVD, there is no disappearing baby.

[drsd2kill]

Speaking of the recent Bambi DVD, I did notice they corrected a blooper from the original released that they didn't corrected before that. After the fire, we see a mother raccoon licking her baby which disappears after a few seconds. Walt decided not to correct this scene since the studio was tight on money. However, in the DVD, there is no disappearing baby.

I noticed that too. Oddly enough, I think those kinds of revision are fine. :-) It's a mistake Disney would've wanted to fix, I'm sure. Even cel dirt and dust removal I can understand and appreciate, but when quality control isn't strong and things go awry...

[nickramer]

I noticed that too. Oddly enough, I think those kinds of revision are fine. :-) It's a mistake Disney would've wanted to fix, I'm sure. Even cel dirt and dust removal I can understand and appreciate, but when quality control isn't strong and things go awry...
I thought that change was okay, too. I was sort of afraid I was the only one who didn't mind the change, thinking that there was many angry Disney fans that would protest this fixed blooper.

[Thad]

Steve is correct. Disney does indeed enjoy doing 'color correction' on the classic features. Frank or Ollie said of the Snow White restoration, "That looked nice, but those weren't the colors we used". I do know that the recent issue of Alice in Wonderland is pretty much spot on though.

They are not being screwed around with on the Looney Tunes DVDs however. THAT is a falsehood.

[travis t]

While they were digitaly remastering it, they forgot to take the one guys cigar out of his mouth ;) Of course we don't want this to happen.

[Jon Cooke]

They are not being screwed around with on the Looney Tunes DVDs however. THAT is a falsehood.

Are you sure? Some of the pre-48s DO seem to have the color cranked up a bit much.

[Thad]

Are you sure? Some of the pre-48s DO seem to have the color cranked up a bit much.

"Gruesome Twosome" and "Tweetie Pie" are 'pumped up' but that is it AFAIK.

Anything else you hear is a lie.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

The main difference on the Cinderella laserdisc and dvd seem to be color temperature and contrast, at least to me anyway.

The laserdisc has warm tones to the color, while the dvd is more in the cool range, hence the blue tint to the whites of the eyes. The laserdisc has more contrast between light and dark colors. In the dvd, the contrast is muted.

[Bugsmer]

That comparison you posted with Cinderella in her coach looks magnificant in the laserdisc edition, but dull and bland in the DVD picture. All the excitement has been removed from the image, making it appear uninspiring. The shine on the coach's roof has been removed, and the change of colour makes it look less than striking, as opposed to how it looked on laserdisc. The DVD colours don't jump out at you, and the feeling of great worth and luxury you get when looking at the laserdisc image is gone when viewing the cheap plastic version from the DVD.

The next two pictures of the stepmother walking down the hall seem to change the mood of the scene. She looks far more sinister and angry in the top image than she does in the later one. The contrast of dark and light, followed by the way her eyes seem to glow really bring out a vivid image.

The next DVD picture dull the colours of the anti-Nazi demonstrators, particularly the one in green who dares to defy the Fuhrer by biting her wrist. Those colours are fun and bright, and you'd think that on a restored DVD, they'd look even brighter and nicer than they did on the faded negatives.

The man with the red face seems angry in the next picture--an emotion completely lacking in the next one. Also, the floor in the first seems to want to rise up and hit you in a rather dramatic fashion, with even the cracks in the floor and the dark blue tile dividers serving as eye-catchers. The colour and floor cracks were downplayed in the DVD picture, making for a rather boring floor.

If the next two are the same frame, then they look completely different. I'm assuming they're not, simply because the backgrounds don't match up. It looks interesting, to say the least.

The last two pictures, I think, look great. The DVD seemed to enhance the background of his bed and his blanket, although they made the man's face less red, and his shirt tan instead of yellow. Even his pillow has been transformed into a dull grey.

