It is currently Sat Sep 27, 2025 3:45 pm

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » Indian Media Forums » General

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 4
  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
  Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
Chebji
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 8:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 4:10 pm
Posts: 135
hi, just wanted to say that i got BTTF trilogy as a gift this winter break, in full screen (~1.33 ratio), and it's beautifully done. very sharp, very colorful, definitely a must-have. all the other movies i have are widescreen, but this fullscreen dvd set is so good i don't even care about the widescreen. just thought i'd add those comments and recommend the fullscreen trilogy. definitely a worthy set to own. BTTF series is classic!

Hasan

*Also, the top and bottom information isn't missing on the full screen as on the widescreen, so that's definitely a plus. the side information is, of course, but doesn't take away from the great transfer. man, if Indian dvds could be as well done...



Edited By Chebji on 1042145411
Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 9:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6146
ali wrote:
Check section 4.4 here;

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~leopold/Ld/FilmToVideo/

... T2 was shot with a aspect ratio '2.35:1 in mind'

Ali

Thanks Ali for a very nice and "to the point" link.

I think, Sunnyaudit will find this link useful as well. Ali, do you want to do the honour to post the link in Sunny's thread or should I?? May be Sunny can copy it himself if he finds it usefull.

Rana

P.S.
1) Where does it say that T2 was shot with an AR of 2.35:1. What was the actual picture capture AR??
2) BTW, I will study the info carefully. Now I will understand what DragunR2, Congress, Sanjay et. al. mean when they say Hard Matted, Soft Matted, Super 35 etc.
Top
 Profile  
 
ali
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 10:13 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 2:06 pm
Posts: 4944
Location: UK
rana wrote:
1) Where does it say that T2 was shot with an AR of 2.35:1. What was the actual picture capture AR??

It doesn't! This is how the film was shot;

Image

..with a AR of ~1.60:1 – the above is actual film frame.

BUT it’s intended, in mind, how it was meant to be displayed was @ 2.35:1 – I believe when they shoot scenes they can actually see the 2.35:1 frame outlined on monitors and cameras.

To get the 4:3 version of T2 is bit more complex as it a mixture of the original shot @ 1.60 and the widescreen 2.35:1 zoomed and pan and scan to 4:3. This is because all the special effects were done in the 2.1:1 frame – they were never done to the shot/full original 1.60:1 frame. So as Sanjay says there’s always only one original true aspect ratio for T2 – that’s at 2.35:1.

Ali
ps be my guest to post the link to where ever you want!
Top
 Profile  
 
DragunR2
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 11:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 3:16 am
Posts: 4259
Chebji wrote:
*Also, the top and bottom information isn't missing on the full screen as on the widescreen, so that's definitely a plus. the side information is, of course, but doesn't take away from the great transfer. man, if Indian dvds could be as well done...

The open matte version, even if you are seeing MORE, is the WRONG way to watch the film. The point of watching the original aspect ratio isn't to see more image or less image, it is to see WHAT THE FILMMAKERS WANT YOU TO SEE. Nothing more than that and nothing less.

Rana, not all open matte transfers have boom mikes in the matted out area. Efforts are usually made to keep even those areas clear because they are thinking of the open matte transfer for video/TV down the road.

Was "The Patriot" the widescreen film you saw where there were boom mikes? I've heard that there is one shot in the film where this happens, even at a properly framed 2.35:1. If the film you are talking about was in the theater, it is likely that the projectionist misframed the image. 1.85:1 films are often printed as unmatted 1.37:1 for theatrical prints, so it is up to the projectionist to frame it properly. Some prints come with a 1.66:1 or 1.78:1 matte, and some films are matted incamera to 1.66:1.
Top
 Profile  
 
theon
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 1:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2002 11:21 pm
Posts: 540
since we're talking about matting, i'd just like to recommend making letterbox mattes in case you guys don't have any already. they make the movie watching experience MUCH more enjoyable as you don't have to worry about any black bars distracting you from the movie. the only problem is, many times the subtitles get cut off if you use the mattes. people may laugh at you when/after you make them, but when they see the mattes in action, they'll shut up.

http://www.keohi.com/keohihd....na.html
Top
 Profile  
 
Chebji
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 1:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 4:10 pm
Posts: 135
DragunR2 wrote:
The open matte version, even if you are seeing MORE, is the WRONG way to watch the film. The point of watching the original aspect ratio isn't to see more image or less image, it is to see WHAT THE FILMMAKERS WANT YOU TO SEE. Nothing more than that and nothing less.

