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
* * * * * 9 votes

Aspect Ratio Documentation


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
5473 replies to this topic

#2801 of 5474 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,652 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 01 2013 - 01:55 PM

I love that ad, thanks Doug!

Would it be possible to get a higher-resolution copy for the widescreen article?


Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#2802 of 5474 OFFLINE   Douglas R

Douglas R

    Screenwriter



  • 1,870 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 30 2000
  • Real Name:Doug
  • LocationLondon, United Kingdom

Posted July 02 2013 - 12:37 AM

I love that ad, thanks Doug!

Would it be possible to get a higher-resolution copy for the widescreen article?

 

Sorry Bob. I don't have the original ad so can't provide anything better this time.



#2803 of 5474 OFFLINE   Keith Cobby

Keith Cobby

    Supporting Actor



  • 937 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 08 2013
  • Real Name:Keith Cobby
  • LocationKent "The Garden of England", UK

Posted July 04 2013 - 12:56 AM

Just a quick question and apologies if it has previously been covered. Written on the Wind has been shown on UK television a couple of times recently and the framing looks very tight. You can immediately notice this from the Universal globe. What should the AR be and does anyone know if a blu-ray is imminent?



#2804 of 5474 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,652 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 04 2013 - 07:55 AM

Here you are, Keith.

 

You'll note that even by September 1956, 2.55, 2.1, 1.85 and standard (1.37:1) are still suggested in the trades. They were very careful to report the correct data as supplied by the distributor.

 

8befc81331617b1addf12a5052f9f887_3772_0.jpg


Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#2805 of 5474 OFFLINE   EddieLarkin

EddieLarkin

    Supporting Actor



  • 815 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2012
  • Real Name:Nick
  • LocationYorkshire

Posted July 04 2013 - 08:27 AM

What should the AR be and does anyone know if a blu-ray is imminent?

 

Even Criterion had this down as widescreen all the way back in 2001, when they released their DVD. Albeit, it was 1.78:1 rather than the slightly wider 2:1. If a Blu-ray is coming it will most likely be from them, and since they got it right with Magnificent Obsession they'll probably take the opportunity to correct their earlier mistake.



#2806 of 5474 OFFLINE   Keith Cobby

Keith Cobby

    Supporting Actor



  • 937 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 08 2013
  • Real Name:Keith Cobby
  • LocationKent "The Garden of England", UK

Posted July 04 2013 - 08:36 AM

Gentlemen, thanks for your responses. I saw it in HD (on television) and it was like watching it for the first time. 



#2807 of 5474 OFFLINE   Mark-P

Mark-P

    Screenwriter



  • 2,366 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 26 2005
  • Real Name:Mark Probst
  • LocationCamas, WA

Posted July 04 2013 - 06:32 PM

Bob,

I don't believe the aspect ratio of The Wild One has been discussed yet, at least not in this thread. I just watched the Sony Blu-ray (imported region-free from Europe). It is 1.33:1. Now I know the film was released in December of 1953 and was most likely cropped to widescreen in many theaters. The opening titles were slightly moved up so that they weren't exactly centered, probably to accommodate a crop with minimal head-clipping. The 1.33:1 framing looked correct in that there was no space above the actors' heads to speak of. My question is, when did principal photography occur on this film?



#2808 of 5474 ONLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Moderator



  • 25,040 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted July 04 2013 - 06:34 PM

Bob,

I don't believe the aspect ratio of The Wild One has been discussed yet, at least not in this thread. I just watched the Sony Blu-ray (imported region-free from Europe). It is 1.33:1. Now I know the film was released in December of 1953 and was most likely cropped to widescreen in many theaters. The opening titles were slightly moved up so that they weren't exactly centered, probably to accommodate a crop with minimal head-clipping. The 1.33:1 framing looked correct in that there was no space above the actors' heads to speak of. My question is, when did principal photography occur on this film?

February 12th to March 17th, 1953.


Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Listing

 


#2809 of 5474 OFFLINE   Mark-P

Mark-P

    Screenwriter



  • 2,366 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 26 2005
  • Real Name:Mark Probst
  • LocationCamas, WA

Posted July 04 2013 - 07:24 PM

February 12th to March 17th, 1953.

Good. Then it is safe to say that this movie was not intended for widescreen. I suspected as much.



#2810 of 5474 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,652 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 04 2013 - 07:55 PM

Variety lists February 17th as the start date and 1.37:1 is correct.


Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#2811 of 5474 OFFLINE   John Hermes

John Hermes

    Supporting Actor



  • 785 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 01 2007
  • Real Name:John Hermes
  • LocationLa Mesa (San Diego) CA

Posted July 04 2013 - 09:41 PM

I thought this BD of The Wild One looked quite nice and was framed correctly.  One thing I noticed was in some of the night-for-night street scenes is that there is ghosting on the street lamps, as if there was a shutter problem with the film camera or it was threaded with too small a loop.


Edited by John Hermes, July 04 2013 - 09:42 PM.


#2812 of 5474 OFFLINE   EddieLarkin

EddieLarkin

    Supporting Actor



  • 815 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2012
  • Real Name:Nick
  • LocationYorkshire

Posted July 05 2013 - 07:10 AM

Bob, do you have a variety clipping for Hitchcock's The Wrong Man, from 1956 also? 1.85:1, yes?



