-

Jump to content



Photo

What's your favorite ASPECT RATIO on video?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
24 replies to this topic

#1 of 25 Dick

Dick

    Producer

  • 4,092 posts
  • Join Date: May 22 1999
  • Real Name:Rick

Posted October 13 2001 - 04:33 PM

I'm not talking about your favorite ratio in a theater, but at home, on your television. I prefer 1.66:1, and it has nothing to do with how much of the area on my screen is taken up with image (if that was the issue, I'd obviously prefer 1.33:1). I love 2.35:1 in theaters, but for whatever reason, I find the 1.66:1 ratio on my t.v. to be the most aesthetically pleasing. I just love that SHAPE. I can remember seeing 1.66 in some theaters thirty or forty years ago or so, and I loved it then, too.

#2 of 25 Jason Merrick

Jason Merrick

    Supporting Actor

  • 695 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 02 2000
  • Real Name:Jason Merrick
  • LocationSimi Valley, CA (Los Angeles)

Posted October 13 2001 - 04:44 PM

1.85:1... still gives that WIDESCREEN look, but don't need magnifier to view it on my 27" JVC.

------------------
Posted Image

#3 of 25 Jason Whyte

Jason Whyte

    Screenwriter

  • 1,442 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 03 1999

Posted October 13 2001 - 05:21 PM

I have none, since it all depends on the intentions of the filmmakers. I just look at the frame and not the aspect of it.

Jason

------------------
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image
jason_whyte@yahoo.com 2001 Film List I Am Jack's DVD List
ICQ: 16733922 AOL IM: JayLo Whyte
"Are we gonna let the elevator bring us down?
Oh no! Let's go...let's go crazy!" Prince, Purple Rain

My Own Film Review Website Is Coming Soon!

Buy National Treasure on DVD today..."The best movie I saw on Saturday night from 7pm to 9:30. The DTS track is freakin' awesome!" --Multiplex Drone

#4 of 25 Bruce Hedtke

Bruce Hedtke

    Screenwriter

  • 2,249 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 11 1999

Posted October 13 2001 - 05:27 PM

2.35/1 is my favorite. It just gives the picture a more dramatic look and feel.

Bruce

------------------
Posted Image
Welcome aboard the Satellite of Love
The Mads are calling

#5 of 25 Matthew Chmiel

Matthew Chmiel

    Screenwriter

  • 2,284 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 26 2000

Posted October 13 2001 - 06:38 PM

1.33:1

No, no... I'm just kidding.

I like 1.85:1 and 2.35:1/2.40:1 both the same.

------------------
Posted Image
My DVD Collection / AOL IM: MrMatthew / ICQ: 96444542
"I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule."


#6 of 25 MichaelPe

MichaelPe

    Screenwriter

  • 1,118 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 22 1999

Posted October 13 2001 - 06:46 PM

Original

------------------
Posted Image
MY TOP 20 OF 2001

#7 of 25 Neil Joseph

Neil Joseph

    Lead Actor

  • 8,338 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 16 1998

Posted October 13 2001 - 08:14 PM

1.85 then 2.35

------------------
Neil's H.T. Site
(gateway to H.T.Links + movie images)

Posted ImagePosted Image
------------------
My Favourite Movie


Click on above image to enter " T H E . H O L O D E C K "
---------------------------------------------------------
The Holodeck. My DIY Screen. DIY Subwoofer: The MaxCaliber
My humble collection of DVD's. HTF Beginner's Primer and FAQ

#8 of 25 Scott W.

Scott W.

    Second Unit

  • 319 posts
  • Join Date: May 20 1999

Posted October 13 2001 - 11:17 PM

2.35:1

Scott

#9 of 25 Inspector Hammer!

Inspector Hammer!

    Executive Producer

  • 11,067 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 15 1999
  • Real Name:John Williamson
  • LocationWilmington, Delaware

Posted October 14 2001 - 12:12 AM

Jason, I agree with you. But i'm a sucker for a good anamorphic 2.35:1 movie, even on my 27" VVEGA. I really love the lens flares.

