Widescreen Advocate now open (1 Viewer)

[Jan Strnad]

Josh,
Excellent site! I've linked to it from my site's Guide to Letterboxing.
You might want to list my guide as a resource for home theater fans as they go forth to convert the masses. It's very simple and covers the basics very quickly.
Congrats on a great site!
Jan
http://www.mindspring.com/~atombrain/letterbox.html

 

[Eric M Jones]

Jan,

Thanks for the link to your site. I've added you to our What is Widescreen section and listed you as a site contributor.

Buzz,

Thanks for the typo catch, it's fixed now.

-EJ

Widesceen Advocate

 

[DarrenA]

Absolutely love the site!! It is very classy, very professional and could potentially be very educational for those who don't understand the benefits of widescreen. Also, the downloadable widescreen brochures are simply the best!

With all that said, I think I only spotted one possible error. Since the film The Fifth Element was shot in Super 35, the Pan & Scan version is still slightly cropped on the edges, but there is some additional video information above and below the image that can be seen on the 4:3 version when compared to the widescreen 2.35:1 version. Therefore, you may want to look into using a different title as this comparison may not be completely accurate.

 

[John Stone]

but there is some additional video information above and below the image that can be seen on the 4:3 version when compared to the widescreen 2.35:1 version

Not for the shots that contain visual effects, of which there are many in the Fifth Element. I think the Fifth Element is a super example.

 

[AaronMK]

but there is some additional video information above and below the image that can be seen on the 4:3 version when compared to the widescreen 2.35:1 version

That is still Pan&Scan, with all the evils that it implies. I wish that less Widescreen advocacy pages pushed this to the side, but guess I understand why they do.

 

[Eric M Jones]

but there is some additional video information above and below the image that can be seen on the 4:3 version when compared to the widescreen 2.35:1 version

This is true of all films shot in Super 35 I believe. The assumption is that the film is shot for Widescreen and that additional information isn't framed for the final film. A good example of this is the famous shot of John Cleese in "A Fish Called Wanda" where in the 4x3 you see him wearing pants and in the widescreen version he looks and is suppose to be naked.

While the films are shot this way the visual effects aren't. AFAIK visual fx are created as widescreen (the size depending on the film). Why waste money on creating extra information that won't be in the final cut? I feel using fx shots from a Super 35 film is an appropriate example. I used shots from the 5th Element on the site because I thought they we beautiful examples of missing out on excellent visual effects work by wahtching P&S.

BTW - Glad you like the site and thanks for the feedback I'm glad to know what you all think.

-EJ

 

[David Lambert]

 

[DarrenA]

OK, I apparently didn't explain myself very well concerning Super 35 filming, so a picture is worth a thousand words...

My point to all of this is that you do indeed see some additional video information at the top and bottom of the full screen (Pan & Scan) transfer from The Fifth Element, though a large portion is still severely cropped on the sides. The pictures on the WA site merely show a 4:3 window taken from the middle portion of the 2.35:1 image, which is not the case with most Super 35 films. I would think a better example of P&S cropping would be a movie like The Mask of Zorro which was filmed in 35mm Panavision (Anamorphic).

 

[John Stone]

Darren,
We understand Super-35. What you are missing is that special effects shots are usually hard matted to the theatrical aspect ratio; there is no additional information above and below to expose for those shots. Look at the Fifth Element Link Removed. Every shot was grabbed directly from the DVD, which has the pan and scan and the OAR versions on the same disc.
Notice that even though The Fifth Element was shot Super-35, the special effects shots (the last 3 sets of Fifth Element pictures on my site) have over 40% of their image cropped from the sides and there is no additional picture information above and below to "open up". Like you said, a picture is worth a thousand words, so just look at the pictures on my site and I think you'll see what I mean.

 

[DarrenA]

John,

Thanks for clearing that up, that makes more sense now. So to conclude with regards to Super 35 filming, only shots that contain SFX are truly P&S with zero additional video footage above or below the image. But on some rare occasion shots without SFX the P&S version can contain additional video material above and below.

BTW, John I think your explanations and screenshots would serve a great justice if added to the Widescreen Advocacy site instead of just being a link to your site. Your explanations on "matting" and Super 35 are wonderful!

Thanks again,

 

[John Stone]

Darren,
Thanks for the kind words, I'm glad we were able to clarify things.
Before I put my screenshot comparison page up, I asked Cinematographer Link Removed to check it for clarity and errors, which he was kind enough to do. After receiving David's stamp of approval I felt pretty good about the accuracy of the information. Unfortunately he couldn't do anything to improve my sophomoric writing. :b

 

[Eric M Jones]

BTW, John I think your explanations and screenshots would serve a great justice if added to the Widescreen Advocacy site instead of just being a link to your site. Your explanations on "matting" and Super 35 are wonderful!

Well, of course all of the screenshots we use at the site and in our Why Widescreen? materials are from John's excellent site. (With his permission of course!) Thanks again John.

-EJ

 

[Mark Zimmer]

I will still insist that Tucker and Apocalypse Now are presented in incorrect AR--certainly not OAR. I don't care if the cinematographer likes them better at 2:1 (with overscan, that works out to about 16:9). They were made to be shown wider than that. Tucker in particular has some very badly cropped scenes.

I'm willing to accept Kubrick's full-frame versions of his later pictures since he shot them with an eye to eventual 4:3 presentation (the Shining chopper blades notwithstanding). But these Coppola pictures were not shot to a 2:1 ratio. That's a decision imposed onto them years later, and poorly thought out to boot.

 

[DarrenA]

2:1 (with overscan, that works out to about 16:9)

I certainly won't argue with your opinion about changing a 2.35:1 move to a 2.0:1 movie, but if you're television is displaying Apocalypse Now (2.0:1) in a 1.78:1 ratio then you need to adjust the Overscan as that equates to 12% overscan.

 

[Phong]

Nice job on the site. I'm sure it will serve its purpose well. The design is great, quite professional. I'm in the middle of (trying to) design exhibition pages for my photography and I'm finding it difficult to maintain the professional look I'm after.

Great work.

 

[Kurt N]

Nice site. Obviously a lot of time & energy went into this. I will be printing some brochures.

Very well done.

 

[Eric M Jones]

Thanks,

We have put a lot of time and effort into WA. Thanks for taking the time to check it out. All of your feedback is important to us because the DVD enthusiast who we built the site for. So please use our resources and maybe we can make some steps in educating J6P about widescreen.

-Eric Jones

 

[Eric Peterson]

Great Site!! I just hung a flier up in my cube at work. Hopefully, I'll be able to make a few converts whilst getting paid. I'm also debating trying to sprinkle a few fliers around the local Best Buy and I'm looking forward to the new fliers that you are creating.

Keep up the good work/fight!!

 

[Mark Zimmer]

if you're television is displaying Apocalypse Now (2.0:1) in a 1.78:1 ratio then you need to adjust the Overscan as that equates to 12% overscan.

Tell that to my ISF calibrator who set it that way :frowning: I'm reluctant to revise it for fear of screwing up the geometry. The Malata N996 with the ability to zoom out has helped as a workaround.

 

[Richard Kim]

Nice site, Josh! One thing though: on your non-OAR list, you mention Jade. Jade is open matte, at the behest of director William Friedken, who is not a big fan of widescreen.