What's new

Another w/s vs. p&s thread (split off from "Universal addresses and fixes BTTF") (1 Viewer)

Alex Spindler

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2000
Messages
3,971
Also as an example:
Ocean's 11 is currently running on HBO in open matte (or at least partially). The film was projected at 2.35:1, so there are some significant changes in the framing. Throughout the film, I found myself far less involved and distracted than I had remembered when watching my DVD of it. After some careful attention, I realized that the open matte was the cause. First, I was seeing a lot of things that I never had before. I was seeing actors gesture with their hands in sections that had always been hidden, and it was very distracting. I was focusing less on their faces than I would have normally. Then, in the scene with Garcia, Mac, and Damon, Everyone seemed so distant. In this case, there was a large table to the bottom of the screen which felt like it separated me from the story on screen.
Now, in no part of this film was filmmaking equipment visible, so the open matte didn't reveal anything of this kind. But the framing introduced all kinds of things that distracted or muted the film itself in my eyes.
Also, as a good corrollary, would you rather every deleted scene be readded to the film. It represents more of what was shot, although the director chose for whatever reason to leave it out. Often times, the added material just doesn't work or adversely affects the film. If a director truly wanted to have the deleted scenes in the film, they would release a director's cut with them added in.
For me, unless the director or cinematographer creates a "director's framing version" with a non-OAR ratio, it just isn't suitable. Just as a studio version that forces you to watch the film with deleted scenes added in without the approval of the creators.
 

Jagan Seshadri

Supporting Actor
Joined
Nov 5, 2001
Messages
528
so..

WHY was the BTTF series 'shot-and-protected' with this open-matte 4:3 aspect ratio? Technical reasons, anyone?

-JNS
 

Inspector Hammer!

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 15, 1999
Messages
11,063
Location
Houston, Texas
Real Name
John Williamson
They protect it for the inevitable 4x3 release, Zemeckis just wants to make sure the 4x3 area doesn't exhibit any cables or equipment in the 4x3 frame. Hence the term 'protection'.
 

Patrick McCart

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 16, 2001
Messages
8,195
Location
Georgia (the state)
Real Name
Patrick McCart
WHY was the BTTF series 'shot-and-protected' with this open-matte 4:3 aspect ratio? Technical reasons, anyone?
It's not very common for films to be hard-matted. Usually, they'll just shoot the film with the camera, but with the viewfinder or TV monitor set up with lines or tape covering excess image.

When you hard-matte, it has to be done very carefully...if you matte too much, you'll end up having the mattes creeping into the intended frame.

The Godfather is a good example of this.
 

Inspector Hammer!

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 15, 1999
Messages
11,063
Location
Houston, Texas
Real Name
John Williamson
Ahh, I misunderstood Jagan's question I think. Were you asking about protection in general or were you asking about hard matte vs soft matte?
 

Qui-Gon John

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Messages
3,532
Real Name
John Co
JW, witty reply above. :D
OK, so I can see that what matters most to you is the director's intent, irregardless of your own personal likes or dislikes.
But I just watched my tape of BTTF 1, paying as close attention as possible to shot composition. So far, I'm in the FS camp for the trilogy. I will be watching 2 & 3, over the next couple of days. If I'm still happy with the shot compositions in those, then I'm really gonna be leaning to getting the FS version of the DVD's and avoiding all this WS hassle over the screwed up framing.
We'll see.
 

Michael Reuben

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 12, 1998
Messages
21,763
Real Name
Michael Reuben
Before you spring for the fullframe version, it might be worth considering Douglas Pratt's comparison of the widescreen and fullframe LDs of BTTF2, originally published in The LaserDisc Newsletter:
The non-special effects parts of were shot flat, with the intention of being projected on a theater screen with the top and bottom masked, as the image appears in the matted letterboxed version. Hence, in scenes where the screen composition can be easily calibrated--the date readout on the car panel or the shot through Christopher Lloyd's binoculars--the image appears to be exactly the same width on both the letterboxed version and the standard version. However, the special effects shots were made with a wider aspect ratio and appear on the source material with hard mattes already imbedded on the top and bottom of the film. It is on these sequences that MCA had to scan and crop the standard version. For example, when Michael J. Fox's character first meets the older Biff and his grandson, the standard version shows only the duplicated images of Thomas F. Wilson, while the letterboxed version is able to include Fox in the shot.
 

Alex Spindler

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2000
Messages
3,971
I'm so surprised that, given the very special effect-laden nature of the BTTF series, that one would consider a Fullscreen presentation. All of the effects shots would be panned and scanned. I can't see how that is considered a worthwhile value proposition. The way it is now, your choice is between a misframed movie (widescreen) with all of the effects shots or a misframed movie (fullscreen) with panned and scanned effects shots. The less crappy of the two seems obvious to me.
 

Inspector Hammer!

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 15, 1999
Messages
11,063
Location
Houston, Texas
Real Name
John Williamson
Thanks John, most here don't appreciate my particular brand of fast food humor. ;)
We can't really win either way is the bottom line. We can't get the WS editions because they're misframed, and we sure as hell can't, or more appropriately WON'T buy the FS editions for the obvious reasons.
I considered for a VERY short time (about five seconds all total) getting the FS editions and matting them to 1.85:1 since they were shot flat and matted anyway. I came to my senses however when I realized the visual effects issue, plus it will be a freezing day in hell before this self proclaimed OAR Snob gives his money to the FS cause.
The mere fact of KNOWING I helped pad the sales of FS makes me physically ill.
 

