Unusual (or extreme) aspect ratios? (1 Viewer)

[Matt Pelham]

Looking through my DVD collection the other day and noticed a few movies had odd aspect ratios. For example Lawrence of Arabia (2.20:1), Bridge on the River Kwia (2.55:1) and a few others. I was wondering if anyone else knew of some movies that have unusual aspect ratios (not 1.33:1, 1.66:1, 1.78:1, 1.85:1, or 2.35:1)

 

[Tim Raffey]

Ben Hur was 2.76:1. It was filmed 2.2:1 65mm, with an anamorphic lense. I'm afraid I can't recall the name of the process right now.

Also, the battle scene in Gance's Napoleon was at least 3:1.

 

[Matt Stone]

If I recall correctly, both Boogie Nights and Fight Club are 2.4:1

 

[Malcolm R]

Austin Powers: IMM is 2:1

 

[Jack Briggs]

Geeks.

 

[Jason Whyte]

If I recall correctly, both Boogie Nights and Fight Club are 2.4:1

All "scope" projected films post-1971 are 2.40:1.
This should be required knowledge at the Home Theater Forum.

 

[Matt Stone]

I feel like such I moron. I always thought it was 2.35:1.

[wipes egg off face]

 

[Terrell]

Geeks.

I think Ben-Hur has the most extreme aspect ratio I remember seeing. Star Wars had a 2.35:1 aspect ratio, which is still pretty extreme these days.

 

[Steve Enemark]

Also, the battle scene in Gance's Napoleon was at least 3:1.

Try 4:1. That's three Academy ratio frames side-by-side!

 

[Jason Whyte]

Star Wars had a 2.35:1 aspect ratio

2.40:1.

 

[Terrell]

2.40:1

Close enough. Don't embarrass me like that.:p):b

 

[Peter Kline]

Circarama had an aspect ratio of 360 degrees. For all things wide-screen, as usual, go to
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/lobby.htm

 

[Damin J Toell]

All "scope" projected films post-1971 are 2.40:1.

SMPTE 195 specifies that the proper projection AR for scope films is actually closer to 2.39:1. the SMTPE 195 aperture is actually .825" x .690" which, when multiplied for anamorphic projection and divided as a ratio, comes out to 2.39130434.... this is usually referred to as 2.4:1, but 2.39 is a closer approximation. this was a slight change from the 1971 standard (PH22.106-1971), which had an aperture of 0.838 X 0.700 (or 2.39428571... when fixed for anamorphic projection and divided as a ratio).

DJ

 

[Chuck L]

Judy Garland's "A Star Is Born" is 2.55 I believe...

 

[Alex-C]

SMPTE 195 specifies that the proper projection AR for scope films is actually closer to 2.39:1. the SMTPE 195 aperture is actually .825" x .690" which, when multiplied for anamorphic projection and divided as a ratio, comes out to 2.39130434.... this is usually referred to as 2.4:1, but 2.39 is a closer approximation. this was a slight change from the 1971 standard (PH22.106-1971), which had an aperture of 0.838 X 0.700 (or 2.39428571... when fixed for anamorphic projection and divided as a ratio).

duuhhhhhhh !!! :b

 

[Matt Pelham]

I just looked at Spartacus and it listed an aspect ratio of 2.21:1 ????!!!

 

[Tim Raffey]

Early Cinemascope was 2.55:1.

Most of the 65mm processes were in & around the 2.20/2.21:1 area.

Try 4:1. That's three Academy ratio frames side-by-side!

Didn't know when the Academy format was adopted, but I stand corrected...or, clarified. Something like that.

 

[Cees Alons]

Boogie Nights and Fight Club are 2.4:1

Boogie Nights just needed that extra length...

Cees

 

[Peter Kline]

"Boogie Nights" roller skatng sequence was FAR superior to all the ones in "Rollerball" !

 

[Scott H]

All "scope" projected films post-1971 are 2.40:1.
This should be required knowledge at the Home Theater Forum.

Actually, it's 2.39:1.
The 1971 0.838 x 0.700 projection aperture was changed under SMPTE 195 in 1993 to 0.825 x 0.690. The AR remained 2.39:1.