What's new

ROBIN HOOD -- Cropping Full-Frame Films for the Widescreen Future (1 Viewer)

Douglas Monce

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
5,511
Real Name
Douglas Monce

Actually I'm thinking more of the fact that a lot of directors used to think that they had to shoot huge closeups because the TV screens were so small.

Doug
 

Clinton McClure

Rocket Science Department
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 28, 1999
Messages
7,784
Location
Central Arkansas
Real Name
Clint
I have not read this entire thread but (for what it's worth) the back of my Robin Hood Gold Collection DVD (UPC 17951 00868) reads .
 

Douglas Monce

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
5,511
Real Name
Douglas Monce

DVDs are frequently miss-labeled when it comes to original aspect ratios. I have a few that are labeled 1.85 when they are really 2.35.

Again it doesn't make much sense to make a 1.33 film in 1973 when almost no theater in the world would be able to show it that way.
 

AndrewWickliffe

Second Unit
Joined
Jun 12, 2002
Messages
367
Real Name
Andrew Wickliffe

Just look how Warner labels the Kubrick's. They're all full frame like he "intended," but its not their OAR
 

Ira Siegel

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Nov 28, 2004
Messages
163
Real Name
Ira Siegel

It seems to me that 4:3 TV closeups captured the hair atop the actors' heads and at least their necks, and usually their shoulders.
 

Douglas Monce

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2006
Messages
5,511
Real Name
Douglas Monce

You're quite right, but once directors got out of TV and into movies, to get more or less the same size in a widescreen frame, they end up doing the chin to forehead thing. I'm not apposed to a shot like that; I just think it’s over done a lot these days.

Doug
 

Patrick McCart

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 16, 2001
Messages
8,196
Location
Georgia (the state)
Real Name
Patrick McCart
I just picked this up (Target had a huge blowout on DVDs). Just skimming from the movie, the 1.75:1 framing is most likely correct...

[url=https://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/3/38/htf_imgcache_6720.jpeg] [/url]
[url=https://static.hometheaterforum.com/imgrepo/1/18/htf_imgcache_6721.jpeg] [/url]

Great transfer, too. Looks like they kept it mostly unprocessed, but with excellent color and sharpness. (Also, I like how in Disney films, you can jump to any random place and find a humorous frame to capture from).
 

David_B_K

Advanced Member
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
2,604
Location
Houston, TX
Real Name
David
I for one will not worry about the cropping of full-frame films for 16:9 TVs until we ger a really blatant example of its ocurrance. Since the actual aspect ration of Robin Hood is so fuzzy, this film is not it. Until they start cropping Casablanca and Citizen Kane (or any other film whose OAR is unquestioned) then I will hold off on grand conspiracy theories.
 

Brian Little

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Sep 3, 2005
Messages
216

What price did your Target have it on sale for? The ones around here all have it for $19.99. That is *NOT* a sale price.
 

Stephen_J_H

All Things Film Junkie
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
7,892
Location
North of the 49th
Real Name
Stephen J. Hill
I get strange looks every time I buy from a B & M, because I'm usually buying for myself and my kids. Do the cashiers honestly think that we would let our kids watch Reservoir Dogs before they're ready for it?
 

Jon Lidolt

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
189
Location
Toronto Ontario in Canada
Real Name
Jon Lidolt

Cinemas began installing wide-screens in the summer of 1953 and once they were installed, projected all spherical films cropped - regardless of how they were shot. The screen ratios weren't standardized then and varied widely, everything from 1.66 to 2:1.
 

ScottR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2000
Messages
2,646
And unfortunately, Gone With the Wind was a big victim of this cropping. A dozen or so shots have been forever changed because some knucklehead threw out the original Academy Ratio footage of those shots.
 

Ken_McAlinden

Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,241
Location
Livonia, MI USA
Real Name
Kenneth McAlinden
While it was certainly still a problem with the 1998 "restoration"/re-release prints and the initial DVD, doesn't the current DVD correct all of the shifted shots by using the "Ultra-resolution" process with the separate YCM Technicolor negatives?

Regards,
 

ScottR

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2000
Messages
2,646
Ken, I'm not sure. While those shots look better color wise on the new dvd, it appears that they simply zoomed in on them, because there is actually less picture info than before. But I don't know.
 

Ken_McAlinden

Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2001
Messages
6,241
Location
Livonia, MI USA
Real Name
Kenneth McAlinden
So you are saying that they cropped the separate YCM negatives and not a composite element when shifting the frames to create the 70mm blow-up?

Regards,
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more







You will only receive emails from us. We will never sell or distribute your email address to third party companies at any time.

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
357,005
Messages
5,128,192
Members
144,228
Latest member
CoolMovies
Recent bookmarks
0
Top