THE ABYSS anamorphic release? (MERGED THREAD) (1 Viewer)

[Stephen_J_H]

Paul S., "anamorphic" widescreen broadcasts have been quite common in Europe for some time now, as PAL widescreen TVs have been widely available.

 

[Paul.S]

In what sense are you calling a movie broadcast "anamorphic"? Because it's a signal that preserves the 2.35-2.40 "Scope" widesceen aspect ratio of the film? If so, again, that's a different matter.

Widescreen does not equal "anamorphic" within the context of this thread. And even outside this context, calling any widescreen broadcast "anamorphic" is very problematic.

 

[Geoff_D]

There's no need for the Cinematography 101, fellas. I didn't see the broadcast in question (damn!) but Dave is right.

Instead of cropping/opening up to 16:9, Channel 4 have recently starting showing 2.35 movies in their full aspect ratio, and through the UK's widescreen digital TV service they are presented just like on a anamorphic DVD (smaller borders top and bottom, stretched image, which is then squashed to its proper dimensions by a 16:9 display). I was awestruck when I realised that C4 have made this a permanent thing, and I can only hope that other broadcasters follow suit.

An anamorphic broadcast does not always mean a new version is arriving though, as these transfers are often produced on an ad hoc basis for whoever in TV land requests them. There have been anamorphic widescreen broadcasts of Kubrick's Lolita and Barry Lyndon, for example, but anamorphic DVDs are nowhere to be found.

 

[Paul.S]

I assume you're (largely) referring to me, Geoff, with your "Cinematography 101" comment. I would disagree that making those points wasn't necessary insofar as, at least until your post, it was not clear what exactly Dave was referring to.

And over here in NTSC land, the term "anamorphic" doesn't have currency within the broadcasting industry as far as I'm aware.

I'm also not clear on what you mean by "smaller borders top and bottom." If a 2.35 movie is broadcast widescreen traditionally/"non-anamorphically" at the proper aspect ratio, then it's my understanding that the black bars would be the same proportions when broadcast "anamorphically." There would just be better picture quality.

I'm also curious about what kind of image 4x3 set owners see during "anamorphic" broadcasts. Seems to me it won't be properly composed unless your cable service provides you with a set top box via which you tell the broadcaster what kind of set you have/image you should receive.

Out of curiousity, how do broadcasters alert their viewing audiences that a broadcast is "anamorphic"? Is it common knowledge this is being done or are lagrely just the "digerati" aware?

 

[TonyD]

over here states side, we dont get anamorphic tv as paul mentioned.

so any explaination or cinematography 101 IS helpful to better understand what you're talking aout.

 

[Geoff_D]

I didn't mean to sound snippy above, but given the high(er)-brow nature of this forum I assumed that most folk on here were aware of the use of the term 'anamorphic' with regard to home video/TV broadcasts.

Whenever I'm using the term 'anamorphic' above, I'm referring to the largely standard DVD practice of encoding a widescreen image for a 16:9 display to give a higher resolution. If you've got a widescreen DVD from Universal, flip it over and it'll most likely say 'anamorphic widescreen', but whatever you wanna call it, '16x9 enhanced', 'enhanced for widescreen TVs', that's what I mean. Right? That's how our digital TV is broadcast.

If you're still confused, I suggest seeking out the Star Wars 'original versions' thread to see plenty of other people banding the term 'anamorphic' about in the same context. And yes, I'm plenty aware of what 'anamorphic' means with regard to actual motion picture photography.

As for The Abyss, I'm watching the broadcast right now on digital TV, and it looks like a bona fide '16x9 enhanced' transfer in the original 2.35 ratio. Actually, it's pretty soft and may well be an upconvert, but if it is then it's the best one I've ever seen. Hell, I'm still amazed that we're now getting regular 2.35 broadcasts on network television over here.

 

[Paul.S]

Thank you, Tony.

This is where you're losing me: to my understanding, you're conflating the discrete issues of anamorphic enhancement and aspect ratio. Also, "digital" does not equal "anamorphic" in the States. Are you saying all digital TV either is or at least is called anamorphic in the U.K.? And prior to digital it was not possible for you to see a movie broadcast in its original aspect ratio?

 

[TonyD]

calling andrew markworthy for second opinion.

 

[Dave Simkiss]

Sorry for the confusion fellas.
Thanks to Paul.S for going to the trouble ands thanks to Geoff for sorting out the confusion.

