PinoyDVD: The Pinoy Digital Video & Devices Community
DVD Forum => General DVD Discussion => Topic started by: boybi on Nov 08, 2007 at 01:05 AM
-
What movies are presented in 1.78:1 aspect ratio? I can only watch with this aspect ratio right now while breaking in my new 42" plasma.
Bakit kasi 16:9 lagi ang nakalagay sa mga DVD labels kahit na 2.35:1 sya. E 21:9 na yang 2.35:1.
-
There are quite a number of movies in 1.78 aspect ratio. Hmm....so far I can think of: the Hulk ;D
Most animation movies are in this ratio e.g. Finding Nemo while Chicken Run is in 1.85.
The safest bet is all current TV series are in 1.78 ratio e.g. 24, Rome, Desperate Houswives, Battlestar Galactica, Prison Breaks, Heroes, etc... ;)
-
try here (http://213.232.121.40/reviews/track.asp?Index=170).. they list a couple of titles..
-
All Spielberg movies are in 1.78:1.
-
Spielberg's movies are in 1.85:1 ratio... very close to 1.78, so you won't notice any difference... ;D
-
This is a serious question - when you watch a widescreen film on a 4x3 TV, you notice a change in size of the "black bars" - smallest for 1.66:1 and progressively larger for 1.78:1, 1.85:1, 2.35:1, etc.
However, when you watch these movies on a 16x9 TV, although you see "black bars" for films in the 2.35:1 ratio, the image fills the entire screen for all aspect ratios 1.85:1 and below. Since 16x9 is essentially 1.78:1, when watching a 1.85:1 movie, is the image being slightly cropped on the sides to fit the screen, or is it being slightly squeezed in to fill the screen?
-
There are 4 ways to fit a 1.85 movie into a 16:9 widescreen TV. But the most common approach, when the movie is transferred from film, black mattes are added to box it into the 16:9 shape. These mattes become permanent part of the picture.
For a 1.85 movie, the mattes are very small. Thus, on a widescreen TV, the mattes are hidden in the overscan area. However, from what I notice not all mattes found in 1.85 movies are exactly the same. Some DVDs (e.g. Jurassic Park & War of the Worlds) the mattes are obvious & can be seen easilly while others (e.g. Saving Private Ryan) can't be seen.
I also tried some 1.85 HD DVDs (The Hulk & Ant Bully) all are done nicely & the mattes can't be seen at all.
-
Edward Scissorhands. Finding Nemo. Shawshank Redemption.
-
This is a serious question - when you watch a widescreen film on a 4x3 TV, you notice a change in size of the "black bars" - smallest for 1.66:1 and progressively larger for 1.78:1, 1.85:1, 2.35:1, etc.
However, when you watch these movies on a 16x9 TV, although you see "black bars" for films in the 2.35:1 ratio, the image fills the entire screen for all aspect ratios 1.85:1 and below. Since 16x9 is essentially 1.78:1, when watching a 1.85:1 movie, is the image being slightly cropped on the sides to fit the screen, or is it being slightly squeezed in to fill the screen?
From how I understood it in my very limited knowledge about 16x9 tvs, this is one of the wonders of having an ANAMORPHIC TRANSFER or those that are ENHANCED FOR 16X9 tvs. If you notice the dvds that are non anamorphic, black bars are still present even for widescreen TVs,. Thus, technology has found a way to make for a totally satisfying viewing experience for our widescreen tvs by correctly fixing the aspect ratio that will fit our 16x9s and still maintaining the original aspect ratio that the director intended for the film.
-
Yup, if it's a non-anamorphic transfer, the black bars are burned in with the picture when the film is encoded, so to watch the non-anamorphic widescreen film on a 16x9 TV, you'll either need to have black bars on both the sides and top/bottom of the screen, using a small area of your tv screen; or use the zoom feature, compromising picture quality.
The second part of your response was actually my question, as well. 16x9 is 1.78:1. Whether the director intended the film to be 1.66:1, 1.78:1 or 1.85:1, the anamorphic transfer shows up without black bars on my 16x9 TV screens. So I'm wondering how this is possible. Logically speaking, the 1.85:1 should have very slight black bars at the top and bottom of the screen, while the 1.66:1 should have very slight bars on both sides. Are the images slightly stretched to fit the screen accordingly, or is some of the edge picture not visible on the screen?
I kind of understand what pchin's saying, though. But I'm not too much of a techie, so I'll need to look up what "overscan area" actually means... I think it means "some of the edge picture really can't be seen on the screen, anyway" but that's a guess based on what the term "overscan area" sounds like... ;D
-
Logically speaking, the 1.85:1 should have very slight black bars at the top and bottom of the screen, while the 1.66:1 should have very slight bars on both sides. Are the images slightly stretched to fit the screen accordingly, or is some of the edge picture not visible on the screen?
I kind of understand what pchin's saying, though. But I'm not too much of a techie, so I'll need to look up what "overscan area" actually means... I think it means "some of the edge picture really can't be seen on the screen, anyway" but that's a guess based on what the term "overscan area" sounds like... ;D
Yup, good guess Mr. Hankey. ;D Overscan refers to covering the edges of the picture with a mask around the screen. Most tv have an overscan of about 4 to 5%. At ratio 1.85 there should be a very slight visible black bar at the top & bottom of the screen.
In short, yes the image is stretched (anamorphically squeezed) to fit into the widescreen tv & the reason the black bars aren't not visible as the edges are hidden. However, in some 1.85 movies you can still discern the tiny black bars at the top & bottom. :)