A quick comparison of BOG prints:
-
A quick comparison of BOG prints:
(sources @CactuarJoe - https://retro.pizza/@CactuarJoe/114660878293995836 )
The archive.org version is a VHS rip, not just pan-and-scan but bizarrely zoomed to "text safe" _within the 4:3 P&S_, resulting in an hilariously small window within the overall film frame.
YouTube's print is much more visually complete, and much sharper than the archive.org version with better colour retention. It's still mildly inset, with light cropping on all sides, but does - in my small sampling - have the best quality soundtrack.
Tubi's version appears to be the most visually complete, with the fullest frame, and within that, both the best detail and colour retention. The sound is fine, but definitely not as good as the YouTube print.
-
C Cactuar Joe shared this topic on
-
A quick comparison of BOG prints:
(sources @CactuarJoe - https://retro.pizza/@CactuarJoe/114660878293995836 )
The archive.org version is a VHS rip, not just pan-and-scan but bizarrely zoomed to "text safe" _within the 4:3 P&S_, resulting in an hilariously small window within the overall film frame.
YouTube's print is much more visually complete, and much sharper than the archive.org version with better colour retention. It's still mildly inset, with light cropping on all sides, but does - in my small sampling - have the best quality soundtrack.
Tubi's version appears to be the most visually complete, with the fullest frame, and within that, both the best detail and colour retention. The sound is fine, but definitely not as good as the YouTube print.
@moira I like that they all still very much suck, like even Tubi still looks like it was shot on a camera with astigmatism
