Watching movies letterbox/wrong aspect ratios. (1 Viewer)

[David_B_K]

Yep - I just want to watch in OAR - and I don't care *what* OAR is, just that I prefer that to any pan-and-scan (for any WS product) or fake WS image (from 4:3/Academy ratio product). The "Black Bars" people constantly complain about do not bother me in the least.

Ditto. I do not notice them at all.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Hehheh... just to be clear, I don't hate letterboxing (or pillarboxing... or even windowboxing at times... and even choose that on occasion for my FP setup ).

I just think it had some real drawbacks back in the old SD days, especially if you're talking VHS on a smaller CRT to boot.

But yes, definitely OAR all the way... and hate P&S. IF the PQ is bad enough (because of an ancient SD transfer... yeah, I'm spoiled nowadays), I'll just watch something else instead while I wait hopefully for an eventual good release -- there are just waaay too much good stuff to watch to waste time on very poor PQ stuff... And yes, glad to see True Lies and The Abyss finally getting good (enough) releases coming very soon...

_Man_

 

[YANG]

Hehheh... just to be clear, I don't hate letterboxing (or pillarboxing... or even windowboxing at times... and even choose that on occasion for my FP setup )... ...

with current 16:9 display, i often goes with windowboxing with movies that are either non-anamorphic ws2.35:1, and movies that are ws1.85:1 anamorphic enhanced or not, as the windowboxing HDMI input is connected to a player that outputs in 4:3 letterbox.

 

[TJPC]

What annoys me are the tv shows that will never play in the theatre presented as if they are wide screen with black bands top and bottom.

I also don't understand why subtitles are not placed in these areas. We use them all the time a) because our treadmill is noisy, and b) because we are old!

 

[Dennis Gallagher]

The Internet's truly a wonderful thing; realizing that there are individuals out there far more obsessed with this kind of thing than I am. (FWIW - I have a JVC RS1000 projector and a 120 diagonal screen typically set for a "constant area" masking somewhere around 2:1. The projector has multiple settings for different aspect ratios. I drop the image and go wide for "scope" and 70 and fill to the top masking panel for "flat" and old school 4:3 (and even narrower early sound ratio). On rare occasions, I use the entire 120 inch 16:9 diagonal for the setting I call "epic" - stuff like the IMAX films with multiple aspect ratios, e.g. "Oppenheimer" and "Top Gun: Maverick". Stretching the image is some level of heresy for me. The end of the relevance of a publication like Wide Screen Review occurred when they considered this kind of thing a viable option for display on "scope" screens - even when it was supposedly seen as not being noticeable with the tool they were using.)

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

The Internet's truly a wonderful thing; realizing that there are individuals out there far more obsessed with this kind of thing than I am. (FWIW - I have a JVC RS1000 projector and a 120 diagonal screen typically set for a "constant area" masking somewhere around 2:1. The projector has multiple settings for different aspect ratios. I drop the image and go wide for "scope" and 70 and fill to the top masking panel for "flat" and old school 4:3 (and even narrower early sound ratio). On rare occasions, I use the entire 120 inch 16:9 diagonal for the setting I call "epic" - stuff like the IMAX films with multiple aspect ratios, e.g. "Oppenheimer" and "Top Gun: Maverick". Stretching the image is some level of heresy for me. The end of the relevance of a publication like Wide Screen Review occurred when they considered this kind of thing a viable option for display on "scope" screens - even when it was supposedly seen as not being noticeable with the tool they were using.)

I basically intended to do something like that as well... but never got around to doing the actual masking... and then, got lazy of late and haven't actually changed the zoom setting on my Epson 5050 as planned for the past year or so...

I may get back on that next summer or so after I move (downstairs) to a somewhat bigger HT space (and more importantly, much better wall spaces, probably somewhat better light control and likely better situation for playing it louder) and maybe get a bigger 135" screen -- that's the very tentative plan for now...

_Man_

 

[Dennis Gallagher]

I basically intended to do something like that as well... but never got around to doing the actual masking... and then, got lazy of late and haven't actually changed the zoom setting on my Epson 5050 as planned for the past year or so...

_Man_

Understood. I used to have a somewhat wonky masking system which some guy out in California engineered in his garage - and which never quite worked properly. With the new JVC I've ended up using a fairly simple drapery motor for the top mask and I DID have manual panels for the side masks but they didn't slide well so they've been removed with the plans to replace them at some (unknown) later date.

