FUNimation "DBZ on Blu-Ray" Survey

[eledoremassis02]

Neither am I really lol. TOEI has the original source (as up until recently other countries for rebroadcast copies *lower quality* to work with). That would almost be like showing a copy of the Mona Lisa in a museum. If Toei made a new "master copy" and cropped it like the Orange brick then they would loose the highest quality *sake of better word* "original" source.

Just like they did with the audio. They threw out the original clear audio and made a new master that was lower quality. The original audio reels were destroyed and lost forever. However, because it's not a painting. People were able to film the original broadcast, they were able to save the audio (although they are probably a smidgen lower in quality).

Of course if I am wrong in any regard, do correct me.

EDIT: Just saw your edit. That how I feel do. It really is hard to compare because, as you said, Mona Lisa was meant to be a singular entity where film, obviously, is not.

[Kojiro Sasaki]

It's a shame we can't get all the NEP and audio from the dragon box. If we can get English and Japanese OP ED and title cards with their English counterparts, it would probably be the best release ever. heck, I'd sell my Dragon Boxes of that was the case lol

You can always ask about this in survey. If they will get a couple of such suggestions, maybe they will do something about it. I think that FUNimation has the same 16 mm film masters as those which were played by Fuji TV on first broadcast.
Despite all, I think that we also need to do everything that's possible to get better quality Japanese audio.

If you put your mind to it, you can accomplish anything.

[Gaffer Tape]

That seems like a very specious argument. It's not the same, there's no way that all the copies of DBZ would be changed, only then would it be like defacing the original mona lisa.

Of course what you're saying is not the same. You're comparing altering copies to altering an original!

Unless there was no way to get the show back to the original state, then it's not like ruining the original mona lisa. I can't fathom how it would ever be feasable to destroy all the copies of Dragon Ball. Even if the original master was ruined, there would still be methods (maybe not ideal) to recreate the show as it once was. Ergo, your argument is a false equivalency.

Your reasoning is contradictory. You're right. It's unfathomable to think that all copies of Dragon Ball could be destroyed. It's also unfathomable to think that every copy of the Mona Lisa could be destroyed. After all, it does have a several-hundred year head start! And, likewise, you could just as easily sub in the Mona Lisa with what you just said. "Even if the original painting was ruined, there would still be methods (maybe not ideal) to recreate the painting as it was once." But in both cases, they're not the original. They're copies.

In fact, if you want to point out some real differences, you could say it's much easier to find a good copy of the Mona Lisa because there are so many more, and you can always see the original because it's on display. If FUNimation screws up Dragon Ball, they're the only game in town (this town being North America and other countries where FUNimation has licensed the show), and you're pretty much stuck with what they sell you, and you can never technically see the original because it has to be kept hidden.

To get more on the technical side since you said you don't know much about it: traditionally, when distributing films, there were several steps, several generations, to get to what you see on the screen. You have the compiled, original negative. That's the original film, that's the only original there ever is. There's only one. Obviously it can't be shown in theatres for two reasons: it's the only one, and, well, it's a negative. Negatives look like, well, negatives. Struck from that is an interpositive. That would be the best quality viewing source, as it's only one generation away from the negative, but, again, traditionally, that's not possible either. To make each interpositive, you have to copy the original negative, and each time you handle it and copy it, you wear it out, and once you lose that, you have nothing. So copied from that is an internegative, which also can't be distributed because, again, negative, so all the screening prints are positives made from that. But as you can see, you're already a few generations away from the original. Now with digital processing, I'm sure it's much easier to work with the negative without harming it. And from a purely digital source, you can surely make as many duplicates without any kind of degradation. In Dragon Ball's case, for airing, those mass-produced copies would then be telecined. For airing (and home video until the orange bricks) in North America, they were provided digibeta tapes. For home video, the negative, after being cleaned up, was copied into an interpositive, and that was probably used to make the masters for the Dragon Boxes, which is as close to the original source as you can get. But that's still a master made at 480p and then compressed to put on a disc, so you are still quite far away from actually seeing an original. FUNimation's film masters are probably, at best, a second generation interpositive.

