Did I buy the wrong version? (1 Viewer)

[Meaux]

I just bought Red Dragon Widescreen. When I got home and read the back, it says, 2.35:1.
I have a toshiba 50H81 TV. Should I have gotten the regular version? I really don't want to see bars on the screen.

I'm new at this stuff, I just don't know. I thought if I have a 16:1 TV, I should buy a "widescreen" version. I notice it dosen't say DTS on it either. I thought all new movies would be DTS.

Thanks

 

[JoeyPalmiotti]

Late April Fool's joke?

 

[Joel C]

It's a complicated answer, actually. 16X9 TVs will still show black bars on some widescreen releases, because there are many widescreen ratios. The most common, 1.85:1, will more of less fill a 16x9 TV. But Red Dragon is 2.35:1, which means you will still have thin black bars on the top and bottom. They take up much less screen space than the bars on a 2.35:1 film on a square TV.

As for the "right" version, yes, you got the right on. You will see the film as originally intended, albeit with the bars. There is no way to NOT have bars, in fact, since buying the P&S version means you will have a square of picture in the middle and big grey bars on the sides.

The bars go away once the movie starts, just don't look at them!

 

[JoshB]

DTS does not make the movie. I can see where this debate will be going.....................

 

[Meaux]

It' no joke Joey, I am that ignorant.

I forgot to mention that I'm also using a Toshiba SD4800, If I have the right DVD, I guess it dosen't matter.

Thanks

 

[NickSo]

You got the right DVD.. the bars are supposed to be there... The movie is wider than your TV, so its gotta letterbox it... its normal..

DTS is a sound format, like dolby digital. DTS is featured on some DVD's not all.

 

[clayton b]

Yeah, on many titles there's nothing you can do to avoid the black bars. It's probably something we'll always be plagued with, considering all the different aspect ratios that film makers use.

If they bother you that much try one of the different theatre wide modes on your toshiba, you should be able to stretch it to fill the screen. However, you risk losing stuff at the top and bottom then, plus it won't look right because it's... stretched.

 

[Meaux]

OK. I thought DTS was the latest surround sound format and all the new stuff would have it.
I don't have DTS yet, I only have a McIntosh Mac-3 dolby digital 5:1 proscessor which works pretty dang good for me. I'm lookin for a Mac MSD4, but I'm not in a hurry.

Thanks

 

[Seth Paxton]

Meaux,

Take a spin through the "Basics" area of HTF (under the Home Theater section). I think you should find some pretty helpful threads on both widescreen issues and sound formats.

If you have a 16x9 ratio TV then you want ANAMORPHIC or ENHANCED FOR WIDESCREEN DVDs, though any film lover will tell you to always get the widescreen version even if it's not enhanced/anamorphic.

And remember that thousands of films were (and sometimes still are) NOT made in a wide aspect ratio. This means that when you get Casablanca or Gone with the Wind and find them not widescreen, that's actually correct. Those will have bars on the sides of your screen.


The only correct approach generally is to get the ORIGINAL ASPECT RATIO of the film (ie, no P&S or Formatted to fit your screen crap). This is true no matter what hardware you have.

There are a few rare examples in which there exist 2 different releases of a film where the first was widescreen but non-enhanced, while the 2nd is enhanced (making the 2nd the better choice for 16x9 set owners).

Finally, 16x9 sets do not mean your days of black bars are over. These sets are just a compromise between the thinner films (1.33:1 ratio), the middle ratio (1.85:1) and the wider ratio (2.35:1) - and I'll leave out some other aspects that you will come across. The idea being that you MINIMIZE the worst cases of black bars on either the top/bottom or sides.

Well, that was more than I meant to say. :b Again, take the time to swing by Basics. Lots of good FAQs over there.

 

[Malcolm R]

Then don't watch the bars, watch the movie.

Bars are your friends. Embrace them.

