What's new

Aspect Ratio Documentation (2 Viewers)

James LM

Grip
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Messages
22
Network were about to release The Sandwich Man (1966) in 1.33:1 after obtaining a master but delayed the release and requested a master in the 1.66;1 ratio after I had contacted producer peter newbrook to confiorm the original theatrical aspect ratio.
 

James LM

Grip
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Messages
22
Network were about to release The Sandwich Man (1966) in 1.33:1 after obtaining a master but delayed the release and requested a master in the 1.66;1 ratio after I had contacted producer Peter Newbrook to confirm the original theatrical aspect ratio.
 

James LM

Grip
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Messages
22
Bob Furmanek said:
Network is scheduled to release DUEL IN THE JUNGLE on DVD on August 4.

If anybody has a contact with Network, please let them know that it was composed for widescreen 1.66:1.

attachicon.gif
Duel-in-Jungle-7.28.53-Moti.gif

attachicon.gif
Duel-in-Jungle.jpg
The article of the gif doesn't provide evidence that the film was shot with an intended 1.66:1 theatical aspect ratio. It refers to an upcoming decision on whetehr to shoot the film in 3-D and also whethe to shoot the film in widescreen. We know that they did not go for 3-D but there is nothing in the artcile stating clearly that the film would either be in widescreen or 3-D, it just says that both possibilities were on the table at that time. However, the answer from Network that the film was shot in full frame does not tell you what its origional aspect ratio was and so I would like to see stronger evidence either way. i accpet that it is more likely to be in widescreen due to its producions dates.
 

EddieLarkin

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
991
Location
Yorkshire
Real Name
Nick
No, it refers to an upcoming decision to shoot in 3D OR widescreen only (the first sentence clearly implies this).

WB had already started production on films that are 100% confirmed to be widescreen. True, this wasn't a WB production per se, but when you have a statement saying the director would prefer to shoot 1.66:1 non-3D, and when you consider the changes that were going on at the time, there is no reason to believe it would have ended up being 1.37:1 non-3D.

A simple matting to 1.66:1 will bear this out.
 

Adam_S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2001
Messages
6,316
Real Name
Adam_S
Bob Furmanek said:
Boy, they certainly are a sensitive group over there.

I invited the esteemed domino harvey to a private screening of an archival 35mm dye-transfer print of SUMMERTIME - in the proper aspect ratio - and she didn't even have the courtesy to reply.

The thread was shut down by Mr. Sausage. You think that's his real name?

I have the feeling some of the members had this reaction when presented with facts about the transition to widescreen.

attachicon.gif
hands-over-ears.jpg
Did you know that 3 strip technicolor exposed THREE black and white negatives and we've been stuck with color fascists forcing us to watch these films in color?

Clearly if a director went to the effort of shooting the film three times in black and white that means they wanted it to be seen in black and white. Just because the studio said they wanted color doesn't mean the director didn't secretly make the film in black and white and clearly with my psychic mental connection to the dead director I'm the only one to really get that this was his true and pure intention and that means I'm right.
 

Cine_Capsulas

Second Unit
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
416
Real Name
Patrick
Brandon Conway said:
LOL @ the thread on the other self-serious forum being shut down because I called them on their BS. :P
I'm constantly amazed at the patience and self-assurance that Mr. Furmanek (and EddieLarkin) demonstrate at that other forum, deflecting needless attacks from rude veteran members who do not acknowledge his authority on the subject.
 

Bob Furmanek

Insider
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2001
Messages
6,708
Real Name
Bob
Oh, deep down they know that I'm correct but some people have a funny way of showing it.

By the way, I might change my ID here to "What's His Face."

It's not quite as clever as "knives" but it's got a nice ring to it.

Then, I can be as rude, arrogant and condescending as I want because nobody will know who I am!
 

Josh Steinberg

Premium
Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2003
Messages
26,274
Real Name
Josh Steinberg
Bob Furmanek said:
I invited the esteemed domino harvey to a private screening of an archival 35mm dye-transfer print of SUMMERTIME - in the proper aspect ratio - and she didn't even have the courtesy to reply.

UPDATE: Ms. Harvey just replied. She declined. :(
Who would say no to that?! I've never seen it but I'd jump at the chance, a dye-transfer of a bona fide classic doesn't seem like the thing one should turn down.
 

Mark B

Screenwriter
Joined
Sep 27, 2003
Messages
1,070
Location
Saranac Lake, NY
Real Name
Mark
Bob Furmanek said:
Oh, deep down they know that I'm correct but some people have a funny way of showing it.

By the way, I might change my ID here to "What's His Face."

It's not quite as clever as "knives" but it's got a nice ring to it.

Then, I can be as rude, arrogant and condescending as I want because nobody will know who I am!
Wow. Just read that thread. Every so often it's a bit fun and definitely entertaining to pop in on that forum and giggle. In my world, if you want to consider yourself worthy of discussing film you have to understand the basics. Aspect ratio is a key ingredient to all films, whether made by Edison in 1900 or Hollywood in 2014. If one is not willing to accept that we as individuals do not reserve the right to choose our own shape, then one should not even step in to the arena.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,788
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top