I see what you mean by incorrect colour selection. By comparing these two, you can tell that a lot has been changed, and not always for the better. I don't think it's a bad attempt, however, though I hope Disney will continue to experiment with the restoration of their films and will always keep a copy of their "original" negatives and early masters so they can always refer back to them each time they want to restore their films.

[Treadwell]

It's interesting that the background is different in the frames with the king bouncing the children on his back. Or was that a cycle, and those two frames are not the same ones?

I wouldn't call her eyes "blue". They just aren't a pure white. And they might not've been on the cels, either. I'm sure most of us have seen color model sheets that point to various parts of a character, specifying colors. I've seen "white" areas identified with certain codes that were not pure white. Sometimes, when they ARE, there's a notation reading "WHITES WHITE!".

For various reasons, you don't often want "white" areas to be 100% pure white.

[drsd2kill]

I apologize for giving the wrong date of the last Laserdisc release. The box set CAV Laserdisc of the restored version came out in October of 1995, not 1997. 10 years of technological advancements could've made that film master look so much better, but instead it has been "enhanced" into being something wholly other. :-(

[TomJerry79]

It's interesting that the background is different in the frames with the king bouncing the children on his back. Or was that a cycle, and those two frames are not the same ones?



Very good observation. There's one way to find out but I'm really not in the mood to turn off the MST3K version of Godzilla vs Megalon to put on Cinderella.

[Studio Toledo]

How do we know the colors on the 1997 transfer are accurate?
I used to think watching these movies in the 80's and 90's used to look quite fair in contrast to the way they look today. Colors was just a bit more dark in places that now seem terribly bright with a lot of contrast. I really don't have much of an opinion on this matter, more of just accepting it for what it is (as long as they don't DVNR the hell out of it).

I do find it annoying that they replaced the original RKO logo.
We really needed to have that little reminder in there!

[Studio Toledo]

The 1997 transfer color balance was similar to the 1987 or 1988 (can't remember) video transfer save for the fact that it was cleaner and sharper.
Ah yes, the 80's VHS release I first saw the film on! Used to get a little bugged watching those cheesy video transitions in a few places such as "The End" that was a freezed frame that faded in and out via video rather than just keeping the film as is through post-production. It was just so annoying.

I don't remember what it looked like at the theater, but I would think colors wouldn't change so drastically on the third video release. Some shots look almost identical in color balance, and others look so different. Sometimes only a few colors are affected. Maybe this was part of some effort to make the color more consistent, but this new digital restoration is anything but. I highly doubt the whites of the stepmother's eyes are supposed to be sky blue when they were white previously. What is sad is that this is how the film is being preserved and digitally projected.
I just assume they gone back through the original negatives this time around than to rely on what was already used before in previous transfers.

[Daws Butler Jr.]

I wouldn't call her eyes "blue". They just aren't a pure white. And they might not've been on the cels, either. I'm sure most of us have seen color model sheets that point to various parts of a character, specifying colors. I've seen "white" areas identified with certain codes that were not pure white. Sometimes, when they ARE, there's a notation reading "WHITES WHITE!".

For various reasons, you don't often want "white" areas to be 100% pure white.

One of the reasons, and I remember this happening in the dailies of "The Rescuers", is that full white can "bloom" when placed against other colors. I remember a shot of Penny where it literally looked like her eyes were headlights, they were so bright white.

[drsd2kill]

Again, the 1995 transfer was from a restored print manufactured directly from the original negatives. And even the 1987 video release wasn't so terrible, although the restored 1995 release was so much cleaner, brighter, and stable. I understand that pure white can be too much to take in Technicolor, but that is why they would usually use an off-white or light gray. But turquoise? I wonder why everyone is rushing to defend what I can only see as an accident in the "digital restoration" phase. The whites of her eyes are sometimes white, sometimes blue - and it varies from shot to shot.

I'm going to compare BAMBI soon to the new DVD. I didn't take a good look at the DVD when it came out. I did notice the incredible soundtrack though. I love the song "I Bring You a Song" and it was impossibly clean sounding. As good as the previous release sounded for a film recorded optically, the new DVD soundtrack - even the "original mono" (which I think is a recomposited mono with slightly different balance, but still) - is a revelation. I just don't know how they got such a full-bodied, rich and crisp - but not shrill or gravely - soundtrack from optical elements.

