Tilt 'N Scan - the new OAR violator

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Michael St. Clair, Jan 29, 2002.

  1. Michael St. Clair

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    0
  2. John Torrez

    John Torrez Second Unit

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2000
    Messages:
    314
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is really pathetic. You bet your ass I won't be watching Cheers in that format.
     
  3. Michael Reuben

    Michael Reuben Studio Mogul

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 1998
    Messages:
    21,769
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'd like to see side-by-side comparisons, just to better understand what they're doing. It doesn't sound like the usual zoom, but the article doesn't provide enough detail.

    M.
     
  4. Jerry Gracia

    Jerry Gracia Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 1998
    Messages:
    537
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  5. GlennH

    GlennH Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 1998
    Messages:
    2,135
    Likes Received:
    7
    Real Name:
    Glenn
    Yeah, I can't figure out from that exactly what they are talking about doing - but I know you can't turn 4:3 into 16:9 without losing or distorting something.

    The article makes this sound like a whizbang *good* thing. I think not.
     
  6. Michael St. Clair

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  7. Brian Kidd

    Brian Kidd Screenwriter
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2000
    Messages:
    1,921
    Likes Received:
    230
    Welcome to the future. I have a theory that most, if not all 4:3 content will have this done to it once 16:9 tv's become the norm. People will want the picture to fill their screen without any of those annoying black bars.
     
  8. GlennH

    GlennH Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 1998
    Messages:
    2,135
    Likes Received:
    7
    Real Name:
    Glenn
    Yes, TV in the brave new world will be great. 2.35:1 movies will still be P&S, just to 16:9 instead of 4:3. And original 4:3 movies and TV shows will be cropped to 16:9 dimensions too.
     
  9. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,525
    Likes Received:
    126
    Location:
    Alpharetta, GA, USA
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    Why can't they simply windowbox the series?

    I won't give one penny towards the purchase of bastardized images. 1.33:1 is the OAR and the OAR is what SHOULD be put on TV.

    Besides, the zooming is going to make the image look like SHIT. Cheers was filmed in 16mm, so you're going to see it in Grain-o-Rama.
     
  10. Michael St. Clair

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm pretty sure Cheers was shot on 35mm, but it does sure look soft.

    Chins and foreheads will be bleeding regardless.
     
  11. David Lambert

    David Lambert Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2001
    Messages:
    11,386
    Likes Received:
    38
    [​IMG]
    NO OAR = NO SALE!!
     
  12. Kyle McKnight

    Kyle McKnight Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Messages:
    2,515
    Likes Received:
    0
    Agreed. If they start releasing TV stuff like this, they will be the ones I will not purchase.
     
  13. Jeff F.

    Jeff F. Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 1999
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    5
    Just a thought, but since "Cheers" was shot in 35mm, why couldn't they just go back to the original film source and remaster it for HD?

    35mm is a widescreen format, but wasn't it cropped in editing for the 4:3 format?
     
  14. Rob Lutter

    Rob Lutter Producer

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,528
    Likes Received:
    1
    35mm doesn't have to be widescreen... it could just be 'soft matted' on the 35mm frame (ALA Pee Wee's Big Adventure, The Shining, Eyes Wide Shut). [​IMG]
     
  15. Michael St. Clair

    Joined:
    May 3, 1999
    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  16. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,525
    Likes Received:
    126
    Location:
    Alpharetta, GA, USA
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    35mm can be widescreen if anamorphic.
     
  17. Scott H

    Scott H Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2000
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
    One way this issue is being addressed in current sitcom production does preserve the full 4:3 frame within the 16:9 frame. A very popular acquisition method for HD programing is Super16. I have visited many sitcoms that are currently being shot with Aaton XTRprod cameras on pedestals and Steadicam which are shooting 1.78:1 with a primary 4:3 frame centered. Thus they are simultaneously composing for both ARs, though obviously the 4:3 is action safe. They can broadcast at 1.33:1 now, and at 1.78:1 later.
     
  18. Scott H

    Scott H Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2000
    Messages:
    693
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  19. Jesse Skeen

    Jesse Skeen Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 1999
    Messages:
    4,284
    Likes Received:
    195
    Not like it'll matter because it'll have station logos and god knows what else plastered all over the screen!
     
  20. MathewM

    MathewM Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    0
    I could be wrong, but wasn't the same process done for the first 2 seasons of The Sopranos? I remember reading something about the difficulty of re-framing the compositions. I do notice some odd compositions when watching the early episodes that have been recomposed (if that is the case); with the framing appearing lopsided or too tight. Anyone have some side by side comparisions? I do know the later episodes have been shot with 16:9 in mind. The compositions are still fairly conservative, probably to appease the full frame viewers (and still a wise decision until 16:9 becomes the norm).

    I agree that unless the show was hardmatted, window boxed in the first place, it should remain true to itself and stay 4:3. With that out of the way: I know I'll take some heat for this, but in my opinion a lot of early tv shows (pre-16:9) were shot with too much head and leg room. Not to take anything away with the directors original intentions but perhaps with utilizing the extra overscan from the original framing, they could go about recomposing for a 1:66 ratio that would be viewable on a 16:9 display, with overscan with no noticeable loss in quality and no "dreaded" black bars. Just my humble opinion and a few run-on sentences.
     

Share This Page