 

[JoshZ]

What annoys me are the tv shows that will never play in the theatre presented as if they are wide screen with black bands top and bottom.

I also don't understand why subtitles are not placed in these areas. We use them all the time a) because our treadmill is noisy, and b) because we are old!

Subtitles in the letterbox bars get cut off and are not readable by those of us with projection screens wider than 16:9. Subtitles belong inside the image, not in the letterbox bar.

 

[JohnRice]

I just want to agree with the sentiment that it seems a bit odd to still be having this discussion in 2023.

 

[Lord Dalek]

I just want to agree with the sentiment that it seems a bit odd to still be having this discussion in 2023.

Welcome to the "Old Men Yell at Clouds" Forum.

 

[BobO'Link]

Subtitles in the letterbox bars get cut off and are not readable by those of us with projection screens wider than 16:9. Subtitles belong inside the image, not in the letterbox bar.

Considering that SDH is generated by the player you'd think there would be an *easy* method to adjust exactly where they appear on the screen. Yes, I realize that SDH over opening credit sequences frequently bounce all over the screen but once things "settle down" it'd be nice to be able to move them up/down to accommodate different systems and user desire. As I watch on a "TV" I'd rather them be in the "letterbox" bar as it's not uncommon that the *text* color chosen just doesn't work well (i.e. practically unreadable) if placed over the image.

 

[JohnRice]

Considering that SDH is generated by the player you'd think there would be an *easy* method to adjust exactly where they appear on the screen. Yes, I realize that SDH over opening credit sequences frequently bounce all over the screen but once things "settle down" it'd be nice to be able to move them up/down to accommodate different systems and user desire. As I watch on a "TV" I'd rather them be in the "letterbox" bar as it's not uncommon that the *text* color chosen just doesn't work well (i.e. practically unreadable) if placed over the image.

Some players have allowed that. I'm guessing Oppo, but I forget. It definitely is the exception.

 

[JoshZ]

Considering that SDH is generated by the player you'd think there would be an *easy* method to adjust exactly where they appear on the screen.

OPPO players and selected models from Panasonic and a few other brands do allow subtitle position movement, but that is unfortunately not a common feature. And when watching something on streaming, placement of subtitles is completely out of the user's control.

Yes, I realize that SDH over opening credit sequences frequently bounce all over the screen but once things "settle down" it'd be nice to be able to move them up/down to accommodate different systems and user desire. As I watch on a "TV" I'd rather them be in the "letterbox" bar as it's not uncommon that the *text* color chosen just doesn't work well (i.e. practically unreadable) if placed over the image.

Yes, text color or font blending into the picture can be problematic. However, my counter-arguments to that would be:

- When watching a movie with foreign-language dialogue in a theater, have subtitles ever been projected below the screen?
- If watching on a large screen, the need to look down below the image to read subtitles will draw your eyes away from what's happening in the movie for significant amounts of time.

Subtitles in the letterbox bar are just a reminder that you're watching a movie on a TV. It breaks the illusion of a cinematic experience, IMO.

And subtitles with one line in the image and on in the letterbox bar is the worst of all worlds, neither here nor there. It's like they can't decide whether the subtitles should be inside the movie image like theaters, or in the letterbox bars like TV, so they do both and make nobody happy.

 

[jayembee]

What annoys me are the tv shows that will never play in the theatre presented as if they are wide screen with black bands top and bottom.

They are "presented if they are wide screen" because they are widescreen. That's the framing that the producer/director/DP decided to use. Just because a TV screen is 16x9 doesn't mean that all TV productions need to be composed for that ratio.

Or am I completely misunderstanding what you're getting at?

 

[Indy Guy]

The OPPO subtitle placement feature is terrific, as it also can push forced subtitles off the screen. This works on almost all foreign discs except 4:3 aspect ratios where the entire height of the recording is used for picture.
It is sad that the TV consortium decided on 16x9 without considering the more common film ratio of 1.85. Today, most non-scope BR's and 4K's are released in 1.85 and do not completely fill the 16×9 panel.
To maximize image size, I set up an auto height detection feature for my projector processor. It detects any AR input, and fills the screen top to bottom regardless of AR width. It handles everything from 1.33 to the 2.35 limit of the screen. When a 1.85 film is detected, within seconds, the picture snaps to a slightly wider and taller image that is a noticeably larger, filling the screen top to bottom.
The setting can be frustrated by bonus features where legacy 1.37 material is mixed with scope images from the film or talking video heads in 16x9!
In those cases I disengage it...especially films with IMAX segments since IMAX is counter to the wider real estate of a scope screen. If I leave the processor active, IMAX portions have the full height size of 1.37 or 16x9 images compared the full height size of the scope elements!

