History Main / DigitalDestruction

24th Aug '16 5:21:12 PM drbreakfast
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The 2004 ''Franchise/StarWars'' [=DVD=]s, despite being billed as digitally restored, received ''terrible'' color correction, de-saturating the soft colors of the original films into darker, more realistic lighting, and much of the clarity and detail of the original prints is lost in the process. A comparison on [=YouTube=] that is no longer available claims this was the result of Lucasfilm ordering the color correction of the films to be done in a breakneck pace of ''30 days''. Darth Vader's lightsaber becoming pink is a particular standout for ridicule.

to:

* The 2004 ''Franchise/StarWars'' [=DVD=]s, despite being billed as digitally restored, received ''terrible'' color correction, de-saturating the soft colors of the original films into darker, more realistic lighting, and much of the clarity and detail of the original prints is lost in the process. A comparison on [=YouTube=] that is no longer available claims this was the result of Lucasfilm ordering the color correction of the films to be done in a breakneck pace of ''30 days''. Darth Vader's lightsaber becoming pink is a and Luke's alternating between blue and green are particular standout standouts for ridicule.
23rd Aug '16 12:34:13 PM Prinzenick
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* While most Disney films avoid using the DVNR process, the Disney/RobinHood: Most Wanted Edition DVD release was an exception to the rule. While Disney is usually careful even when using the infamous process, the issue was that the film was made when Disney was using Xeroxing in place of hand inked cels, and the itchy, hairy lines combined with a restoration process that is specifically designed to remove things it detects as scratches and dirt was a recipe for trouble. There are many obvious instances of linework and art erasing throughout this release.
19th Aug '16 12:24:15 PM isrflo62
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** The earliest DVD sets, specifically the first two seasons (originally released by Warner Bros.), had man problems in the DVDs, being transfers from the Rhino DVD sets.
*** When Comedy Central remastered the show to HD, they did so by changing the theme song audio.
9th Aug '16 8:54:07 PM Willbyr
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* It seems that during the restoring of JeremyBrett version of Series/SherlockHolmes for their reruns on the BBC during 2003 to 2005 and their 2005 Region 2 complete collection DVD boxset, had resulted in the lost of the old Granada logos (even the ones at the beginning) and ended up getting plastered over by the same Granada logo that plastered the LWT logo on the Series 1-Series 6 of Poirot, even the JCA restoration of Granada Holmes made it even worse with changed copyright and ITV Studios logos. Averted by the Region 1 DVD release of that series due to being sourced from the original negatives.

to:

* It seems that during the restoring of JeremyBrett Creator/JeremyBrett version of Series/SherlockHolmes ''Series/SherlockHolmes'' for their reruns on the BBC during 2003 to 2005 and their 2005 Region 2 complete collection DVD boxset, had resulted in the lost of the old Granada logos (even the ones at the beginning) and ended up getting plastered over by the same Granada logo that plastered the LWT logo on the Series 1-Series 6 of Poirot, even the JCA restoration of Granada Holmes made it even worse with changed copyright and ITV Studios logos. Averted by the Region 1 DVD release of that series due to being sourced from the original negatives.
6th Aug '16 9:06:36 AM Josef5678
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

* The DVD version of ''WesternAnimation/TheBraveLittleToaster'' was taken from a worn out copy of the film used for festival screenings rather than the original negative, resulting in the picture appearing to wiggle at the beginning.
25th Jul '16 8:44:20 AM Prinzenick
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The WoodyWoodpecker DVD collections (the two official sets) got a very nasty case of DVNR treatment, terrible color correction and blatant digital compression issues the ones that get hit the worst are the shorts directed by Dick Lundy (i.e., "the best shorts"). Curiously, the earlier, sloppier shorts were considerably less ravaged. The unofficial Columbia House mail-order DVD sets use the unaltered prints, however. The B&W bonus cartoons got hit with this too; while the Oswald Rabbit shorts "Hells Heels" and "Spooks" only has it in only minor form, "Grandma's Pet" has some really bad line and art erasing issues.

to:

* The WoodyWoodpecker DVD collections (the two official sets) got a very nasty case of DVNR treatment, terrible color correction and blatant digital compression issues the ones that get hit the worst are the shorts directed by Shamus Culhane and Dick Lundy (i.e., "the best shorts"). Curiously, the earlier, sloppier shorts were considerably less ravaged. The unofficial Columbia House mail-order DVD sets use the unaltered prints, however. The B&W bonus cartoons got hit with this too; while the Oswald Rabbit shorts "Hells Heels" and "Spooks" only has it in only minor form, "Grandma's Pet" has some really bad line and art erasing issues.



* One particularly notorious example of Digital Destruction would be the infamous ''BettyBoop: The Definitive Collection'' series of VHS tapes and Laserdiscs. In ''every single short'' there is blatantly obvious, horrendous line thinning and erasing. Fortunately, Olive Films came to the rescue in late 2013 by re-releasing Betty Boop shorts with exquisite restorations that are completely devoid of DVNR--the only downside being that some of the pre-1933 shorts have their aspect ratio slightly cropped.

to:

* One particularly notorious example of Digital Destruction would be the infamous ''BettyBoop: The Definitive Collection'' series of VHS tapes and Laserdiscs. In ''every single short'' there is blatantly obvious, horrendous line thinning and erasing. Fortunately, Olive Films came to the rescue in late 2013 by re-releasing Betty Boop shorts with exquisite restorations that are completely devoid of DVNR--the only downside being that some of the pre-1933 shorts have their aspect ratio slightly cropped.cropped, most notably ''Snow White'', which has a good chunk of the top of the screen cropped for no good reason.
25th Jul '16 8:38:44 AM Prinzenick
Is there an issue? Send a Message


