Has Anyone Else Noticed The Aspect Ratios Of Many DVDs Are Not As Advertised? (1 Viewer)

[David Von Pein]

No, it's approx. 1.65...

Not on my screen -- which I guess just happens to be mis-calibrated to reveal the exact AR that I'm seeing on this DVD on my TV screen (1.80:1).

Odd coincidence.

That screenshot has a perfect "1.85" look to it to me. But, I guess it's my computer monitor, since I measure the full frame (with pillars) to = 1.91:1, and it should = 1.78.

Oh, well.....

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

But, I guess it's my computer monitor.

It has to be, an enhanced DVD frame is always *exactly* the 1.78 ratio, regardless of the actual image information inside. If you adjust your monitor's geometry to make that captured frame exactly 1.78, the picture area without pillars is approx. 1.66.

 

[David Von Pein]

Thanks for the help guys.

I still say I should be seeing some "pillars" on the side of this disc (or see thinner black bars at top/bottom). Because I'm definitely not imagining the image I'm seeing -- it IS 1.85 on my TV (and with no distortion). But it *should* be 1.66 at its WIDEST.

Still doesn't add up to me. IOW -- How can a DVD with an image no wider than 1.66 be displayed as a 1.85 AR, without distorting said image?

Seems impossible to me.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

I still say I should be seeing some "pillars" on the side of this disc (or see thinner black bars at top/bottom). Because I'm definitely not imagining the image I'm seeing -- it IS 1.85 on my TV (and with no distortion). But it *should* be 1.66 at its WIDEST. Still doesn't add up to me.

The height on your TV for an enhanced 1.66 will be exactly the same as an enhanced 1.78 transfer (a 1.85 transfer will be a touch shorter). Your TV is simply cropping off the pillars on the left and right, it's no more complicated than that. Your TV is also cropping off that same amount off the left & right with *every* other DVD.

 

[David Von Pein]

Yes...I understand that, Peter.

But, for the hundredth time now, -- The image I'm seeing displayed on this 1.66 disc is not 1.66, but 1.85.

It is what it is .... and it IS 1.85. If I were seeing a true 1.66 image, one of two things would have to occur on my screen:

Either I'd pick up some of the side pillars on screen (which I do not; it's all movie image).

Or: the top/bottom bars would be thin, like with all other 1.66 material. The measurements don't lie. My Player must be formatting 1.66 Anamorphic as 1.85 for some reason.

The question remains: How can it do this without making people look fat and distorted?

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Third possibility: The geometry of your TV is off.

Is it a curved tube or a flat face? Put on the AVIA test DVD, squeeze the image and measure the diameter of the circle in the test patterns. The diameter measured top to bottom should equal the diameter measured side to side.

It's late - I'm going to bed

 

[Dan Rudolph]

The top and bottom bars of a 1.66:1 movie will only be thinner if the movie is not enhanced for widescreen TVs. This one is. Meaning it will be windowboxed on a 4:3 TV with black space on all four sides. A 1.85:1 will be the same height, but the image will extend all the way to the sides of the screen. This portion which is black on 1.66:1 and filled in on 1.85:1 transfers could very well be hidden by your overscan, so you wouldn't see any difference.

Also, it could be the geometry of your TV is off. That's only a 10% difference, so it might not be noticeable when watching. Or you could just be measuring wrong. Do you have a curved screen? That would make it much harder to do correctly.

 

[David Von Pein]

The top and bottom bars of a 1.66:1 movie will only be thinner if the movie is not enhanced for widescreen TVs. This one is. Meaning it will be windowboxed on a 4:3 TV with black space on all four sides.

Ah, finally!
A post in this thread I can relate to!
Although to prove my point as being "I'm NOT really a looney-toon!"

OK...I should definitely see the black bars on even a 4x3 TV, right? Has to be.

But this is the rub....I don't see any pillar-bars....the movie image stretches all the way to the screen edges, L & R.

And there's no detectable distortion, pulling the image artificially to the edges.

So my other point still is in question then: Being -- If the DVD is no WIDER than 1.66, how can I possibly be seeing a wider 1.85 image shape without distortion existing?

Can some others with 4x3 TVs check this please. Before the men in the white coats from HTF come & get me for being a lunatic??!!

I do not have a curved screen, btw. It's flat. And I've measured 6 times.

Thanks.

 

[David Von Pein]

Also, it could be the geometry of your TV is off.

Possibly.
However, this cock-eyed geometry would also have to apply to EVERY DVD I play. Meaning it should skew the impression of every DVD's AR.

But, to use an earlier example, R. Window is EXACTLY the same dimension on my screen as Saturday Night Fever (1.80:1 visible image on screen).

And there's no debate as to SNF's AR is there? It IS 1.85 without argument I believe.

But if my "geo" is off, why isn't SNF some oddball, wider-than-it-should-be AR too? But it isn't.

Back to square one.....

Obviously, this discussion is silly to a degree...but it just kinda bugs me about WHY I'm seeing more width to Rear Window than actually is supposed to exist on the DVD.

 

[David Von Pein]

Update (after doing "Letterbox" vs. "Anamorphic" test) -- The anamorphic image of Rear Window has been cropped (over-matted at top & a little @ bottom).

Because MORE image at the top & bottom of the screen can definitely be seen on my copy when switching to non-anam. "letterbox" mode.

Or is this just the result of the player cropping pixels in 16:9 mode? (But wouldn't the Player *also* pixel-crop in letterbox mode too?)

The "letterbox" image, btw, is a perfect 1.66:1 on my screen; but 1.85 (because of top cropping) while compression is on.

If someone can provide a lbx. vs. anam. screenshot comparison, it might prove useful.

