Shrek Disc 1 *NOT* Full Frame

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Bill Catherall, Nov 3, 2001.

  1. Bill Catherall

    Bill Catherall Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 1997
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just to complicate our war against MAR'd discs, Dreamworks mislabeled the aspect ratio of disc 1. The back of the package says "1.33:1 Full Frame." The 1.33:1 is correct, but it is not a full frame transfer (aka open matte). It's clearly Pan & Scan.
    I'm glad Dreamworks gave us the OAR version, but studios should really drop that "Full Frame" name and call it like it is. Either Pan & Scan or Open Matte. I don't care if J6P doesn't know what Open Matte is. Do you think he knows what Anamorphic is? He can learn. Afterall, this "war" is all about education.
    ------------------
    Bill [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  2. frank manrique

    frank manrique Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 1999
    Messages:
    798
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bill,
    Immediately after viewing the widescreen disc of Shrek on the "big" system I checked the full frame version as well, but on another set up.
    I did not see the classic symptoms of panning or scanning on the selected chapters I chose to check, so where in the movie are signs to indicate that the P&S process is taking place?...
    -THTS
     
  3. Bill Catherall

    Bill Catherall Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 1997
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Look at the framing. There is definitely lost image on the sides. I don't have the ability to screen capture DVD. I guess I could download something, but maybe someone here is already set up for it and can do it faster.
    ------------------
    Bill [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  4. Jason Whyte

    Jason Whyte Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 1999
    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Perhaps it was reframed a'la A Bug's Life and Toy Story 2, but theatrically the film was roughly hard matted to 1.77:1 so the full frame version is definately changed from the original.
    Jason
    ------------------
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
    [email protected] 2001 Film List I Am Jack's DVD List
    ICQ: 16733922 AOL IM: JayLo Whyte
    "Clown college? You can't eat that!" Homer Simpson
    My Own Film Review Website Is Coming Soon!
     
  5. frank manrique

    frank manrique Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 1999
    Messages:
    798
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bill,
    The "loss" of image on the sides in the full frame version disc is due to it being zoomed in a bit too much, but this does not mean P&S is taking place.
    No offense is intended, but are you sure you know the difference between the two processes? How do you determine which is which? [​IMG]
    In reality the point is moot for me as I like the widescreen version better and prefer it over the FF any day (Shrek sure looks stunningly bitching being projected by the Dukane 9015 D-ILA display on my 12 foot wide "scope" screen via a top-notch HT-PC DVD player!), but let's be fair and be accurate in whatever we report in these forums...
    -THTS
     
  6. Ron Eastman

    Ron Eastman Second Unit

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    415
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Here's a comparison from 15:09 into the film.
    Full-frame:
    [​IMG]
    Widescreen:
    [​IMG]
    Not the exact same frame, mind you, but as close as I cared to try for. It appears obvious to me that this was panned with a focus towards the left side of the screen as the right is missing the most information.
    Edit - my anal retentiveness forced me to go back and capture the exact same frame.
    ------------------
    "The last thing I want to remembered as is an annoying blabbermouth." - Del Griffith
    my home theater
    my DVD collection
    [Edited last by Ron Eastman on November 03, 2001 at 01:03 PM]
     
  7. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,564
    Likes Received:
    195
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    never mind...
    [Edited last by PatrickMcCart on November 03, 2001 at 01:07 PM]
     
  8. Vince Maskeeper

    Vince Maskeeper Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 1999
    Messages:
    6,499
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wait, who said "FULL FRAME" meant open matte? I always too FULL FRAME to mean square frame- sometimes Open Matte and sometimes P&S. Since no-one know what P&S means, looks like they use Full Frame to mean anything 4:3.
    Anyone have a specific example of the definition "FULL FRAME" being open matte?
    -Vince
    ------------------
    http://www.musicianassist.com
    AIM: VinceMaskeeper
    Do you want SOUTH PARK on DVD in order, rather than themed sets? Join our overwhelming majority!!
     
  9. Sean Moon

    Sean Moon Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2001
    Messages:
    2,041
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thank you vince, you beat me to the punch. I see this thread as grabbing for straws for something to knock on this disc.
    ------------------
    [​IMG]
     
  10. MickeS

    MickeS Producer

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2000
    Messages:
    5,058
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    FWIW, I always saw "Full frame" as meaning "Open matte", until someone at a studio decided to start using "Full frame" as equivalent to "4:3", possibly in order to avoid using "Pan and Scan".
    I think the majority of people who care about aspect ratios feel like Bill (and I), that "Full frame" implies "Open matte". After all, it indicates that the viewer sees the "full frame", meaning the full celluloid frame.
    Since there ARE differences between "Open matte" and "Pan & Scan", there is no reason for studios to use the term "Full frame" if they really want to. Of course, "Full frame" sounds better than "Pan and Scan", so that's the only reason they use that term.
    /Mike
    ------------------
     
  11. Vince Maskeeper

    Vince Maskeeper Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 1999
    Messages:
    6,499
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Again- I have never seen any official definition of Full Frame, but I'd be interested to do so. I always just thought FULL FRAME was used like FULL SCREEN- to mean 4:3, regardless of process.
    If someone has a documented definition, I'd love to see it.
    -Vince
    ------------------
    http://www.musicianassist.com
    AIM: VinceMaskeeper
    Do you want SOUTH PARK on DVD in order, rather than themed sets? Join our overwhelming majority!!
     