[Gokuden]

^^If you picked 16:9, you deserve to be slowly dipped in ac!d.
I filled-out the survey, I'm very excited. 1080p DragonBarru
Resurgence is due to battle of Z. lol

[ABED]

The mona lisa is a completely different artwork in a different medium. The point of seeing the mona lisa is that it was the original piece by the original artist. DBZ is meant for mass consumption. As long as there's a way to see the show in it's original uncropped state, and close to the color pallet, then it's nothing like defacing the Mona Lisa. Dragon Ball isn't a singular work of art. The value we get from it has nothing to do with it being the original art. The manga we read is always a copy of Toriyama's artwork, and the value of the show doesn't come from watching the original print.

Lastly, all the talk about negatives and interpositives comes off as condescending. Are you really interested in teaching me about film, or are you showing off?

[Gaffer Tape]

Lastly, all the talk about negatives and interpositives comes off as condescending. Are you really interested in teaching me about film, or are you showing off?

That... is such an oddly defensive question. What in the world would I have to gain by being condescending? I did find it odd that you were making all these empirical claims about this subject while admitting you had no clue how it worked, so I figured it would help to put us on equal footing, so that maybe you'd understand why I'm arguing from the position I am.

[ABED]

Lastly, all the talk about negatives and interpositives comes off as condescending. Are you really interested in teaching me about film, or are you showing off?

That... is such an oddly defensive question. What in the world would I have to gain by being condescending? I did find it odd that you were making all these empirical claims about this subject while admitting you had no clue how it worked, so I figured it would help to put us on equal footing, so that maybe you'd understand why I'm arguing from the position I am.

I wasn't getting technical. I know that successive generations of film or audio recording degrade each time but anyone could figure that out who has ever taped a tv show or made a mix tape. If you weren't trying talk down to me, thanks, but I don't know what an interpositive or internegative are.

[Gaffer Tape]

In this case, you were "getting technical" because you're talking about originals and copies and those things mean things in the world of film as well, and it just seemed like that point wasn't getting through to you, and you were misappropriating certain ideas in our discussion.

[Sin]

Not sure if this has been posted but Funi posted this to their facebook


Source

I can't see any comments asking for 16:9, hopefully this is a good thing. As for the show looking 'brighter' and 'crisper' I really wonder what kind of quality we can expect using this new technology. Ah well, I honestly don't mind the show's colours being brighter than intended as long as 'crisp' doesn't just mean upping the sharpness.

[ABED]

In this case, you were "getting technical" because you're talking about originals and copies and those things mean things in the world of film as well, and it just seemed like that point wasn't getting through to you, and you were misappropriating certain ideas in our discussion.

Okay, but I wasn't going that in depth. I don't want to argue semantics. My point has always been that you can't compare DBZ with the Mona Lisa. It's apples and oranges. The value come from very different characteristics. If someone destroyed or marked up the original prints for DBZ, but since the value of the show comes from viewing the show, not the original print, it wouldn't be the same loss as if the original Mona Lisa was defaced.

You're comparing altering copies to altering an original!

So did the original poster when they discussed how watching a show in a way that was different than the original intention of the author. They equated zooming and cropping to ruining the Mona Lisa.

[dario03]

The presence of an English dub does not destroy the product for those who want to watch it in Japanese, nor does the presence of the Japanese version destroy the product for those who want to watch it in English.

The existence of a cropped version in and of itself, BY ITSELF, destroys the product for a good portion of its audience when it doesn't have to because those that do not care about the integrity of the image can press "ZOOM" on their remote without having it ruined for the rest of us.

The end.

People keep saying this but a TV just zooms in on the middle but in Funimation's 16:9 release didn't they adjust where the zoom/crop is to prevent it from cutting off the important parts of the scenes? I'm with you guys in wanting 4:3 but I don't think just telling people to zoom in is actually giving both groups what they want (unless I'm wrong and Funi really did just cut off the very top and bottom of every frame but I was pretty sure they didn't).
But something that I've always wondered is do blu rays have some kind of feature that would let them put in the 4:3 video but also include a program that could take said 4:3 video and crop it at different parts to achieve the same 16:9 affect without actually having a whole separate video file?