Well, at least the "full" & proper 1.66 image can be seen by using lbx. mode. Not quite as pristine; but not too bad.

 

[Dan Rudolph]

What are you changing modes on? The DVD player or the TV? I'm not sure what you're doing.

Anyway, if the sides of the picture are hidden by overscan, 1.85 and 1.66 movies will apear exactly the same. See the Images below:




The red area represents overscan. Notice how the only difference between the image area is the black at the edges of the frame, which is in the red overscanned area.

Thanks to DVD Beaver, who I stole the Ghost in the Shell shot from.

 

[David Von Pein]

What are you changing modes on? The DVD player or the TV? I'm not sure what you're doing.

Both.
The TV mode needs to go from "Compression" to "Normal" when the DVD player is set to "4x3 Lbx.", of course.

And with this Lbx. combination in place, Rear Window shows up perfectly as 1.66, with MORE top & bottom image than the anam. version on the disc.

Indicating either ....

1.) Pixel cropping by the player for the anam.

2.) The image has, in fact, been cropped/over-matted for the Anam. version.

 

[Dan Rudolph]

The first sounds more likely.

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

David:
Since you've now seen that your television is cropping the top & bottom of the image when it's in squeeze mode (proving that the DVD is, in fact, correct at 1.66), here is the answer for you.

My first post (#71) made mention of a hardware issue, I found the reference for you and maybe you'll be able to adjust your set for it. This posting references a Sony Wega set and the "blanking shutters" are part of the service menu adjustments. I'll quote the relevant part first and then provide the link:

I had already tried manipulating the image in various ways to reveal the additional {top & bottom} picture information, but with little success. How does one reduce the vertical overscan without distorting the image? Well, I knew that shrinking the image via the vertical horizontal sizing or position settings wouldn't work. Instead, what suddenly popped into my mind thanks to Bill's comment was "blanking shutters" — and I couldn't believe that I didn't think of them earlier. "Blanking Shutters" work like rectangular black masks that are positioned over your screen to 'contain' the image (a very simplified explanation, but it gets the point across). Theoretically, moving the Top and Bottom Blanking Shutters should "open up the image," allowing me to view the entire anamorphic signal being sent to the set without any cropping. So I went back into the VVEGA's Service Mode, found the Blanking Shutter options, and gave it a shot — and it worked perfectly! My 1.66:1 and 1.78:1 titles are no longer cropped when viewed in anamorphic mode. Heads are no longer missing at the top of the frame when watching "Horror of Dracula" (or other titles), and Christopher Lee's chin is back as well (see my earlier picture). Woohoo! (Just as an FYI, I did this in 960I mode, which is how the VVEGA does its 16:9 anamorphic compression. The shutter values are different depending upon the mode — 480I, 960I, etc. — but thankfully the VVEGA allows you to set these values independently of one another based on the mode.)

Link to post (read the whole thread, because in an earlier post he describes exactly your situation: more picture top & bottom when using "letterbox" mode vs. "squeeze" mode):

HTF link

 

[Chad R]

My DVD player can zoom the picture out, as well as in, which essentially windowboxes the entire picture. I measrued Jaws 2 and I got 24.5" wide and 10" tall. That's actually 2.45:1 (and I'm sure there's some variable in there with distortion from the TV and such, but I think it comes out to be about 2.40:1 which is the panavision aspect ratio.

 

[David Von Pein]

Peter.........

Thanks very much. I appreciate it.



Incredibly, I now fully understand what is happening here, with regard to 1.66 Anamorphic material. (You see, it takes a wee longer to sink into the heads of us REALLY, REALLY old folk! LOL! )

Thanks to all who tried to hammer home what now seems obvious to me (upon reading up still more on it).

So now I don't have to come back into this thread and gripe about this problem again with regard to The West Wing Season 2 (which is also a 1.66:1 Anamorphic release).

Of course, another option with a 1.66 Enhanced DVD is to simply watch it the "old-fashioned" (unenhanced) way [so to speak] -- via regular 4x3 Letterbox mode. This will show the full top/bottom of the image, and it's perfectly formatted @ 1.66:1 too.

Now, I realize that watching it in "Lbx." mode with no compression results in lesser quality --- but can you tell me exactly how much PQ I'm really denying myself with re. to 1.66 material when I choose to watch via "4x3 Letterbox"?

Obviously, it's not as great a PQ differential as a wider (1.85 / 2.35) DVD would entail, because the bars needed for 1.66 don't require nearly as much of the image scan lines to be created. Correct?

Upon doing a quick PQ test with the West Wing 2nd Season DVD that I just received today -- It appears to me that the "4x3 Letterbox" mode is giving a pretty nice-looking & clear picture -- very nearly the quality of the Anamorphic image. (Although the colors DO look more vibrant when Anamorphic mode is chosen.)

Thank You, one & all.

 

[ToddJ]

i don't know if anyone mentioned this or not, but "Dazed and Confused" is 16x9, but they just cropped the full screen version it appears. One of the jokes (a guy wearing goggles on top of his head right by a sign that says wear goggles) is cut out of the "letterbox" version....

 

[Patrick McCart]

i don't know if anyone mentioned this or not, but "Dazed and Confused" is 16x9, but they just cropped the full screen version it appears. One of the jokes (a guy wearing goggles on top of his head right by a sign that says wear goggles) is cut out of the "letterbox" version....

It's a normal "flat" film for which a full-frame image is actually on the film. For the 1.33:1 TV version, the entire frame is exposed. For the correct 1.85:1 version in theaters and on DVD, the image is matted on the top and bottom.

This is normal. Less is more.

 

[ToddJ]

Normally that is what I would assume too....but that joke then wouldn't work in the theaters.....it is sort of the reverse of the bike chain in Pee Wee's Big Adventure.....