The Matrix - regraded, v2.0

[dvdmike]

The laserdisc is from the IP is it not?

[zoidberg]

The laserdisc is from the IP is it not?

I capped the laserdisc earlier this year. It's basically the same as the first DVD release video wise.

[spoRv]

My preferred release is the 35mm scan, it looks just good

[Hands emulating a megaphone] REGRADE TO 35MM! REGRADE TO 35MM!

(And don't add fake grain)

Ahahah

I concur with Colek and Evit.

Add me to that too!!

Regrade to 35mm or not at all

I too concur. 35mm, please!

Something like this?!? http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/127223

[iguanaclerk]

That looks really great.

[bendermac]

Judging from those tiny screens, i'd suggest a bit more contrast reduction, to bring some details backs.
On those pictures, it looks very crushed blacks. but beyond that, it looks pretty sweet

[iguanaclerk]

I actually think the contrast looks good on most of the thumbs. Reduced a bit from the extremely contrasty 35mm, but still retaining the bleached-out highlights and deep blacks.

[deleted user]

Compared to the 35mm, I think the contrast looks relatively fine, but what bothers me is the saturation. I didn't do a side-by-side comparison but I imagine to remember the 35mm wasn't this saturated.

[Stamper]

Looks great to me, I love this high contrast look, the original Blu-ray has really low contrast and it makes it look very flat.

[The Aluminum Falcon]

I actually really appreciate the results as-is. Look forward to this one!

[spoRv]

TomArrow found the workprint; sure, it's cropped, and very dark, but it could be used as color reference; so, I've decided to give it a go, and compare the workprint regrade with the film and DVD ones, and at the end a median of the three - which is the most balanced to me: https://diff.pics/Z_XCpll54XFD/1

WARNING! Only DVD is in sync, while both film and workprint are not, so the automated script failed in many shots; this is just the usual quick'n'dirt version; if there will be any interest, more advanced tests would eventually follow.