[drsd2kill]

I agree that DVNR can ruin animation, but I don't think what Disney has done is any less destructive. The lines in the animation are thinner - if not obliterated as they would be with DVNR - and the result is an image that doesn't slow as smoothly and naturally as the original. The film now looks like it was produced for video! :-(

[Daws Butler Jr.]

I didn't mean to make it sound like I was defending shoddy workmanship. If they've actually changed the colors instead of "restoring" them, then that is a shame. I was only pointing out that in animation, "white" is not always "white".

Doesn't anyone on here have an original cel of the Stepmother? That would be the best reference you could find (although even those colors change a bit with age).

[drsd2kill]

Another original RKO card [if anyone is interested]

It really is a shame these are being cut because of the custom artwork made for them. It seems that the first video releases had them cut, then the following video reissues had them restored, and now we're back to having them cut again - lol

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/vlcsnap-11133384.jpg

[cabe624]

I have no idea why Disney cuts out the RKO logo; it’s a ridiculous practice, and they seem to pick and choose which films get this treatment. "Dumbo" and "Bambi" retain their original opening, whereas "Snow White" does not. :confused:

However, I do have to question the claim that Disney is "pumping up" the colors on their restorations. While it looks like the colors are much more vivid on the DVD transfer, didn't Disney reference original artwork to get the accurate colors during the recent restoration? Just wondering.

[drsd2kill]

I have no idea why Disney cuts out the RKO logo; it’s a ridiculous practice, and they seem to pick and choose which films get this treatment. "Dumbo" and "Bambi" retain their original opening, whereas "Snow White" does not. :confused:

However, I do have to question the claim that Disney is "pumping up" the colors on their restorations. While it looks like the colors are much more vivid on the DVD transfer, didn't Disney reference original artwork to get the accurate colors during the recent restoration? Just wondering.

They SAY they did.... But it's weird that apparently the color on their films has been wrong since day one. And all their advertising. And the cels that have been available.

[Vdubdavid]

I have no idea why Disney cuts out the RKO logo; it’s a ridiculous practice, and they seem to pick and choose which films get this treatment. "Dumbo" and "Bambi" retain their original opening, whereas "Snow White" does not. :confused:

Well, to be fair, the original title sequence for Snow White is apparently lost, though a reconstruction of it appeared on disc 2 of the film's Platinum Edition DVD. However, Bambi did not have it's RKO card on it's Platinum DVD release. By the way drsd2kill, what Disney feature is that other RKO card from? Is it The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad?

[Thad]

Well, to be fair, the original title sequence for Snow White is apparently lost, though a reconstruction of it appeared on disc 2 of the film's Platinum Edition DVD. However, Bambi did not have it's RKO card on it's Platinum DVD release. By the way drsd2kill, what Disney feature is that other RKO card from? Is it The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad?

It's from Peter Pan.

[wackyoverkhaki]

Wow...if you can still find it on VHS, buy that one because at least the coloring's still authentic.

[Steve Stanch]

[QUOTE=Vdubdavid]Well, to be fair, the original title sequence for Snow White is apparently lost, though a reconstruction of it appeared on disc 2 of the film's Platinum Edition DVD.


An old 16mm Blue Track IB tech print of Snow White(probably from the early 40's) showed up on Ebay a while back, with the original RKO titles intact. It went for about $600. I was hoping the Disney folks would get that one... The prints probably also had the jittering prince too taht was fixed in the later releases....

[drsd2kill]

I thought I'd dig out my 1995 CAV Laserdisc box set of CINDERELLA and post a scan from one page from the enclosed book. This is for the people insisting all previous releases of CINDERELLA were from poor quality prints and this DVD is the only version representing the image from the original restored negatives.

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f112/drsd2kill/CINDYLDNOTES.jpg