Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

What aspect ratio will Avatar be when released on Blu-Ray 3D?


This topic has been archived.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

#1 of 119 OFFLINE   RolandL

RolandL

    Screenwriter



  • 2,398 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 11 2001
  • LocationCromwell, CT

Posted January 19 2010 - 01:34 AM

I have seen Avatar twice. The first time it was at a regular 3-D theatre and I think it looked like 2.35:1. Yesterday, I saw it at the Imax theatre in Providence, RI and it looked like 1.85:1 or maybe less. What was very strange and I have never seen this before at an Imax theatre, was that the image was window boxed with black bars on all four sides of the screen. I have seen black bars on the top and bottom before but never on the sides. So, will it be 1.78 on Blu-ray 3D (probably) or 2.35?

Roland Lataille
Cinerama web site

 


#2 of 119 OFFLINE   Chad R

Chad R

    Screenwriter



  • 2,174 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 14 1999
  • Real Name:Chad Rouch

Posted January 19 2010 - 05:39 AM

From what I understand, the prints shipped to theaters matched the screen in the auditorium it would be playing to get the most massive picture. If the auditorium is constant width, it got a 1.85 print, if it is constant height then it got a 2.35 print.

Cameron has always been about variable aspect ratios since he knew his movies had a life beyond the theater, so I wouldn't be surprised if the Blu-ray is 1.78. But that's just my guess.


#3 of 119 OFFLINE   Stephen_J_H

Stephen_J_H

    Producer



  • 4,078 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 30 2003
  • Real Name:Stephen J. Hill
  • LocationNorth of the 49th

Posted January 19 2010 - 06:13 AM

IMDb indicates that all 3D versions are 1.78:1 and flat versions are 2.35:1. IMDb, of course, has been known to be wrong on more than one occasion. Using the term "print" is debatable in this context, as the only theatres that would get prints are IMAX theatres and those showing the film flat. 3D threatres other than IMAX would get this as digital files. My best guess is that Cameron will release the 2D version in 2.35:1 for home media and the 3D in 1.78:1 in order to fully immerse the viewer in the 3D experience as much as possible.
"My opinion is that (a) anyone who actually works in a video store and does not understand letterboxing has given up on life, and (b) any customer who prefers to have the sides of a movie hacked off should not be licensed to operate a video player."-- Roger Ebert

#4 of 119 ONLINE   Jason Charlton

Jason Charlton

    Screenwriter



  • 2,988 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2002
  • Real Name:Jason Charlton
  • LocationBaltimore, MD

Posted January 19 2010 - 06:23 AM

Can you just imagine what the release would look like had this been a Universal film?

DVD/Blu-Ray/IMAX/3-D Mega Super Combo Flipper pack!

Disc 1 - DVD with bonus features.
Disc 2 - Digital Copy/Coaster
Disc 3 - 2D Blu-Ray Flipper (side 1: 2.35 aspect ratio, side 2: 1.85 aspect ratio)
Disc 4 - 3D Blu-Ray Flipper (side 1: IMAX 1.67 aspect ratio, side 2: (Lie)MAX 1.78 aspect ratio)
Disc 5 - Extra, super, special Blu-Ray features that wouldn't fit on the other discs...

All at NO EXTRA CHARGE!!!!  /img/vbsmilies/htf/smiley_wink.gif

Are you new to the Home Theater Forum? Stop by the New Member Introductions area and introduce yourself! See you there!


#5 of 119 OFFLINE   TheBat

TheBat

    Producer



  • 3,024 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 02 1999

Posted January 19 2010 - 06:33 AM

I read the first release of avatar would not be in 3D. that the 3D release would come later. it would be the regular 2D version. I am curious if they will have a dvd/bluray pack. some people have not gotten into bluray yet. I remember the wolverine had a walmart 3 disc set that included both the bluray and dvd.

Jacob


#6 of 119 OFFLINE   Zack Gibbs

Zack Gibbs

    Screenwriter



  • 1,687 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 2005

Posted January 19 2010 - 06:35 AM

It will be interesting to see how it plays out. Will there even be separate 3D/2D releases?

A 3D release is all but guaranteed to be released full frame. If there are seperate releases I can see them making the 2D 2.35 to help distinguish it from the 3D release (since anyone can play that in 2D).

