Latest on MJJC

Dangerous Short Films are currently being upscaled to 4K on YouTube!

Last edited:
Annita said:
www.mjvibe.com

“Black or White” Reclaimed: Michael Jackson’s Short Film Restored to Its Original Vision - MJVibe

At the center of the controversy was the panther dance sequence, one of the most powerful and talked-about moments in Michael Jackson’s career.
www.mjvibe.com www.mjvibe.com
Click to expand...
Regarding Black or White, I increasingly feel that there are clear differences in quality between certain shots. Even if AI was used throughout the restoration, some scenes such as the snow transition and the dance with the Russians appear, to me, to be of a quality that clearly goes beyond what AI could normally achieve from a standard definition source. These shots stand out as noticeably sharper and cleaner than others.

I wonder if this is because the snow and the large amount of movement in the image help mask the AI artefacts, or because I am used to this level of detail typically resulting in pixelated images when the bitrate is low. Or did they actually rebuild the video using multiple sources of varying quality? Some images almost look like 35mm film where the grain has simply been smoothed out by modern 4K processing.

I am not sure, but these questions remain in my mind. In addition, the estate appears to have used the wrong shot for the zipper scene. Was this due to a mislabeled master, or simply a mislabeled raw take? Regardless of the type of media used, I just want to know whether they have multiple raw takes in their archives or only multiple masters.

I also don’t really understand why Black or White is in such much better quality than the other Dangerous short films, even though all of them received the same AI treatment. Overall, I feel that the source for Black or White is clearly of much higher quality, but I’m wondering why.
 
Last edited:
MJ_Fame said:
Regarding Black or White, I increasingly feel that there are clear differences in quality between certain shots. Even if AI was used throughout the restoration, some scenes such as the snow transition and the dance with the Russians appear, to me, to be of a quality that clearly goes beyond what AI could normally achieve from a standard definition source. These shots stand out as noticeably sharper and cleaner than others.

I wonder if this is because the snow and the large amount of movement in the image help mask the AI artefacts, or because I am used to this level of detail typically resulting in pixelated images when the bitrate is low. Or did they actually rebuild the video using multiple sources of varying quality? Some images almost look like 35mm film where the grain has simply been smoothed out by modern 4K processing.

I am not sure, but these questions remain in my mind. In addition, the estate appears to have used the wrong shot for the zipper scene. Was this due to a mislabeled master, or simply a mislabeled raw take? Regardless of the type of media used, I just want to know whether they have multiple raw takes in their archives or only multiple masters.

I also don’t really understand why Black or White is in such much better quality than the other Dangerous short films, even though all of them received the same AI treatment. Overall, I feel that the source for Black or White is clearly of much higher quality, but I’m wondering why.
Click to expand...
the shots were most likely enhanced seperately so that each shot can look "as best as possible", shots were with less detail will look more muddy upscaled, you can compare those to the original standard definition transfers. Some are also way easier to upscale than others or simply, they got a better result with certain settings in one scene but not in the other.
 
MJ_Fame said:
Regarding Black or White, I increasingly feel that there are clear differences in quality between certain shots. Even if AI was used throughout the restoration, some scenes such as the snow transition and the dance with the Russians appear, to me, to be of a quality that clearly goes beyond what AI could normally achieve from a standard definition source. These shots stand out as noticeably sharper and cleaner than others.

I wonder if this is because the snow and the large amount of movement in the image help mask the AI artefacts, or because I am used to this level of detail typically resulting in pixelated images when the bitrate is low. Or did they actually rebuild the video using multiple sources of varying quality? Some images almost look like 35mm film where the grain has simply been smoothed out by modern 4K processing.

I am not sure, but these questions remain in my mind. In addition, the estate appears to have used the wrong shot for the zipper scene. Was this due to a mislabeled master, or simply a mislabeled raw take? Regardless of the type of media used, I just want to know whether they have multiple raw takes in their archives or only multiple masters.

I also don’t really understand why Black or White is in such much better quality than the other Dangerous short films, even though all of them received the same AI treatment. Overall, I feel that the source for Black or White is clearly of much higher quality, but I’m wondering why.
Click to expand...
They didn't even watch the tape and gave the excuse that it was "mislabeled" and written "uncensored."
 
mjfp said:
the shots were most likely enhanced seperately so that each shot can look "as best as possible", shots were with less detail will look more muddy upscaled, you can compare those to the original standard definition transfers. Some are also way easier to upscale than others or simply, they got a better result with certain settings in one scene but not in the other.
Click to expand...
And there are still 2 videos left to receive their upscales. This year Invincible turns 25, maybe they'll do the same, or maybe not, for them only Bad and Dangerous exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top