Usually, we want to know if the aspect ratio on the DVD is equal to the aspect ratio of the same movie in the theatre. What we may forget here is that by itself, the aspect ratio is just a shape and that even if the aspect ratio on the DVD is equal to the aspect ratio in the theatre, there may still be cropping on the DVD! Yes!

Ben-Hur is a good example. The DVD existing for quite some time had aspect ratio equal to that in the theatre -- however, the new special DVD release shows some more picture info while maintaining the same aspect ratio.

Check this out

http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/special/ben-hurdvd2.htm

and

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/dvdcompare/ben-hur.htm

I think this is actually a great point. That said, I believe that it is uncommon that you will get hold of a DVD that is in the 2.35:1 aspect ratio (of a 2.35:1 aspect ratio movie) that is cropped (equally) from all sides. Even in the case of Ben-Hur, I think it was rather silly the way some people threw a fit upon discovering that they weren't seeing "all that the director had intended be seen." Honestly, in the case of Ben-Hur's original DVD release, the cropping was quite negligible (and this is coming from someone who abhors cropping/stretching/other DVD sins). I think the problem is far more prevalent with DVDs of older Indian films, especially with those that are in the 4:3 aspect ratio. In the Mard DVD (take your pick — they all suck), for instance, it is clear that you are watching a 4:3 aspect-ratio (though I'm not sure whether the film was shot this way or not [it is likely that it was, indeed, not, as it is an '80s' film, and those usually used wider framings (even in India)]), yet you sometimes feel that you might be missing part of the picture. Well, anyway, good topic.

Ok... but how are we going to compare the theater print from a dvd? Unless you have two dvds of the same title. The best example will be the two Jaanwar dvds. Here's a link to the old zulm forums...

http://www.zulm.net/of/showthread.php?threadid=860

Sholay

Ali

For sake of interest only... compare the 1.78 HBO images from Gladiator at http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDCompare7/gladiator.htm (scroll down to where the same images are presented thrice...)

see the author's NOTE:

[img]NOTE:
We added (thanks Enrico!) the HDTV 1080i / aspect ratio - 1.78.1 open matted, audio - Dolby digital 5.1, no subtitles image from HBO for interest sake. It looks marvelous (if a little red).
[/img]

I have seen a large number of HBO version of orig films, and Believe me none looked bad!! Filling full screen was charming too!

Open Matted to 1.78:1

Then, what about director's intentions of chopped heads @ 2.35:1 ??

If such a thing exists, "Director's Intentions", I wonder why do directors want us to see their films with chopped heads @ 2.35:1 when additional picture at top and bottom was captured and is available on the film ?? Sadistic or Retarded ??

Actually, HBO-tv shows a pan and scan from the 1.78 open matte -- not the full open matte itself. (the gladiator shots are full-open matte for "interest sake")
From the same open matte, the 2.35:1 prints are also made...
This is why sometimes pan-and-scan versions show image-information not seen on the 2.35:1 versions.

i watched the rock on hbo, in HD last night, it was modified with no black bars but still pleasing, audio/video was simply awesome. I cant wait BR release of this

Connery's, The Rock? Pretty good action movie. Hey, remember the re-make atrocity that was, Qayamat?

also see viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3490

The information regarding the perfect tips for the aspect ratio is simply better in their work. It gives a lot of ideas to everyone for making a huge contribution in their work in making the perfect ratio for others. It helps everyone a lot to make their work as a better one for the future.

It is a great tip for everyone to know about the various types of caution there. It is a great technique for others to do about the aspect ratio based on our request. This is simply great for others to do the perfect things in knowing about the better things for the aspect ratio. It actually helps others to know about the different types of recent techniques there.

Avatar AR ??

IMDB lists Avatar AR as 1.78:1.

I saw this film in I-Max screen and it was 1.78:1 but had blank screen left all around, making me doubt if they really did transfer it on I-Max film format (Sound sure was I-Max standard).

On repeat viewing, I saw it on non I-Max screen and it was 2.35:1. This is the first time that I noticed AR difference for a Hollywood film. I'm not sure, but I think 2.35:1 AR gets top & Bottom of the picture cut ??

So, what was director's intention ?? 2.35:1 or 1.78:1 ??
Can someone confirm, which of the two versions has more picture ??

^ Reason for different A/R.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/05/30/ ... verywhere/

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1216136