And then there's the new issue of the 3D compression, which is going to make this one of the most heavily scrutinized Blurays of all time.



"Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now... and so we'll hunt him... because he can take it... because he's not a hero... he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector... a DARK KNIGHT."

#7 of 119 OFFLINE   Steve Tannehill

Steve Tannehill

    Producer



  • 5,536 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 06 1997
  • Real Name:Steve Tannehill
  • LocationDFW

Posted January 19 2010 - 08:17 AM

When I saw Avatar in 3D, it was 2.35x1.

- Steve


#8 of 119 OFFLINE   Chad R

Chad R

    Screenwriter



  • 2,174 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 14 1999
  • Real Name:Chad Rouch

Posted January 19 2010 - 08:38 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen_J_H 

Using the term "print" is debatable in this context, as the only theatres that would get prints are IMAX theatres and those showing the film flat. 3D threatres other than IMAX would get this as digital files.
I was using "print" as a catch-all term to keep it simple.


#9 of 119 OFFLINE   john a hunter

john a hunter

    Supporting Actor



  • 647 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 11 2005

Posted January 19 2010 - 09:11 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Tannehill 

When I saw Avatar in 3D, it was 2.35x1.

- Steve
 
So it was when I saw here here in Sydney


#10 of 119 OFFLINE   AVnut

AVnut

    Auditioning



  • 2 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 01 2009

Posted January 19 2010 - 10:54 AM

I hope they release a 3D version on regular Blu-ray before they do a Blu-Ray 3D version. I'm not ready to buy the first gen Blu-Ray 3D players but I'd love to see it again in 3D.

I saw the IMAX 3D version and it was absolutely incredible.

#11 of 119 OFFLINE   AaronMK

AaronMK

    Supporting Actor



  • 768 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 30 1999
  • Real Name:Aaron Karp
  • LocationOrlando, FL

Posted January 19 2010 - 06:02 PM

3D Blu-rays are backwards compatible.  You can stick them into a legacy Blu-ray player and watch the 2D version.  (Or a 3D capable player hooked up to a 2D display.)

Quote:
And then there's the new issue of the 3D compression, which is going to make this one of the most heavily scrutinized Blurays of all time.

That 50% compression overhead is the reasons I might prefer a separate 2D release.  Maybe it will be the first to make use of the 35.4GB/layer discs. :)


#12 of 119 OFFLINE   Sam Davatchi

Sam Davatchi

    Producer



  • 3,151 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 1999

Posted January 20 2010 - 01:59 AM

I have another question. I remember clearly James Cameron saying that editing in 3D is different than editing in 2D. For 3D you have to cut scenes in a way that doesn't cause eye strain.

So, is the 3D cut of Avatar different than the 2D cut?


#13 of 119 OFFLINE   Chad R

Chad R

    Screenwriter



  • 2,174 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 14 1999
  • Real Name:Chad Rouch

Posted January 20 2010 - 05:46 AM

No, the 2D and the 3D cuts are identical. I think what you're thinking about is that with 3D directors have to be a little more cautious with how they move the camera and how quickly they cut scenes -- overdoing either could lead to motion sickness due to the added 3D effect.


#14 of 119 OFFLINE   Sam Davatchi

Sam Davatchi

    Producer



  • 3,151 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 1999

Posted January 20 2010 - 07:17 AM

Yes that's what he said. That you can do things with a 2D cut that can't do with a 3D cut. That's why I was wondering if he made 2 cuts.


#15 of 119 ONLINE   Jason Charlton

Jason Charlton

    Screenwriter



  • 2,988 posts
  • Join Date: May 16 2002
  • Real Name:Jason Charlton
  • LocationBaltimore, MD

Posted January 20 2010 - 07:28 AM

Yet another reason I have so much respect for Cameron - he takes into consideration so much more than most directors out there - especially when it comes to editing his movies.

I heard an interview with Cameron on XMRadio (Cinemagic) in which he talks about his approach to editing fast-moving, kinetic action sequences.  He realizes that as a director, seeing the sequence dozens if not hundreds of times during the editing process that he subconsiously knows how the onscreen action is going to shift from shot to shot and his eyes are able to learn where to go so as not to miss anything critical - an advantage that is lost to first-time movie viewers.

