Slashdot Mirror
Widescreen (Finally) Winning
Yort writes "There's a little blurb over at the IMDB about customers at Blockbuster now generally preferring the widescreen, or letterbox, format over full-screen. This after Blockbuster tried to only stock full screen versions of movies a few years ago. I guess now the wife will have to let me buy that new widescreen TV, right?"
This site has some samples of movies in widescreen format and the result that one will get in the full screen format. widescreen.org.
The full screen version of LoTR is really bad because of its original screen ratio.
While I think releasing DVDs in widescreen is the way to go, I've noticed that more and more programs on my TV are being letterboxed, probably becuase programs are increasingly being distributed and broadcast in HD.
Meanwhile the effective size of my TV screen is being erroded beacuse of this letterboxing. Damned progress.
Reliable, Great Value Hosting: $7.95/mo 2.4G/120G
Considering that the cost of front projection DLP is falling fast, I'd skip the widescreen tv route entirely. You get whatever aspect ratio you need.
Even if you do go rear rear projection or tubes, I think I'd still go with a bigger 4:3 (as long as it supported 16x9 compression, like the Sony's or JVCs)
I find, generally, that when you say 'aspect ratio' to your average layperson they say 'gesundheit'.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
Call me a snob, a bigot, whatever. But I cannot fathom how people stomach non-widescreen. I mean, it's cutting off sizeable chunks of what the director intended you to see. With competent editing it is a disaster. With incompetent editing it's unwatchable.
How the hell are you supposed to watch Kubrick or Kurosawa, for that matter, on a format other than they shot it in and not walk away with (almost literally) half the picture?
My
Limekiller
The widescreen version is better because it is the full frame as the cinematographer and director intended. Anything 'pan and scan' cuts out about a third of the frame. But we all know that.
;-).
I bought a widescreen HDTV a few months ago and I must say there is no going back to standard 4:3. Even if you do not watch/get HD feeds, I highly recommend the new widescreen HDTVs for DVD watching. Even without my HD receiver, I'd still have purchased the TV just for the DVD experience. Now, of course, I'm an anamorphic snob
--- witty signature
Here in the UK quite a lot of the digital channels are broadcast in widescreen, and all the free-to-air digital channels are.
Seems like almost all the TVs in the shops are widescreen now, as well.
Flame all you want, but after the first month, approximately 100% of people who watch any movie will be watching it on a T.V., so why the hell wouldn't you design the movie to be seen on that medium?
A few directors do that, Stanley Kubrick shot most of his films in something closer to a TV ratio (the top and bottom would be cropped off in theatres) and I read an interview with Cronenberg where he stated that he tried to frame his films with the expectation they will be shown in a television ratio.
If only widescreen TVs would become more commonly available in the USA - last time I was back in Britain visiting family I found you were hard pressed even to find a 4:3 TV in stores. The little 10" TV/VCR combo units were about the only ones left, everything else was 16:9. This is because the upcoming DTV standard for Europe is 16:9.
That said, Panasonic sell a nice 30" and 34" 16:9 HDTV tube TV in this country. Movies and videogames look phenomenal those sets and they're a lot cheaper than plasma displays.
Graham
This method won't work until DVDs store info about the area of focus, and can pan&scan on-the-fly, to any ratio your player wants to put it in.
Which they've actually always been able to do. That's why your DVD player's setup menu has a preference field for the selection of 'full screen' or 'widescreen'. Widescreen DVDs that offer P&S-on-the-fly support will play back in fullscreen mode if you set up your player that way.
However, very few discs have taken advantage of the P&S-on-the-fly feature. I'm not sure why; it may be because the telecine P&S process has more options available than the automatic feature provides, like zooming.
The original pressing of the Last Temptation of Christ DVD actually enabled this feature by mistake. Viewers with the fullscreen option turned on were rewarded with a corrupted P&S picture (well, more corrupted than usual). I imagine they've fixed this by now.
Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
There's no inherent reason why a wider aspect ratio is any better in the first place.
:)
I disagree... I think we're used to seeing the world in a pretty wide aspect ratio... compare how your peripheral vision compares left to right as up and down. I can see ~40-60 degrees more left to right (just a quick approximation).
I think the wider view is more immersive... not necessarily as good as having an IMAX type screen where you can't see the whole screen unless you turn your head, but we can't all afford that
Doug
Venn ist das nurnstuck git und Slotermeyer? Ya! Beigerhund das oder die Flipperwaldt gersput!
The first rule of filming Fight Club is: You do not use a low f-stop.
The second rule of filming Fight Club is: You do not use a low f-stop.