------------------
God bless the USA and the men and woman of our military and their families!

"That's Jack Bauer!!!!!! He's coming for me!!!!!" - Charles Logan

#10 of 25 Dick

Dick

    Producer

  • 4,092 posts
  • Join Date: May 22 1999
  • Real Name:Rick

Posted October 14 2001 - 02:53 AM

I vguess I need to explain my intention for starting the thread - of course any of us on the HTF want the OAR. I am only interested in what SHAPE pleases your eye most on the t.v.

#11 of 25 Rob Tomlin

Rob Tomlin

    Producer

  • 4,507 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 08 2000

Posted October 14 2001 - 02:55 AM

It really depends on the film and the subject matter. I would say overall that the 2.35:1 does tend to appear a bit more "dramatic" for lack of a better word.
For ordinary men, it's a burning, fiery furnace.

#12 of 25 TomRS4

TomRS4

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 50 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 21 1999

Posted October 14 2001 - 04:20 AM

2.35:1 is my favorite. It gives that big theatrical feel, and I like seeing the black bars on my 16:9 tv. Posted Image

------------------
Tempus Fugit
Tempus Fugit

#13 of 25 Adam Tyner

Adam Tyner

    Screenwriter

  • 1,413 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2000

Posted October 14 2001 - 05:33 AM

Another 2.35:1/2.40:1 fan...

------------------
My DVD list | My personal site


#14 of 25 Nate Anderson

Nate Anderson

    Screenwriter

  • 1,153 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 2001

Posted October 14 2001 - 08:11 AM

I always get a charge when I see a movie was shot in scope 2.35:1. It always leads to a grander, although less cramped shot. If you want to do a two shot, it always looks better in 2.35:1, although it sucks when you have to Pan and Scan it.

Long live OAR.

------------------
"This is not a drill. This is the apocolypse!"

My Extensive DVD collection.

My Extensive DVD collection.

Shameless Webpage Plug: My Movie Reviews.

#15 of 25 Keith_R

Keith_R

    Screenwriter

  • 1,179 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 16 2001

Posted October 14 2001 - 12:27 PM

I like 1:85:1. I like it because when viewing a movie a movie on my 20 inch Sony it doesn't make the movie seem like it is dilutted or smaller like 2:35:1 sometimes does. Of course OAR is important no matter what.

------------------
-Keith-


-Keith-       


#16 of 25 brentl

brentl

    Screenwriter

  • 2,918 posts
  • Join Date: May 07 1999

Posted October 14 2001 - 03:50 PM

2.05:1

Brent L
OAR works too Posted Image

------------------
OK guys ..... The tour of the Paradigm

plant is now being planned. GO TO THE HOME THEaTER

MEETS PAGE and register.


#17 of 25 JohanK

JohanK

    Second Unit

  • 480 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 22 2000

Posted October 14 2001 - 04:25 PM

2.35 for wide shots like a battle scene; 1:85 for interpersonal scenes.

------------------
equipment list

Posted Image


equipment list

#18 of 25 Jeffrey Forner

Jeffrey Forner

    Screenwriter

  • 1,117 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 1999

Posted October 14 2001 - 08:46 PM

I love 2.35:1 simply because I think it offers more exciting composition possibilities. When done right. 2.35:1 movies look absolutely amazing.


------------------
-J.Fo
"Why do I always get a warped one?"

-J.Fo

#19 of 25 Dominik Droscher

Dominik Droscher

    Supporting Actor

  • 532 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2000

Posted October 14 2001 - 10:22 PM

I am with Jeffrey here. I watched "Thin Red Line" yesterday which is magnificentally photographed. You could hang every single frame as a poster on your wall.

------------------
-Dominik Dröscher ICQ: 25318265
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes."


#20 of 25 Richard Kim

Richard Kim

    Producer

  • 4,389 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 29 2001

Posted October 14 2001 - 11:47 PM

For sweeping epic landscape type shots, 2.35:1, but for more intimate close up shots, 1.85:1 or 1.33:1 is better.(why do I feel like I'm the only who'll vote 1:33? Posted Image )