Aspect Ratio Documentation (2 Viewers)

[Douglas R]

Smallest Show on Earth (1957) was on TCM yesterday. They were showing it as 1.33. I cropped it to 1.77 but in some scenes, peoples heads were cut off so much you couldn't see their eyes.

Filmed at Shepperton. Kine Weekly gives the AR as 1.75:1.

 

[Jimbo64]

Smallest Show on Earth (1957) was on TCM yesterday. They were showing it as 1.33. I cropped it to 1.77 but in some scenes, peoples heads were cut off so much you couldn't see their eyes.

Maybe the master was already zoomed in losing the sides

 

[Worth]

Most older TV masters weren't true open matte. They were opened up a bit at the top and bottom and cropped on the sides, and the amount of each would vary from shot to shot.

 

[Patrick McCart]

The long-OOP Anchor Bay DVD was 1.66:1 from what I remember. They also issued The Ladykillers in 1.66:1, both 16x9 enhanced.

 

[RolandL]

Four for Texas just finished on TCM in 1.33. Funny, comparing it to youtube looks like it's cropped on the sides. The end titles were 1.85.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

Hey Bob, quick question..
What is the OAR for
Odds Against Tomorrow (1959)?

Olive is releasing it. The UK bluray was 1:33. I worry that Olive will release it full frame.
Being a 1959 film, shouldn't it be widescreen? Any chance you can contact Olive to make sure they're doing it right?

 

[Brandon Conway]

Olive's press release lists Odds Against Tomorrow as 1.85.

 

[commander richardson]

I do hope The Dambusters will get released in its widescreen glory.
I have so far owned this in VHS, DVD and in two separate Blu ray editions. I will certainly add a third if it's at last seen as intended. Otherwise, I'll stamp my foot and say shucks and tarnation.

DAMBUSTERS is being released on BD 4K early JUNE 2018 in full frame AND WIDESCREEN the latter first time ever in widescreen on home video.....check out WEB SITE : CINE OUTSIDER for all the details ......

 

[AnthonyClarke]

My remark was made quite a while ago ... and in the meantime I've pre-ordered the new version.
It will be arriving while my wife and I holiday in Iran and Italy ... something to look forward to on our return!

 

[BleedOrange11]

Indicator is releasing Footsteps in the Fog (1955) and Terror of the Tongs (1961) in July. What are the correct ratios? I'm guessing 1.75:1, but maybe 1.85:1 since they're from Columbia.

 

[moviefanatic1979]

The Blu-ray.com entry says 1.66:1 for Footsteps in the Fog, which sounds right to me.

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Footsteps-in-the-Fog-Blu-ray/204674/

 

[Douglas R]

Indicator is releasing Footsteps in the Fog (1955) and Terror of the Tongs (1961) in July. What are the correct ratios? I'm guessing 1.75:1, but maybe 1.85:1 since they're from Columbia.

Bob may have information on those titles but there’s nothing from Kine Weekly. Shepperton (Footsteps in the Fog) were usually 1.75:1 around that time.

 

[Douglas R]

I recently came across an old newspaper cutting from 1959 about the presentation of THE NUN'S STORY at a cinema in Nottingham in the UK. It says "Audrey Hepburn is the star of this film which was originally made by Warner Brothers in ordinary sound. But, for the benefit of British audiences, the makers were persuaded to go over the sound again and put it into four-track".

This is news to me. I've never heard of the film being anything other than mono sound. It was given a roadshow presentation in the UK which I suppose gives credence to the idea that Warner Bros remixed the sound. I saw the film as a roadshow presentation but only at a London suburban cinema which was not equipped for stereo. Confusingly the article also refers to the installation of Todd AO equipment in the cinema. Obviously that would have been nothing to do with THE NUN'S STORY which was shown either 1.66 or 1.75:1 in 35mm in the UK.

 

[Bob Furmanek]

Indicator is releasing Footsteps in the Fog (1955) and Terror of the Tongs (1961) in July. What are the correct ratios? I'm guessing 1.75:1, but maybe 1.85:1 since they're from Columbia.

I don't have anything on FOG.

 

[Brent Reid]

I recently came across an old newspaper cutting from 1959 about the presentation of THE NUN'S STORY at a cinema in Nottingham in the UK. It says "Audrey Hepburn is the star of this film which was originally made by Warner Brothers in ordinary sound. But, for the benefit of British audiences, the makers were persuaded to go over the sound again and put it into four-track".

