Robert Harris on The Bits - 8/12/02 column - OFFICIAL THREAD

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Bill Hunt, Aug 12, 2002.

  1. Bill Hunt

    Bill Hunt Insider
    Insider

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 1998
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    0
    We've just posted Robert Harris' new column on The Digital Bits. This time around, Robert talks about aspect ratios and runs down some good titles to watch out for on DVD.
    Aspect Ratios - Salve for the Soul
    As always, click on the link to read Robert's comments and then come on back here to this official thread at the HTF to discuss, give feedback, ask questions of Robert and sound off as you will.
    Enjoy!
     
  2. gregstaten

    gregstaten Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 1997
    Messages:
    608
    Likes Received:
    3
    Glad to see you've included the SMPTE film alignment chart, but the graphic seems to have been cut off on the right side. It is cut off on the right side of the television aperture.

    -greg
     
  3. Paul McElligott

    Paul McElligott Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2002
    Messages:
    2,598
    Likes Received:
    0
    Real Name:
    Paul McElligott
    Yeah... I want to see the chart in it's original aspect ratio!
     
  4. Peter Kline

    Peter Kline Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 1999
    Messages:
    2,393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ah yes, lemons and Atlantic City. Should have won an award for the best use of citrus fruit in a motion picture, or something like that. [​IMG]
     
  5. Bill Hunt

    Bill Hunt Insider
    Insider

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 1998
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just FYI, the SMPTE film alignment chart has now been corrected. My bad. ;-)
     
  6. Will*M

    Will*M Extra

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2002
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bill & Robert:

    Loving the articles, keep them coming.
     
  7. oscar_merkx

    oscar_merkx Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    7,626
    Likes Received:
    1
    just read the article, keep them coming. My DVD collection has just been expanded again with some new found gems.
    I really enjoyed Tough Guys with Burt Lancaster & Kirk Douglas when it first came out, so Disney if you are reading this, bring it on
    [​IMG]
     
  8. Gordon McMurphy

    Gordon McMurphy Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,530
    Likes Received:
    0
    You can get The Leopard on region 2 DVD from Italy, folks. I own it. I love it. The transfer is very good: 2.35:1 anamorphic. Damn, big fat mono though, sounds like it was compressed at Monster Joe's Truck 'N Tow, man. It's the 180 minute version. [​IMG] Still... it's a great DVD - if you understand Italian! [​IMG] No, the film has English subtitles, but everything else - the interviews in disc 2 (oh, yeah it's a 2 discer!) have no subs, what a drag. Does Fox still own the rights to it in the USA? I'd love to see a 205 minute THX DD5.1/DTS 5.1 version with lots of extra features.
    Here's a link to a site that can supply you with a copy of : The Leopard: http://shop.videopark.it/cgi-bin/shop/search?JKTjfdQy;;269
     
  9. Robert Harris

    Robert Harris Archivist
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 1999
    Messages:
    9,349
    Likes Received:
    5,280
    Real Name:
    Robert Harris
    The Leopard is nothing short of a masterpiece.

    Unfortunately, it is also one of those films in desperate need of a full and complete reconstruction and restoration from original elements.

    While there is some question about precisely what version was run at its premiere at Cannes re: running time, we do know that it was appreciatively longer than what we now have.

    Any work done on this film should be done in large format, preserving the detail and fine resolution of the original.

    RAH
     
  10. DaViD Boulet

    DaViD Boulet Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 1999
    Messages:
    8,800
    Likes Received:
    3
     
  11. george kaplan

    george kaplan Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2001
    Messages:
    13,063
    Likes Received:
    2
    I rarely disagree with Bob Harris, and never on matters of fact regarding film. However, in terms of opinion, I have to disagree with the idea that cropping from 1.85 to 1.78 doesn't lose enough picture to care. What is enough. Cropped to 1.66? 1.37? 1.33? To me any cropping from the OAR is bad.
    I guess I shouldn't bother to ask him if the academy standard in that pattern is 1.33 or 1.37. [​IMG]
     
  12. Robert Harris

    Robert Harris Archivist
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 1999
    Messages:
    9,349
    Likes Received:
    5,280
    Real Name:
    Robert Harris
    Re: George Kaplan's comments:

    Actually the cropping goes the other way 'round.

    The difference between 1.85 to 1.78 is added picture, not reduced picture.

    Academy at .825 x .600 is 1.37:1

    Hope I'm not mis-understanding your comments.

    RAH
     
  13. Roberto Carlo

    Roberto Carlo Second Unit

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Messages:
    445
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you for your article, Mr. Harris. You mentioned the dismay at cropping from 1.85 to 1.78. My question involves the opposite. My laserdisc of North by Northwest had an aspect ratio of 1.66 to 1, which I think -- please correct me if I'm wrong -- was one of the ratios associated with Vista Vision. The DVD is 16:9, which makes anamorphic enhancement possible. It isn't only N By NW. Several Disney features appear to have been whatever the opposite of cropped is, also to make anamorphic possible. Am I correct in this observation and, if I am, what is your, or anyone else's, opinion on the matter?
     
  14. Eric Peterson

    Eric Peterson Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2001
    Messages:
    2,959
    Likes Received:
    1
    Excellent column as usual Mr. Harris. I have one request though. Is there anyway that I could get a copy of the diagram in a higher resolution? I'm having a hard time reading the small text and magnification doesn't help.