Qui-Gon John

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Messages
3,532
Real Name
John Co
Just watched my FS tape of BTTF2. I'm still pretty satisfied with the scene composition on the FS so far. Although the picture quality of tape sure leaves something to be desired. Funny, I watched BTTF1, same tape, in my bedroom, Saturday on my 15" Flat LCD TV and thought the pic qual was pretty good. Today I watched BTTF2, still same tape, in my Living Rm on my 58" RPTV and the picture quality seemed very poor.
 

Ken Chan

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 11, 1999
Messages
3,302
Real Name
Ken
Creating new recipes and the visual presentation of a dish is an art. Reproducing that dish on a regular basis is a skill; it now requires consistency instead of creativity. So it depends on which end of the "cooking" you're doing.

//Ken
 

Chris Farmer

Screenwriter
Joined
Aug 23, 2002
Messages
1,496
Creating new recipes and the visual presentation of a dish is an art. Reproducing that dish on a regular basis is a skill; it now requires consistency instead of creativity. So it depends on which end of the "cooking" you're doing.
*cough*Men in Black II*cough*
 

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
Ryan, photography is an art of exclusion. One way to look at it is the photographer (or cinematographer) starts with everything, as in, the entire world to choose from for images. Maybe that sounds a little absurd, but bear with me. I say it this way because painting is an art of inclusion, because the artist starts with nothing (a blank canvas, wall, sheet of paper, whatever) and has to decide what to include. This may seem pointless, but it is actually quite meaningful because many, many hours are spent by the DP and Director deciding what to have in the image, or more accurately, what to exclude from the image. Thinking about it that way, you may understand a little better why it is a real shame to add "information" back into the image.
I also can't believe we went through 31 posts (in this thread only) using words like "information" and "framing" for the image on the screen. Kudos to John Williamson for finally using forms of the word "Composition" in the discussion. The contents of an image are not just "information." I confess, that is one of the few things I see on this forum that genuinely annoys me.
......and a good definition of "Art" could be, "The creation of something from nothing." As in creating something that did not previously exist. That is art.
Ryan, I don''t know if you ever saw it before, but I am still quite proud of This thread on Cinematography. Please take a look at it. There were three other major contributors other than me, all of us exploring very different films. I've forgotten who said it, but I still think about The Man in the Moon being referred to as "Tolkienesque" every time I watch it.
 

Damin J Toell

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2001
Messages
3,762
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Real Name
Damin J. Toell
I also can't believe we went through 31 posts (in this thread only) using words like "information" and "framing" for the image on the screen. Kudos to John Williamson for finally using forms of the word "Composition" in the discussion. The contents of an image are not just "information." I confess, that is one of the few things I see on this forum that genuinely annoys me.
In the very first post of the thread, Dan Hitchman uses "composition" four times. In the third post in the thread, I use "compose" once. In the fifth post in the thread, I use "composition" once. In the fifteenth post in the thread, Dan Hitchman uses "composition" once. In the twenty-third post in the thread, I use "composition" once. As far as I can tell, you've got nothing to complain about in this thread. Personally, I don't see what in the world would be annoying about someone's choice of words between "composition," "visual information" and "framing," anyway. A film's composition includes the framing of visual information; whether you like those words or not, they all apply.

DJ
 

Inspector Hammer!

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 15, 1999
Messages
11,063
Location
Houston, Texas
Real Name
John Williamson
John,
while I appreciate the compliment, and I do, thanks, Damin's right, I can't take all the credit here. When it comes down to it a few people here have said pretty much the same thing as I did, just worded differently.
Alright, maybe I was off based with saying that food was not art, I can see that it can be a very creative medium to work in, it just didn't occur to me. However I stand by my statement that MacDonald's hamburger aren't art. :)
quote...
"...photography is an art of exclusion."
I like that.
 

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
OK, I went off a little carelessly. I should exercise the search feature. :b

What gets me going is how often I see the composition of an image described as "information," as in, you don't lose any "information" by removing a soft matte. Adding more "information" is not OK, which is what I was trying to explain. Please try not to get angry about a mistake I made, and try to read what I meant again. I'm so good at pissing people off. This is something I have been passionate about my entire life and I'm sorry if I don't express myself well regarding it. Don't let it take from what I am trying to say.



As far as what constitutes "Art," what Ken said completely agrees with what I think. One thing is, this definition of Art has nothing to do with quality. This Art can still be crap, it's just crap that didn't exist previously. That is why a McDonald's hamburgers aren't art. They already existed.
 

Qui-Gon John

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2000
Messages
3,532
Real Name
John Co
JohnRice - But I don't think Zemeckis' intent of the art of exclusion included excluding showing us Lloyd pressing the button on the bottom of Fox's jacket in BTTF 2! :)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,710
Messages
5,121,107
Members
144,146
Latest member
SaladinNagasawa
Recent bookmarks
1
Top