 

[GeorgeHolland]

This thread takes me back. I vaguely remember getting a Sony XBR CRT TV many years ago. 32 inch I think, It was an early “High Resolution” model with flat glass on the front and a set or two of RGB inputs that allowed playback of 1080i and possibly a few other higher resolution images in a 16:9 space inside the 4:3 CRT. I can’t remember how it displayed with Laser Disc and S-Video but it was great with DVD.

I remember loving the 16:9 image quality and preferring it by a large margin over normal 4:3 content even with the bars on top and bottom of the image. The TV was a beast and took two to carry with effort. I enjoyed it for many years until eventually getting a 16:9 plasma. I gifted it to my parents who enjoyed it for the rest of their lives.

Set up your system around your viewing preferences and don't be concerned with other people's preferences. While I have no issue watching 4:3 content on a 16:9 screen and even watch 4:3 content occasionally on my 2.35:1 front projector screen, if a viewer does, and it bothers them enough, there are lots of ways to deal with it.

Get a 4:3 CRT TV. My old Sony XBR or even more current models would be essentially free if you could find one. My LG CX OLED has several modes to view 4x3 content that fills more of the 16:9 screen as does Oppo. I haven’t looked if my Panasonic UB820 has display options or not.

I thought 4:3 was behind us. There seems to be more current discussion on Variable Aspect Ratio Films (VAR, IMAX). I wouldn’t suggest using a Lumagen Radiance Pro like I have for many years with projectors, but on my 2.35:1 screen I can use auto aspect detection that instantly changes but on a 2.35:1 screen, this is the opposite of the film makers intent. The 16:9 image is projected smaller rather than larger than the 2.39.:1 content. Fortunately, a single button press on the remote can lock the image at 2.35:1 and in every case I’ve experienced, the movies are shot “scope safe” and look natural.

Choice is good and while I strongly prefer to lock the aspect ratio, others may choose to let it switch. Since I don’t have an IMAX style theater, that is not my choice. I rarely if ever watch VAR content on the 16:9 TV and don’t really know how I would prefer to watch or if I have an option.

 

[Kaskade1309]

On a modern TV, the difference between 1.78 and 1.85 is a bit more obvious though.

I can actually see that very very minute sliver of letterboxing when viewing content that doesn't 100-percent fill the 16:9 frame, but it's so subtle it doesn't bother me.

 

[Kaskade1309]

Yep - I just want to watch in OAR - and I don't care *what* OAR is, just that I prefer that to any pan-and-scan (for any WS product) or fake WS image (from 4:3/Academy ratio product). The "Black Bars" people constantly complain about do not bother me in the least.

I find it humorous that in the 4:3 TV age people complained about "them black bars on the top and bottom" of the screen with a true WS presentation and today it's people *still* complaining about that *and* have now added pillar boxing to the complaint, preferring to watch 4:3 product stretch out of proportion rather than in its proper AR.

Forgive me for having a preference; as I stated at least half a dozen times here, I don't have an issue with OAR when it comes to widescreen -- I leave everything as-is, letterbox bars and all. It's the pillarboxing I have an issue with, but it's probably just my eyes/brain. I can accept the slightly fattened look of a horizontal stretch over the somewhat "squashed" forced-inward look of the pillarboxing.

Just hang/mount something black behind your set and watch with the lights off or dimmed and you'll likely never notice "them black bars" you hate so much. And for goodness' sake... remove those stupid "back lights" from around your set!! They do *not* help the image but trick your eyes into seeing something that's not there. In the long run, they're detrimental to viewing.

Not sure if you are referring to anything I said personally, but I do not have backlights around my set. From what I understand, though, they can aid in eliminating or reducing blooming (on LCD panels with edge lighting, which mine has but which I'm also going to replace soon).

 

[Kaskade1309]

The OPPO subtitle placement feature is terrific

So was its "16:9 Wide/Auto" selection in the menu and zoom button on the remote.

My Cambridge UHD player has both, as it's a clone of the Oppo UDP-203.

My old Oppo BDP-83 had these features as well.

 

[Kaskade1309]

Hehheh... just to be clear, I don't hate letterboxing (or pillarboxing... or even windowboxing at times