    Thanks in advance.
     
  15. Robert Harris

    Robert Harris Archivist
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 1999
    Messages:
    9,349
    Likes Received:
    5,280
    Real Name:
    Robert Harris
    One of the points that I was attempting to make is that aspect ratios have very little meaning unless you are making direct comparisons to either a negative or print of the title in question.

    VistaVision was created to be projected anywhere from 1.66 or slightly wider up to over 2:1, and everything in between.

    N x NW may work fine in 1.66, although the title does need cropping to eliminate artifacts outside of protected range, but recorded on the negative.

    Not having made any direct comparisons, it is possible that a 1.66 image is a 1.85 image with the sides cropped.

    One would have to look at the exact frame.

    Re: chart resolution...

    I can certainly email a copy of the chart to Ron in Photoshop format, but I don't know if he'd care to use his bandwidth in that manner.

    RAH
     
  16. gregstaten

    gregstaten Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 1997
    Messages:
    608
    Likes Received:
    3
    George - methinks you doth protest too much. Opening up the 1.85 masking to 1.78 is not a significant change. In fact, you don't know how good you have it on DVD aspect-ratio wise as compared to a theatrical presentation.

    A theater may have a screen with an exact 1.85:1 aspect ratio. But, I can just about guarantee you that you are not seeing the entire 1.85 image as composed on the ground glass by the cinematographer. Sure, the image has the right shape, but you aren't seeing the entire image.

    Let's take the most ideal, and least likely, situation: the projector is perfectly aligned on axis to the center of the screen - there is no keystone and no parallax. The size of the image on the screen is a combination of the projector's throw length and the lens' focal length. I've yet to see a theater where there's a perfect match that exactly fills the screen. They almost always overshoot. This means the edges of the frame spill over the masking. Why is this done? Well, it makes it easier to "rough-in" framing on a hard matted print.

    But you don't see all that spill on the masking, you say? That's because the aperature plate in the projector was filed down to mask most of the spill. Yup. The plate is covering over part of the image. (If the theater is set up to SMPTE specs, the total loss should be no more than 5% per side.)


    Now let's leave that perfect world and talk about the average theater today. The projection booth is not on axis with the screen. Indeed, with the advent of stadium seating, it could be as much as 30 degrees off axis or more. This creates a keystone effect. Plus, large screens are generally curved inward. That results in a parallax effect.

    (Keystoning results in an image that is longer at the bottom than at the top. Parallax results in an image that is bowed downward like a smile.)

    To ensure that the viewer doesn't see these effects, the image must be blown up more and the aperture plate ground to hide these effects. So, in a typical theater, you're seeing less of the image at the bottom of the frame and less of the image at the corners on the top and less of the image at the middle of the bottom.

    Add to this the fact that the framing may well be incorrect and you may lose even more at the top or bottom. I've attended screenings where subtitles were partially offscreen due to a combination of all of the above.

    ---

    So, I can guarantee you that you're seeing more of the image on DVD than you ever saw in a theater and you're seeing the image framed better than you saw it in a theater. (Unless you get to see films in places like the DGA theater in LA - probably one of the best set up and run theaters I've ever seen.)

    Why complain about those few extra scan lines in the 1.78:1 transfer?

    -greg
     
  17. Gordon McMurphy

    Gordon McMurphy Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,530
    Likes Received:
    0
    In reply to: Robert Harris
    Visconti's Il Gattopardo (The Leopard) is one of those films where you see the medium at it's most powerful. Like Sir David's Lawrence Of Arabia and Coppola's The Godfather Part II. Pulverizing. There's a shot in The Leopard that begins with a shot of the moon being smothered by clouds and Burt and... what's his name(?) are walking across the field, and the light in that shot is just incredible, extrodinarily beautiful. Technirama was something else. WOW!
    Gee, I mean the DVD looks great, but I really wonder about the negative of that film. Italian labs and all. Weird. Anchor Bay went to Rome to get the neg of Dario Argento's legendary 1977 horror film Suspiria which filmed in Technovision (2.35:1 anamorphic) and 3 Stripe Technicolor, and they THX'd a print from that and it looks SO great.
    Thanks again, Bob!
    Gordon
     
  18. george kaplan

    george kaplan Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2001
    Messages:
    13,063
    Likes Received:
    2
    Robert,
    Thanks for the reply. Just to be clear to everyone, I don't lose sleep over this stuff. I realize that framing issues are complex and when I'm watching a dvd or ld, I am watching the movie itself and don't think about misframing unless you see someone talking to someone's nose.
    But I still hate the idea of losing any picture at all, even if it's the difference between 1.33 and 1.37. That doesn't mean I worry about it in real life, or let it stop me from purchasing and watching dvds. I only really think about it when it comes up in a thread here at HTF.
     
  19. Robert Harris

    Robert Harris Archivist
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 1999
    Messages:
    9,349
    Likes Received:
    5,280
    Real Name:
    Robert Harris
    To George Kaplan:

    I just want to make certain that I haven't confused the issue and that you and the rest of the group understand that going from 1.85 to 1.78 gives you MORE information.

    Correct?

    RAH
     
  20. Damin J Toell

    Damin J Toell Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,762
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Real Name:
    Damin J. Toell
     

Share This Page