[ABED]

The presence of an English dub does not destroy the product for those who want to watch it in Japanese, nor does the presence of the Japanese version destroy the product for those who want to watch it in English.

The existence of a cropped version in and of itself, BY ITSELF, destroys the product for a good portion of its audience when it doesn't have to because those that do not care about the integrity of the image can press "ZOOM" on their remote without having it ruined for the rest of us.

The end.

People keep saying this but a TV just zooms in on the middle but in Funimation's 16:9 release didn't they adjust where the zoom/crop is to prevent it from cutting off the important parts of the scenes? I'm with you guys in wanting 4:3 but I don't think just telling people to zoom in is actually giving both groups what they want (unless I'm wrong and Funi really did just cut off the very top and bottom of every frame but I was pretty sure they didn't).
But something that I've always wondered is do blu rays have some kind of feature that would let them put in the 4:3 video but also include a program that could take said 4:3 video and crop it at different parts to achieve the same 16:9 affect without actually having a whole separate video file?

I don't recall them carefully framing their cropped footage. THere are plenty of instances where heads are cut off.

[VegettoEX]

Yeah, the orange bricks were a total automated center-crop. No care being taken with that one.

The Japanese TV broadcast of Kai did some minimal reframing to avoid head-chopping, though.

[dario03]

Yeah, the orange bricks were a total automated center-crop. No care being taken with that one.

The Japanese TV broadcast of Kai did some minimal reframing to avoid head-chopping, though.

Ah ok I must of mixed them up. I should of known that too since I just saw a couple of scenes with bad crops on a youtube video a few days ago. Alright well screw it then I guess theres no reason to have a 16:9 version at all unless they do go through and change the center of the crop.

[Ringworm128]

If it wasn't meant to be cropped to widescreen, then don't crop it to widescreen. Period. That's all there is to it.

While I think if there's only one aspect ratio that can be put on the disc 4:3 is the way to go but if an option for both was possible and easy to do it would be fine. It really isn't fair to deny someone the right to enjoy a show how THEY want when there's a "everybody wins" solution just because a bunch of fans put themselves on some kind of moral pedestal. I wouldn't want to watch Phantom Menace and be stuck with Creepy Puppet Yoda just because the folks over at the SW forums didn't like CG Yoda.

[ABED]

If it wasn't meant to be cropped to widescreen, then don't crop it to widescreen. Period. That's all there is to it.

While I think if there's only one aspect ratio that can be put on the disc 4:3 is the way to go but if an option for both was possible and easy to do it would be fine. It really isn't fair to deny someone the right to enjoy a show how THEY want when there's a "everybody wins" solution just because a bunch of fans put themselves on some kind of moral pedestal. I wouldn't want to watch Phantom Menace and be stuck with Creepy Puppet Yoda just because the folks over at the SW forums didn't like CG Yoda.

How many people would be asking for those options if it wasn't given to them at one time? Would anyone be in favor of cropped DBZ if they hadn't seen it that way?

No one is being denied "the right" to enjoy the show the way they want it. No one has a right to see the show widescreen.

[eledoremassis02]

Sadly (as Amazon has proved) people think 16x9 = HD. I've read comments where people complained about the level sects because they were 4:3, thus, not HD

[dbret12]

Those idiots need to realise that 16:9 is an ASPECT RATIO. Not HD. The Dragon Ball series were animated in 4:3 and were not meant to be cropped. Except for the movies in Japan's releases.

[Puto]

Even the movies, I'd prefer to have in 4:3, though 16:9 for those is certainly more excusable than for the series.

Besides, you can zoom and all.

[Kaboom]

The movies are a different case. They were animated in open-matte format, with a full 4:3 picture but crafted with the intent or at least capability to be cropped without losing anything important. In fact, if you DON'T crop them, then you're left with things like visible unfinished animation and iffy framing at some points. So for the movies, if given the option, unlike the series I'd actually want and encourage them to be cropped to widescreen.

Anyone have that screenshot from Movie 3 available? Where in the 4:3 version you can see Gohan's unfinished Masenko up above his head?