I should have specified 16x9 enhanced rather than just said 'anamorphic'. Im not sure about the US, but in the UK it's just a generalised term for 16x9 enhanced as Geoff explained above.


Not to talk for the whole of the UK, but 4x3 sets are vastly in the minority here and have been for quite a long time (easily over 5 years). Also we don't have separate widescreen and fullscreen DVD releases and a lot more of our TV content is broadcasted in 16x9 enhanced.

In terms of how my digital subscriber handles the whole 4x3, 16x9 situation - my sky box set up includes the option of being set for 4x3 or 16x9.
If I was to set it to output 16x9 but I had a 4x3 TV then yes it would be an improperly composed picture. What I would refer to as 'none anamorphic' - with larger black bars and a stretched vertically picture.

With Sky set to output 16x9 on a 16x9 set the picture is shown in 16x9 'enhanced anamorphic'.

With the exception of older shows and some commercials, theres not much content shown in 4x3 on UK TV. It's generally all 16x9 anamorphically enhanced.

Apologies again for the confusion. I assumed the term anamorphic when used to describe a DVD and/or a TV broadcast was in common use.

RE: The Abyss, I know it was wishful thinking to hope a widescreen showing may in some way indicate a potential anamorphic DVD/Blu-Ray reissue, but I would hope no one minds a thread bump for such an important film and the desperate need to have a 16x9 enhanced release.

On a personal level I feel the Special Edition is Cameron's finest film to date and will always be in my top favourite films of all time.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Sounds to me like you go into the setup menus for your Skybox receiver in much the same way you would with a DVD player.

 

[Brandon Conway]

In any case, Fox has to have this on their Blu-ray Disc schedule somewhere as it has always been a big seller for them as far as catalog titles go. That would mean a new transfer, and logic would suggest a new anamorphically enhanced DVD as well.

 

[Craig Beam]

We can only hope. Christ, this is LONG overdue. Seems crazy to upgrade my non-anamorphic DVD to a Blu-Ray disc without an anamorphic DVD edition in between.

 

[TheBat]

like it has been mentioned before.. probably release it when james cameron has his new movie out.. which is next year..

Jacob

 

[Geoff_D]

Just a thought: next year is the 20th Anniversary of The Abyss, and with Cameron's new film due out Fox'd be crazy not to reissue it.

 

[Paul.S]

If by "schedule" you mean general radar screen, yeah. But as far as actually pursuing JC's participation and approval and inking a release date, I don't think the movie has been any more brisk of a seller now than it was, say, five years ago when Fox was insulting us with the release of the same (erroneously labeled anamorphic) transfer re-packaged in a (admittedly attractive) Digipak.

 

[Dave Simkiss]

Agreed. However as mentioned above there have been other instances of multiple broadcasts of a film just prior to an announcement of a DVD release
I actually suspected home entertainment companies planning a DVD release may inform broadcasters ahead of schedule that they only have so many months to potentially broadcast older films that they may have in a vault as a DVD release is pending.
Of course this is all just supposition and once again wishful thinking on my part

 

[Ric Easton]

Well, I've stopped waiting for the animorphic DVD. Now, I just want the Blu-ray disc.

 

[Dave Simkiss]

Ditto... with Cameron commentary and cast commentary.
It could happen...

 

[Paul.S]

YOU would call them both 16x9 enhanced because they're widescreen. But the reality is that neither is accurately described as such and as that term is understood in the DVD context. Again, it's not my understanding that widescreen U.S. broadcasts are squeezed at the source and unsqueezed by a consumer set top. They're simply broadcast in widescreen, lower resolution.

Most importantly, the concept of 16x9 enhancement has no currency whatsoever in the HD universe. The highest ATSC 1080 standards all contemplate a native 16x9 display. Again, it's why we don't call HD DVDs or Blu-ray Discs "16x9 enhanced" or "anamorphic": with the exception of what you've described regarding U.K. TV broadcasting, that terminology applies to images prepared for widescreen presentation on 4x3 displays only. Native 16x9 content displayed on 16x9 monitors is a horse of a different color entirely.

 

[Geoff_D]

Paul, could you please humour me and give the Bits' anamorphic video guide a read at The Ultimate Guide to Anamorphic Widescreen DVD for Everyone! I was gonna launch into another didactic post, but there's no point as you'd pick it apart based on "provincial" misunderstandings.