This is news to me. I've never heard of the film being anything other than mono sound. It was given a roadshow presentation in the UK which I suppose gives credence to the idea that Warner Bros remixed the sound. I saw the film as a roadshow presentation but only at a London suburban cinema which was not equipped for stereo. Confusingly the article also refers to the installation of Todd AO equipment in the cinema. Obviously that would have been nothing to do with THE NUN'S STORY which was shown either 1.66 or 1.75:1 in 35mm in the UK.

View attachment 46092

I can't offer any insights into The Nun's soundtrack, but I can tell you that many of my earliest and most formative cinemagoing memories were forged in this very place. It was one of only a handful of 'proper' cinemas still operating in the city centre by the time I was a kid. This was, of course, before the American-owned multiplexes swept in and changed/ruined (take your pick) everything forever. Happy, happy memories...

 

[Vic Pardo]

I have a general question for the experts contributing to this thread.

As a film student decades ago, I was taught that the Academy ratio was 1.33:1. Yet in recent years I see it listed as 1.37:1. And on Wikipedia's page for Academy Ratio it says this:

The Academy ratio of 1.375:1 (abbreviated as 1.37:1) is an aspect ratio of a frame of 35mm film when used with 4-perf pulldown. It was standardized by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences as the standard film aspect ratio in 1932, although similar-sized ratios were used as early as 1928.

So my question is: When and why did 1.33:1 become 1.37:1?

Thanks.

 

[Lord Dalek]

I have a general question for the experts contributing to this thread.

As a film student decades ago, I was taught that the Academy ratio was 1.33:1. Yet in recent years I see it listed as 1.37:1. And on Wikipedia's page for Academy Ratio it says this:


So my question is: When and why did 1.33:1 become 1.37:1?

Thanks.

When optical soundtracks printed on the left side of a 35mm frame became the academy standard (give or take about 1933). Like 2.40:1, the difference is pretty negligable and only important to spec heads who are OCD about this kind of thing. Now early on in the sound era, a few studios in America (Paramount and the earliest Disney shorts come to mind) and a lot in Europe printed the optical track on the right side of the film creating a thinner ratio of 1.19:1 which is notably different but that's a story for a different time.

 

[Vic Pardo]

When optical soundtracks printed on the left side of a 35mm frame became the academy standard (give or take about 1933). Like 2.40:1, the difference is pretty negligable and only important to spec heads who are OCD about this kind of thing. Now early on in the sound era, a few studios in America (Paramount and the earliest Disney shorts come to mind) and a lot in Europe printed the optical track on the right side of the film creating a thinner ratio of 1.19:1 which is notably different but that's a story for a different time.

I'm confused. So what was the aspect ratio after "optical soundtracks printed on the left side of a 35mm frame became the academy standard (give or take about 1933)"? Sounds to me like that would be 1.33:1 and not 1.37:1 since adding the optical soundtrack would make the frame thinner not wider. And if you're saying that 1.37:1 was adopted in 1933, why was it still referred to as 1.33:1 in the 1970s?

 

[aPhil]

I'm confused. So what was the aspect ratio after "optical soundtracks printed on the left side of a 35mm frame became the academy standard (give or take about 1933)"? Sounds to me like that would be 1.33:1 and not 1.37:1 since adding the optical soundtrack would make the frame thinner not wider. And if you're saying that 1.37:1 was adopted in 1933, why was it still referred to as 1.33:1 in the 1970s?

This from https://imagenevp.com/blog/aspect-ratio-calculator/

"The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (hence Academy Ratio) introduced a new film format which defined new frame dimensions that didn’t occupy the area in which the soundtrack was recorded. By slightly increasing the height of the black gap between frames, they changed the aspect ratio to 1.37:1 which was so close to Dickson’s original 1.33:1 ratio that cinemas did not need to modify their projection screens. Although the new frame size was physically smaller than before, improvements in film technology meant that there was no noticeable loss of quality."

As to the above, I think there was a "noticeable loss of quality" until the late 1930's with (perhaps) better film stock(s).

As to your question ". . . why was it still referred to as 1.33:1 . . ." , well, that is what I always heard it called from my time at UNC-Chapel Hill (then called the Radio-TV-Motion Picture department) -- Perhaps it was so ingrained combined with 4x3 (1.33:1) NTSC Television until the age of digital HDTV.

Also, go to this page at The American Widescreen Museum: Relative Frame Dimensions at
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/filmdims.htm

 

[Gary Couzens]

I now have Blu-ray checkdiscs of the BFI's Woodfall set - or rather the seven discs which aren't repackagings of previous releases.

As I think we've already guessed, they are all 1.66:1.