  12. Ron Eastman

    Ron Eastman Second Unit

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    415
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't think Bill or anyone else is trying to knock this disc. Really, the question is just as Vince asked; what is the definition of Full Frame?
    Last night after I purchased the disc I was looking over the specs on the back cover and thought the same thing. The term "full-frame" is rather misleading. I have always assumed, as Mike mentioned, that this meant that the full 35 millimeter frame was used in filming. If this term refers to filling up the full television screen, well they aren't taking into account those who have 16:9 televisions. I'm also interested if anyone can provide a definition from an "official" source.
    By the way - Shrek = great disc!
    ------------------
    "The last thing I want to remembered as is an annoying blabbermouth." - Del Griffith
    my home theater
    my DVD collection
     
  13. Robert George

    Robert George Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    1,097
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Amongst many LD collectors, when letterboxing became the rule rather than the exception, we preferred the term "fullscreen" for non-letterboxed transfers. This indicates what it really is, a full TV screen, without making any specific claims about how much of the actual film frame was transferred. Personally, I still use the term "fullscreen" instead of "full frame", which I consider misleading.
     
  14. Bill Catherall

    Bill Catherall Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 1997
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hey, don't get me wrong. I LOVE the Shrek discs (both of them) and don't mind having the MAR'd version on there because they also gave us the much preferred OAR. I have absolutely nothing to complain about these discs. When Full Frame is being discussed on this forum it is often used to discuss the open matte process. In other words, open the mattes and you get the whole full frame exposed. The term "full frame" in itself implies that you are seeing the whole picture. Which is clearly not the case with the "full frame" edition of Shrek. It's the wording I'm complaining about. Not the transfer.
    I downloaded a DVD capture program and posted some examples to a webpage. http://home.attbi.com/~bcatherall/shrek.html
    [​IMG]
    Edited to fix link.
     
  15. Ron Eastman

    Ron Eastman Second Unit

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    415
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bill, your captures are very interesting, showing what is obviously cropping on the top and bottom of the screen in the widescreen version. Since this is computer animation and was only transferred to film for theatrical release, I can only think of one explanation for the cropping in the widescreen transfer since both are direct digital to digital:
    Perhaps Shrek was originally composed in 1.85:1 and the reduction was to resize the film to 1.78:1 for 16:9 televisions.
    ------------------
    "The last thing I want to remembered as is an annoying blabbermouth." - Del Griffith
    my home theater
    my DVD collection
     
  16. Bill Catherall

    Bill Catherall Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 1997
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't know what the OAR is. I'm hoping that 1.78:1 is correct. I wouldn't know where to look to find the "real" OAR. Since the added image at the bottom and top of the P&S version varies from shot to shot, I assume they were "zooming out" in an attempt to not cut too much of the sides off. You can see that the extra image is more severe when there is the potential for losing even more "important" image from the sides. It looks like they're trying to fix the framing so it doesn't look too bad.
    But again, I really don't care about how the P&S version came about. It's the misleading "Full Frame" wording that I don't like. "Full Screen" is more correct. But if you have a 16x9 TV, it's not full screen anymore. So I personally avoid that too.
    ------------------
    Bill [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [Edited last by Bill Catherall on November 03, 2001 at 05:45 PM]
     
  17. frank manrique

    frank manrique Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 1999
    Messages:
    798
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bill,
    Once again...the disc containing the BIGGER, LARGER image of Shrek IS NOT panned nor scanned. Is zoomed alright, which CROPS the sides of the image to a degree that causes the near disappearance of some laterally placed characters, but this doesn't equate to being panned and scanned.
    The two processes are not one and the same, regardless of whether one refers to that sized image as full frame, open matte, etc., excepting P&S, of course. Phew!
    Panning and scanning entails having a telecine machine doing just that with very wide aspect ratio images (anomorphic scope, etc.), which in effect alters the original directorial photographic work thus rendering a film so processed nearly unrecognizable.
    Not so with Shrek...where zooming was the only process used to derive an image with a size large enough that can satisfy even those who believe their damned widescreen videos have something missing IF the whole square TV screen isn't filled to the hilt.
    By the tenor of your posts I gather you don't really understand what the differences between P&S and the OTHER film framing processes are all about. Too bad...
    -THTS
     
  18. Bill Catherall

    Bill Catherall Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 1997
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  19. AaronMK

    AaronMK Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1999
    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Real Name:
    Aaron Karp
     
  20. Neil Joseph

    Neil Joseph Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 1998
    Messages:
    8,332
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Neil Joseph

Share This Page