His solution: while doing the editing, he works with the clips reversed horizontally - assembling what he calls the "flop cut".  Once the scene is assembled and cut together, he flips it back the right way so that when he watches the end result, he's effectively placing himself at the level of the first-time viewer.  If he gets lost following the action, he goes back and starts over again.

The man is a machine.  No wonder it takes him so many years to complete a film.

Are you new to the Home Theater Forum? Stop by the New Member Introductions area and introduce yourself! See you there!


#16 of 119 OFFLINE   Sam Davatchi

Sam Davatchi

    Producer



  • 3,151 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 1999

Posted January 20 2010 - 09:05 AM

I remember that. Don't know where I saw it.


#17 of 119 OFFLINE   Joseph Bolus

Joseph Bolus

    Screenwriter



  • 2,193 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 1999

Posted January 20 2010 - 06:34 PM



Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronMK ">

3D Blu-rays are backwards compatible.  You can stick them into a legacy Blu-ray player and watch the 2D version.  (Or a 3D capable player hooked up to a 2D display.)

Those of us which have just acquired our Blu-ray players don't like to hear that they are now being referred to as "legacy" <br /></span>
<br />
<br />

					
					<br />
					
				</div>
				
				
								
				
					<div class=
Joseph
---------------

#18 of 119 OFFLINE   Chad R

Chad R

    Screenwriter



  • 2,174 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 14 1999
  • Real Name:Chad Rouch

Posted January 21 2010 - 05:41 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph Bolus 




Those of us which have just acquired our Blu-ray players don't like to hear that they are now being referred to as "legacy" /img/vbsmilies/htf/smiley_wink.gif

 
I know what you mean. But honestly, I have little interest in 3D at home (and really not that much in the theater). It's all fine and good, but after about 20 minutes my mind adjusted to the effect and "Avatar" didn't look any different than a 2D film. Every now and then something would "stick out" to remind me, but then my brain would compensate again a few minutes later.

I think it will end up being like Surround. All of my friends and relatives have HDTVs and BLu-rays now, but I'm the only one with a full surround system. Everyone else is fine with the TV speakers.



#19 of 119 OFFLINE   Joseph Bolus

Joseph Bolus

    Screenwriter



  • 2,193 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 1999

Posted January 22 2010 - 09:36 AM

Chad,

I don't think you can equate "surround sound" with 3D!  I agree with you that 3D is still pretty much a gimmick;  but without a good "surround sound system" (which includes a good center channel speaker and powered subwoofer) I just don't feel like I'm getting the full movie-in-the-home experience.  The surround sound, to me, is at least 50% of the enjoyment that I derive from viewing a movie at home.

BTW, I currently have my new Blu-ray player feeding a native 720p front projector system, so I'm deriving more satisfaction from the much improved audio than the video right now.  This is not to say that the video doesn't look better than upscaled DVD on my system: It does.  Heck, just being able to view my favorite movies without all that horrid edge enhancement (mostly due to the improved codecs combined with the higher bandwidth) makes the investment in Blu-ray worth my while.  But the biggest improvement right now is in the area of audio!

Getting back to the topic:  I'm probably going to want to read some reviews of Avatar on the new 3D equipment before investing any money in it.  And while I'm sure it will change, right now Avatar is probably the only movie I'd be interested in viewing in 3D at home. For example, I'm perfectly content with the 2D Blu-ray of Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs.  

Joseph
---------------

#20 of 119 OFFLINE   Nicholas Martin

Nicholas Martin

    Screenwriter



  • 2,683 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003

Posted January 22 2010 - 10:12 AM

I loves me some surround sound, particularly more "aggressive" surround mixes where there's a whole series of atmospheric elements going on in addition to the more forceful explosions and passing vehicles.

I've seen Avatar in both 1.78:1 and 2.35:1 and as good as both presentations were, I'd prefer the 1.78:1 AR just because it's a bit more immersive on a TV screen than 2.35:1 is, but because both are legitimate ARs, I'm sure I'll be happy with what we get on the eventual disc. That being said, 3D TV isn't something I'd be able to take advantage of any time soon (or later for that matter) but since the discs are supposed to be fully compatible with 2D, if the first Blu-ray release is 2.35:1 and the second 3D release is 1.78:1, I'll double dip without any hesitation or eye-rolling.