Comments on: Ah-nold in widescreen http://blog.liquidcross.com/2009/12/28/ah-nold-in-widescreen/ anger management via the written word Mon, 09 Jan 2012 14:51:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: liquidcross http://blog.liquidcross.com/2009/12/28/ah-nold-in-widescreen/comment-page-1/#comment-4687 liquidcross Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:28:06 +0000 http://blog.liquidcross.com/2009/12/28/ah-nold-in-widescreen/#comment-4687 It gets even weirder when a film has <em>two</em> aspect ratios, like <em>The Dark Knight</em> on Blu-ray. Some of the outdoor/city shots fill my HDTV, while the rest of the film has black letterbox bars about an inch thick. It gets even weirder when a film has two aspect ratios, like The Dark Knight on Blu-ray. Some of the outdoor/city shots fill my HDTV, while the rest of the film has black letterbox bars about an inch thick.

]]> By: Ryo-Ohki http://blog.liquidcross.com/2009/12/28/ah-nold-in-widescreen/comment-page-1/#comment-4684 Ryo-Ohki Mon, 28 Dec 2009 21:38:26 +0000 http://blog.liquidcross.com/2009/12/28/ah-nold-in-widescreen/#comment-4684 It's Original Aspect Ratio all the way for me. I was converted to OAR way back in the VHS days with <i>Jurassic Park</i>. I remember back in the day when widescreen VHS had its own special rack. It was a niche market. Imagine... properly formatted movies a niche market! But, most people didn't care that their movies were "formatted to fit your screen" back then. But I did after <i>Jurassic Park</i>. And I was watching movies on a 13" 4x3 TV back then! And then there was the myth that widescreen movies were <i>missing</i> image data on the top and bottom! That's only true for shameful work like you describe on those Schwarzenegger movies. When I worked at Media Play, when I tried to explain to clueless customers what widescreen actually <i>was</i>, they'd look at me like I had bugs crawling out of my ears! They just didn't get it. Filling their screen was more important to them than seeing a film in its intended format. Now with 16x9 TVs and Blu-ray slowly becoming the norm, there's a whole new set of problems likely to arise: complaints about any movie not in 1.77:1 or 1.85:1 still having black bars ("but I thought widescreen was supposed to get rid of those! Why does my Blu-ray of <i>Indiana Jones</i> still have black bars on my widescreen TV?!") and scrubbing film-based movies of their grain, losing detail in the process ("Why is there noise on my picture for <i>Close Encounters of the Third Kind</i>? I thought Blu-ray was supposed to be crystal clear like PIXAR movies!"). Plus there's the myth that older movies would <i>not</i> benefit from new HD masters, when in fact the opposite is true; movies shot on film will gain the <i>most</i> from the hi-def treatment. Film is an analog medium, and as such can be scanned to make a new HD master at any desired resolution to extract the most detail possible from the picture. This detail, naturally, also includes film grain which is inherent to the medium and is <i>not</i> a flaw. Can you tell I'm something of a nut when it comes to the technical aspects of porting movies to a home video format? ;) It’s Original Aspect Ratio all the way for me. I was converted to OAR way back in the VHS days with Jurassic Park. I remember back in the day when widescreen VHS had its own special rack. It was a niche market. Imagine… properly formatted movies a niche market! But, most people didn’t care that their movies were “formatted to fit your screen” back then. But I did after Jurassic Park. And I was watching movies on a 13″ 4×3 TV back then!

And then there was the myth that widescreen movies were missing image data on the top and bottom! That’s only true for shameful work like you describe on those Schwarzenegger movies. When I worked at Media Play, when I tried to explain to clueless customers what widescreen actually was, they’d look at me like I had bugs crawling out of my ears! They just didn’t get it. Filling their screen was more important to them than seeing a film in its intended format.

Now with 16×9 TVs and Blu-ray slowly becoming the norm, there’s a whole new set of problems likely to arise: complaints about any movie not in 1.77:1 or 1.85:1 still having black bars (“but I thought widescreen was supposed to get rid of those! Why does my Blu-ray of Indiana Jones still have black bars on my widescreen TV?!”) and scrubbing film-based movies of their grain, losing detail in the process (“Why is there noise on my picture for Close Encounters of the Third Kind? I thought Blu-ray was supposed to be crystal clear like PIXAR movies!”).

Plus there’s the myth that older movies would not benefit from new HD masters, when in fact the opposite is true; movies shot on film will gain the most from the hi-def treatment. Film is an analog medium, and as such can be scanned to make a new HD master at any desired resolution to extract the most detail possible from the picture. This detail, naturally, also includes film grain which is inherent to the medium and is not a flaw.

Can you tell I’m something of a nut when it comes to the technical aspects of porting movies to a home video format? ;)

]]>