I know that these original aspect ratios are how the filmmakers made the film, and how some would like for you to see it in. But to say one is a wrong way or a right way is really just your opinion, and comes across as kinda arrogant. Some people like full-screen, and some like widescreen. I like widescreen myself usually, but for some movies, full-screen doesn't take away from the movie, in my opinion. Case in point is the full-screen BTTF trilogy. I was simply commenting that I think it has an excellent transfer; great pic and sound quality, and good extras as well. However you prefer to watch it, I recommend this trilogy to anyone. Classic movie series on great dvd set.
Top
 Profile  
 
DragunR2
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 1:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 3:16 am
Posts: 4259
Now that I've reduced the brightness on my TV according to the THX Optimode feature on a DVD I rented, the letterbox bars are darker than they were before, but I was never distracted by them anyways. But I think I'll rent Avia or Video Essentials and try the backlighting.
Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 3:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6146
DragunR2 wrote:
Chebji wrote:
*Also, the top and bottom information isn't missing on the full screen as on the widescreen, so that's definitely a plus. ..


The open matte version, even if you are seeing MORE, is the WRONG way to watch the film. The point of watching the original aspect ratio isn't to see more image or less image, it is to see WHAT THE FILMMAKERS WANT YOU TO SEE. Nothing more than that and nothing less.

Rana, not all open matte transfers have boom mikes in the matted out area. Efforts are usually made to keep even those areas clear because they are thinking of the open matte transfer for video/TV down the road.

1) DragunR2, You stated:

"it is to see WHAT THE FILMMAKERS WANT YOU TO SEE. Nothing more than that and nothing less."

Agreed, but you also said:

"not all open matte transfers have boom mikes in the matted out area. Efforts are usually made to keep even those areas clear because they are thinking of the open matte transfer for video/TV down the road"

I guess THEY in the sentence, "they are thinking of the open matte transfer for video/TV down the road" means FILM MAKERS.

So, what do the film makers want you to see on TV that has a different Aspect Ratio than the Cinema Screen?? Obviously, Film makers want you to see the extra picture at the top and bottom instead of the black bars when viewing their creation on a different AR screen.



2) Another case where the Director/ Film maker wanted you to see the extra picture at top and bottom is the EROS version of SHOLAY where the director was involved in the project. SHOLAY is a good example as most of us have both DEI-EROS and EROS-B4U versions. In most of the scenes, In the version with extra picture at the top and bottom, you see the mountain peaks, the skyscape and the landscape. In the theatrical 2.35:1 version, mountain peaks are cut off and so is the landscape.

Rana
Top
 Profile  
 
DragunR2
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 8:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 3:16 am
Posts: 4259
rana wrote:
1) DragunR2, You stated:

"it is to see WHAT THE FILMMAKERS WANT YOU TO SEE. Nothing more than that and nothing less."

Agreed, but you also said:

"not all open matte transfers have boom mikes in the matted out area. Efforts are usually made to keep even those areas clear because they are thinking of the open matte transfer for video/TV down the road"

I guess THEY in the sentence, "they are thinking of the open matte transfer for video/TV down the road" means FILM MAKERS.

So, what do the film makers want you to see on TV that has a different Aspect Ratio than the Cinema Screen?? Obviously, Film makers want you to see the extra picture at the top and bottom instead of the black bars when viewing their creation on a different AR screen.



2) Another case where the Director/ Film maker wanted you to see the extra picture at top and bottom is the EROS version of SHOLAY where the director was involved in the project. SHOLAY is a good example as most of us have both DEI-EROS and EROS-B4U versions. In most of the scenes, In the version with extra picture at the top and bottom, you see the mountain peaks, the skyscape and the landscape. In the theatrical 2.35:1 version, mountain peaks are cut off and so is the landscape.

Rana

1) Most filmmakers have no say as to whether there will be an open matte version. If the studio wants one, one will be made. So they simply keep the matted areas clear of boom mikes. Probably only someone like Spielberg could demand that his films be shown on television and video letterboxed only. So it's not that they WANT you to see the open matte version, it is just that they are usually required to provide one. You can't frame optimally for both 1.85:1 and 1.33:1 or 2.35:1 and 1.33:1 simultaneously, so the director/DP frame for the theatrical aspect ratio.

2) Since the director's cut is 1.33:1, we can surmise that this is most likely what was intended. Don't quote me on that, though, because I do not know whether the director and DP were framing for 2.20:1 or 1.33:1 while shooting. This is a topic that has been discussed to death here, and I'm sure that someone has posted a definitive answer to the question on a Sholay thread.