It bears noting that DVNR (Digital Video Noise Reduction) line damage is a ''very'' common problem among cartoon DVD releases. The reason for this is because the program was designed to remove scratches and dirt from older films by comparing adjacent frames and taking elements from another frame to remove damage. While this usually works fine for a live action film (although it likewise can cause motion smearing and picture damage if used carelessly), in animation (especially animation shot on ones, or one new drawing per frame) the DVNR process can easily mistake details or linework as dirt or scratches, and can accidentally delete whole details from the drawings as a result if the process isn't properly used. Grain Smoothing is also considered to be a serious liability in restoring old cartoons, since it can likewise snuff out details or linework if used carelessly. Another reason DVNR is so often (ab)used is because its an automated process, and is much cheaper and quicker to use than DRS (Digital Restoration Services), which require going through the film frame by frame to clean them up at great expense and time.

to:

It bears noting that DVNR (Digital Video Noise Reduction) line damage is a ''very'' common problem among cartoon DVD releases. The reason for this is because the program was designed to remove scratches and dirt from older films by comparing adjacent frames and taking elements from another frame to remove damage. While this usually works fine for a live action film (although it likewise can cause motion smearing and picture damage if used carelessly), in animation (especially animation shot on ones, or one new drawing per frame) the DVNR process can easily mistake details or linework as dirt or scratches, and can accidentally delete whole details from the drawings as a result if the process isn't properly used. Grain Smoothing is also considered to be a serious liability to use in restoring old cartoons, since it can likewise snuff out details or linework if used carelessly. Another reason DVNR is so often (ab)used is because its an automated process, and is much cheaper and quicker to use than DRS (Digital Restoration Services), which require going through the film frame by frame to clean them up at great expense and time.
25th Jul '16 8:37:17 AM Prinzenick
Is there an issue? Send a Message


It bears noting that DVNR (Digital Video Noise Reduction) line damage is a ''very'' common problem among cartoon DVD releases. The reason for this is because the program was designed to remove scratches and dirt from older films by comparing adjacent frames and taking elements from another frame to remove damage. While this works fine for a live action film, in animation (especially animation shot on ones, or one new drawing per frame) the DVNR process can easily mistake details or linework as dirt or scratches, and can accidentally delete whole details from the drawings as a result if the process isn't properly used. Grain Smoothing is also considered to be a serious liability in restoring old cartoons, since it can likewise snuff out details or linework if used carelessly. Another reason DVNR is so often (ab)used is because its an automated process, and is much cheaper and quicker to use than DRS (Digital Restoration Services), which require going through the film frame by frame to clean them up at great expense and time.

to:

It bears noting that DVNR (Digital Video Noise Reduction) line damage is a ''very'' common problem among cartoon DVD releases. The reason for this is because the program was designed to remove scratches and dirt from older films by comparing adjacent frames and taking elements from another frame to remove damage. While this usually works fine for a live action film, film (although it likewise can cause motion smearing and picture damage if used carelessly), in animation (especially animation shot on ones, or one new drawing per frame) the DVNR process can easily mistake details or linework as dirt or scratches, and can accidentally delete whole details from the drawings as a result if the process isn't properly used. Grain Smoothing is also considered to be a serious liability in restoring old cartoons, since it can likewise snuff out details or linework if used carelessly. Another reason DVNR is so often (ab)used is because its an automated process, and is much cheaper and quicker to use than DRS (Digital Restoration Services), which require going through the film frame by frame to clean them up at great expense and time.
25th Jul '16 8:35:56 AM Prinzenick
Is there an issue? Send a Message


It bears noting that DVNR (Digital Video Noise Reduction) line damage is a ''very'' common problem among cartoon DVD releases. The reason for this is because the program was designed to remove scratches and dirt from older films by comparing adjacent frames and taking elements from another frame to remove damage. While this works fine for a live action film, in animation (especially animation shot on ones, or one new drawing per frame) the DVNR process can easily mistake details or linework as dirt or scratches, and can accidentally delete whole details from the drawings as a result if the process isn't properly used. Grain Smoothing is also considered to be a serious liability in restoring old cartoons, since it can likewise snuff out details or linework if used carelessly.

to:

It bears noting that DVNR (Digital Video Noise Reduction) line damage is a ''very'' common problem among cartoon DVD releases. The reason for this is because the program was designed to remove scratches and dirt from older films by comparing adjacent frames and taking elements from another frame to remove damage. While this works fine for a live action film, in animation (especially animation shot on ones, or one new drawing per frame) the DVNR process can easily mistake details or linework as dirt or scratches, and can accidentally delete whole details from the drawings as a result if the process isn't properly used. Grain Smoothing is also considered to be a serious liability in restoring old cartoons, since it can likewise snuff out details or linework if used carelessly.
carelessly. Another reason DVNR is so often (ab)used is because its an automated process, and is much cheaper and quicker to use than DRS (Digital Restoration Services), which require going through the film frame by frame to clean them up at great expense and time.
25th Jul '16 8:25:35 AM Prinzenick
Is there an issue? Send a Message


All the same, stuff like this happens a lot with restored older films and especially older cartoons... and on occasion, this even happens (or happened) to newer cartoons (as mentioned by ''WesternAnimation/EdEddNEddy'' creator Danny Antonucci [[http://www.awn.com/mag/issue3.12/3.12pages/amididvnr.php3 here]]).

to:

All the same, stuff like this happens a lot with restored older films and especially older cartoons... and on occasion, this even happens (or happened) to newer cartoons (as mentioned by ''WesternAnimation/EdEddNEddy'' creator Danny Antonucci [[http://www.[[https://web.archive.org/web/20140311174840/http://www.awn.com/mag/issue3.12/3.12pages/amididvnr.php3 here]]).
This list shows the last 10 events of 397. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.DigitalDestruction