 

[greg_t]

I thought DTS was the latest surround sound format and all the new stuff would have it

Dolby is the standard and all dvd's must either have a dolby soundtrack or a regular stereo soundtrack. Dolby Digital is designed to downconvert to any source device. For example, Dolby digital 5.1 can be played on a 19" TV with only one speaker. The 5.1 will downmix to mono. This is because dolby is the standard and must be compatible to any speaker configuration. Also remember that just because a DVD has a dolby digital soundtrack does NOT mean that it is 5.1. Dolby digital can be 5.1, 4.0, 3.0. 2.0, or 1.0. I

DTS on the other hand is NOT a standard and is not required to be on all dvd releases. It is up to the studio producing the dvd whether or not they want to include a DTS track. Since DTS is NOT a standard, it is not required to downmix like dolby digital . And it doesn't. So if you have a TV with only stereo speakers and no DTS decoder, you will not get DTS sound. DTS is also either 5.1 or 6.1 depending on the movie, and I think there have also been a few 5.0 movies.

 

[KlausWinkler]

The 5.1 will downmix to mono. This is because dolby is the standard and must be compatible to any speaker configuration

Wouldn't that be the other way?
DD became the standard, *because* it can be downmixed?

 

[John Berggren]

I recommend watching this film, and others like it, in a dark room. The shape of your TV should dissapear, and the shape of the film should be all that remains. Of course, I like to watch all films in my pitch black theater room, so I wouldn't limit it to 2.35 films.

 

[Vince Maskeeper]

The question of "Does a 16x9 set get rid of black bars forever" is also covered in the FAQ AND PRIMER for this forum, the link is in my signature.

-Vince

 

[Bruce Hedtke]

It's probably something we'll always be plagued with

Maybe it's just me, but statements like that always put a bee under my bonnet. I don't see the black bars as a plague..or a problem for that matter. Just to reiterate what has been said already: watch the movie, not your equipment. It's a nice mantra...chant it if you feel up to it.

Bruce

 

[Aaron Reynolds]

I thought if I have a 16:1 TV

Holy crap that's a wide screen.

 

[Steve Schaffer]

The director's commentary mentions that Red Dragon was shot anamorphic. I take this to mean that a "full screen" version must be pan&scan rather than "open matte."

I am a bit confused, but I thought some widescreen films were shot 4/3 (is this what's meant by Super 35?) but have the top and bottom matted off for theatrical presentation, so the "fullscreen" version just puts the top and bottom not intended to be seen in theaters back on the screen, ruining the presentation but at least not pan&scan, whereas filming anamorphically means the picture must be panned and scanned to get a 4/3 version?

 

[John Berggren]

Steve:

A whole explanation of the different filming methods and ratios can be found in the faqs mentioned earlier in this thread. You can also find different explanations of different means of forcing an image to fit the shape of a TV.

No option of changing the original ratio simply to fit a different shape is reasonable. The only option that retains the composition is to letterbox. Enhancing it anamorphically allows for a much nicer image on a 16x9 television, or any Hidef television for that matter.

Keep in mind that in the commentary, they may have mean anamorphic filming, which is on way of saying that they shot for the 2.35 ratio without using super35. You would find that if they used super35 the image would have a lot more grain and be more washed out.

 

[Steve Schaffer]

"Keep in mind that in the commentary, they may have mean anamorphic filming, which is on way of saying that they shot for the 2.35 ratio without using super35. You would find that if they used super35 the image would have a lot more grain and be more washed out."
=====================================

John,

Thanks for the information. I'm a longtime convert to OAR, regardless of how it's accomplished, and was in no way advocating open-matte super35.

In the commentary on Red Dragon, they must have been referring to how the film was photographed rather than the dvd being anamorphic, as they were discussing the difficulty of maintaining focus when filming anamorphically vs super35, something about depth of field which my untrained brain took to mean that objects in the foreground and background could not be in focus at the same time as they are in other films not filmed anamorphically.

I noted that when focus shifted from the foreground to objects further away, the unfocussed objects seemed to stretch or shrink vertically a bit as the transition occurred.

I hope I was correct in assuming that a movie filmed anamorphically could not be butchered into a 4/3 shape without constant pan and scan?

It's sorta funny, I first got into this hobby mainly out of fascination with the electronic gadgetry involved and have since become more and more fascinated with the movies themselves and how they're made. I'm one of the few people I know who will go see a movie because of who directed it rather than who's acting in it.