Shooting 1.33:1 and matting to 1.85:1 or shooting Super 35 and creating 2.35:1 has never been common practice in India, so with Sholay, it is certainly possible that the producers wanted a faux widescreen 70mm version to make the presentation feel "special," similar to the mangled 70mm "stereophonic" version of Gone with the Wind" that was created in the late 60s. But are there no 1.33:1 prints of the original version in existence from which a video transfer can be made?
Top
 Profile  
 
sknath
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2003 3:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 4:17 pm
Posts: 2853
Location: Canada
urbanlegend wrote:
The Back to the Future debacle turns abyssmal
January 2, 2003
Courtesy: DVD Review

As you all certainly know by now, Universals recent release of the Back to the Future Trilogy is defective and the studio is making only half-assed attempts to rectify the problem. Apart from the framing issues explained before, it also appears as if the French language track in the third part of the film is occasionally out of sync and that there is a subtitle occlusion problem on a number of players. And still, Universal feels no need to expedite things!
To top off this cake of incompetency, we hear from various ends that despite their proposed exchange offer, Universal still doesnt seem to take this issue with the right amount of seriousness. Why you ask? Well, for starters, owners of the trilogy living overseas will not have a change to obtain a corrected version. According to our sources, Universal has no plans to correct the region 2 and region 4 releases of the trilogy despite the fact that they are equally misframed. And, if youre living outside the US and bought a region 1 version of the trilogy, youre out of luck as well, because Universal will only replace the discs for US residents
I am not sure what I am more disappointed about, Universals lack of QA on this release, or their arrogance and incompetence at handling this issue. As always, our advice is to stay away from this and potentially all Universal releases for the time being. A studio that doesnt respect its customers doesnt deserve their money either.

Hey UL, any follo-up on this issue ? I sent them an e-mail about this asking for more info and will post the response should it arrive.

Were you able to get any info abt this ?
Top
 Profile  
 
urbanlegend
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2003 11:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 3:37 pm
Posts: 3051
Location: Somewhere in time...
Myself I ordered the Widescreen version but Futureshop sent me the f/s version. I was intent on exchanging it on the following weekend but then started reading about the problems with the w/s version. The company has promised to placed the millions of DVDs out there with fresh new ones but I have a sneaking feeling that alot of people are going to be upset because the exchange wont happen and they will loose their 2nd and 3rd discs. They'll either loose it the mail or the company will screw up and its starting because people are starting to say (ie.Sknath) they are not getting any response. Therefore I said screw it, I owned the f/s VHS before and having this f/s DVD is not going to make any difference especially since I have a 4:3 TV. This is my only f/s DVD that I own besides television series which were made in f/s.
Top
 Profile  
 
urbanlegend
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2003 2:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 3:37 pm
Posts: 3051
Location: Somewhere in time...
SkNath,

See what I mean...look what they are telling their customers regarding the DVD:

Now they are doing nothing but bullsh*t in regards to these films. Customer service reps are actually telling folks there is not a problem.

Click below for the full thread (not too long):

BTTF DVD
Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2003 3:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6146
MOVED

Rana



Edited By rana on 1043237477
Top
 Profile  
 
ganti
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2003 3:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2002 3:45 pm
Posts: 515
Location: columbus
Rana,
I have observed at least one movie in HD (HBO) that is Charles Angels shown in 1.85:1, where as the Theoretical AR is 2.35:1, transferred intelligently so as not to cut the important part of the image.
I can't say every HD transfers done this way but I assume, it may not that difficult.

P.S: They have even shown one small part from the middle of the movie in 2.35:1.
I assume going from big image to small may not be difficult at all.



Edited By ganti on 1043162702
Top
 Profile  
 
rana
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 21, 2003 3:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6146
urbanlegend wrote:
DVDFile.com Forum

Home Theatre Forum

BTTF.com Forum

Image

Image

Image

To me, 1.85:1 LD frame looks right. If the framing is right, I don't want to see more.

Note that:
1.85:1 has more on the sides as compared to the 1.33:1 version.

1.33:1 version has more at the top and at the bottom but is cropped from sides. This implies that the as shot AR was close to 1.6:1 or so. As the best framing in these three shots seems to be 1.85:1, 1.85:1 must have been the director's intention. Which 1.85:1 gets selected by different people (projectionist/ matting selector) is another story.

Rana
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 4
  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Board index » Indian Media Forums » General

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group