#2813 of 5474 OFFLINE   seangood79

seangood79

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 110 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 05 2009
  • Real Name:Sean

Posted July 05 2013 - 07:58 AM

I asked this question almost a year ago.
Here's Bob's answer.
http://www.hometheat...arch/?p=3841511

#2814 of 5474 OFFLINE   seangood79

seangood79

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 110 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 05 2009
  • Real Name:Sean

Posted July 05 2013 - 08:01 AM

Bob, am I reading that clipping correctly? Toward the Unknown was CinemaScope in 1.85?

#2815 of 5474 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,652 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 05 2013 - 08:32 AM

No, it's 1.85. The wrong icon was used.


Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg


#2816 of 5474 OFFLINE   EddieLarkin

EddieLarkin

    Supporting Actor



  • 815 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2012
  • Real Name:Nick
  • LocationYorkshire

Posted July 05 2013 - 08:51 AM

I asked this question almost a year ago.
Here's Bob's answer.
http://www.hometheat...arch/?p=3841511

 

Thank you!



#2817 of 5474 OFFLINE   EddieLarkin

EddieLarkin

    Supporting Actor



  • 815 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2012
  • Real Name:Nick
  • LocationYorkshire

Posted July 06 2013 - 11:51 AM

Bob, do you have access to any documentation relating to Kubrick's films? Surprisingly, he seems to have been little discussed in this thread. I'm trying to establish definitively how each of his films should be presented.

 

Killer's Kiss, despite being released in '55, is 1.37:1. This is plainly obvious from watching the Blu-ray, where even the opening credits are not widescreen safe (this release of the film already has a ton of additional information in the frame compared to the DVD, so is likely not cropped already).

 

I think we can chalk this up to the time the film was actually made though. In the scene where a street performer steals Davey's scarf in Times Square, you can spot both How to Marry a Millionaire and Carol Reed's The Man Between on separate theater marquees. Both of these films were released in November '53, so I wouldn't be surprised if Kubrick was shooting these scenes around that time. Does anyone know when filming started? His first film, Fear and Desire was released in '53, but was shot 2 years earlier, so at this point in his career it wasn't unusual for his films to take a long time to reach screens.

 

The 3 James B. Harris produced pictures, The Killing, Paths of Glory and Lolita are presented 1.66:1 on Blu-ray. Does any of the documentation support this? The only thing I can think of that does is that Kubrick obviously had a thing for 1.66:1 at some point in his career, as his note to projectionists showing Barry Lyndon proves beyond any doubt. But did he strive for 1.66:1 in his films as early as the 50s and 60s too? I'm thinking that MGM's belief that all UA titles were 1.66:1 (see: Night of the Hunter, The Horse Soldiers) likely has a lot more to do with it.

 

Dr. Strangelove is also 1.66:1, so see above. I do seem to recall reading somewhere that Kubrick supervised an older (laserdisc?) transfer of Strangelove and advised 1.66:1. Though I don't know if this is true, or an example of him changing his mind later. Again, documentation from the trades etc would be very interesting. 

 

A Clockwork Orange is 1.66:1 too, but we are now only 4 years away from the 1.66:1 Barry Lyndon, so who knows. That said, 5 years later (and from then on), Kubrick chose 1.85:1 for The Shining. So for his final 3 films discussion is not necessary. Same goes for his two anamorphic pictures, Spartacus and 2001.


Edited by EddieLarkin, July 06 2013 - 10:11 PM.


#2818 of 5474 OFFLINE   Douglas Monce

Douglas Monce

    Producer



  • 5,514 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 16 2006

Posted July 06 2013 - 11:56 PM

2001 was not anamorphic, it was Super Panavision 70, which is 65mm film with spherial lenses.

 

Doug


"I'm in great shape, for the shape I'm in."
Bob Hope in The Ghostbreakers

#2819 of 5474 OFFLINE   EddieLarkin

EddieLarkin

    Supporting Actor



  • 815 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 2012
  • Real Name:Nick
  • LocationYorkshire

Posted July 07 2013 - 12:08 AM

Thank you for correcting me! I stupidly assumed it was Ultra Panavision.

#2820 of 5474 OFFLINE   Bob Furmanek

Bob Furmanek

    Producer



  • 3,652 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 2001

Posted July 07 2013 - 09:03 AM

I don't have information from Variety but here are the Boxoffice listings. I suspect he was composing for 1.85 and protecting for 1.66.

 

1.66 as a presentation format was pretty much finished in the U.S. by the end of 1954. Paramount had been the primary supporter of that ratio but starting on Feb.13, 1954, they were recommending 1.85 for VistaVision. The last holdouts for 1.66 were the 20th Century Fox Panoramic Productions, Republic and RKO.

 

By February 10, 1955, in an effort to "stabilize shooting methods in British studios," the Camera Technical Committee of the British Film Producers Association began recommending 1.75:1 as the optimum ratio for British productions.

 

By this point, both in the UK and U.S., 1.66 was simply used as protection for either 1.75 or 1.85 productions.

 

KubrickKillers.JPG

KubrickKilling.JPG

KubrickPaths.JPG

KubrickLolita.JPG

KubrickDr..JPG


Bob Furmanek

www.3dfilmarchive.com


Bubbleweb_edited-1_zpsc986b444.jpg





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users