Originally Posted by Kram Sacul
The ratio doesn't stay the same with a letterboxed 2.35:1 film. When you crop on all 4 sides you're basically zooming in therefor the active picture area is larger within the 16x9 frame.
Its fine Kram for all the reasons I've stated . It represents a smaller error tolerance than many of the previous stages including the initial capture.
This is 2048x1556 ( or 2048x1152 if its 3 perf) not 2048x1080.
Doing some further work tonight its definitely a crop to 1920 from 2048. The practical difference of this is that most of the cropped area is soft because its at the periphery of the frame and mostly vignetted. Its also well within the tolerance defined by the lineup slate for the feature. I'd take a bet that there was no additional horizontal info on display in the theatrical release vs the BD.
Further to my previous comments I can confirm the crop and resize is exactly the same comparing shots from scenes very far apart in the movie and originated at 3 and 4 perf : 1920 crop and a 0.984 rescale down.
I'd probably revise my description of the transfer: it is softer than the 2k , noticably so in direct comparison to the 2k but I don't see any increase in aliasing or sharpening artifacts. So in those terms its a very clean transfer its just not up to the sharpness of the 2k which I'm surprised and disappointed by
There are obvious artifacts from the component downsampling but the rescale I'm seeing itself may just be down to the filtering on the component downsample or upsampling (in the playback software) stages.
I can do my own 4:2:0 component conversion and back to RGB without displacing the pixels to this level though. I'm obviously not having to deal with any compression though.