The Dark Knight Rises - Blu-Ray Aspect Ratio - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 05:58 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 13
First I want to point out that Rises ha been shot in multiple formats
Here is taken from IMDb:

Cinematographic process

IMAX (some scenes) (1.33:1)
Panavision Super 70 (some scenes) (2.20:1)
Panavision (anamorphic) (current anamorphic format, which is 2.39:1 and NOT 2.35 or 2.40:1)
VistaVision (some scenes) (which is 35mm horizontal a la IMAX and varies from 1.66 to 2.00:1)

Learn one thing: the aspect ratio is NOT an indication of how much wider a movie is than an old TV, but the ratio between width and height in the original frameshot.
For instance, a 2.39:1 from a Super 35 is shorter than a 1.85:1 from that same Super 35, while a 2.39:1 from an anamorphic 35mm is both higher and wider than 1.85:1 and finally IMAX, while being "just" 1.33:1 is the biggest of them all.

Here's an IMAX frame:

luca_frontino is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 06:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Morpheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montreal by day, Paris by night...
Posts: 6,573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked: 305
It wouldn't be much spectacular to have a 16x9 screen going to 1.43, it would even be silly. As they did for TDK, I'm sure WB will go for a 1.78/2.39 shifting AR this time again. This is the closest solution to the idea of the image getting "bigger" for certain scenes, and the most fitting for a home-viewing (and non CIH of course) situation.
Morpheo is online now  
post #3 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 07:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dcowboy7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pequannock, NJ
Posts: 5,472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked: 96
I dont want the ratios switching back & forth like TDK its so annoying....give me the most used ratio in the movie & just stick with that.

Like the Oprah joke:
"Shes fat shes thin, shes fat shes thin....pick a body size & go with it."

dcowboy7 is online now  
post #4 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 07:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jive Turkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: good old USA
Posts: 1,469
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 16
The switch between aspect ratios is a pain in the butt when using a masking system. In particular because mine is not automated.

See ya. Dave

"High Fidelity audio has been like a dog chasing his tail. High Fidelity in my marriage has been much more rewarding cause she knows where I sleep."
Jive Turkey is offline  
post #5 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 10:17 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 13
The problem I personally see is that many hypocrites who wanted OARs in their home video releases, now whine because their masked systems is not comfortable to adapt to movies with changing aspect ratios or because they just want to see movies like they were watching through Robocop's helmet and they don't care if the IMAX original frame is cropped.
Wasn't the purpose of fighting for OAR to not see anymore cropping of frames?
luca_frontino is offline  
post #6 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 10:21 AM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
As long as it is not an inconsistent DMR EE baked mess, like the last one was on disc!
At the end of the day Nolan will pick and that will be that, also 4 ratios on a disc?
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #7 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 10:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by luca_frontino View Post

The problem I personally see is that many hypocrites who wanted OARs in their home video releases, now whine because their masked systems is not comfortable to adapt to movies with changing aspect ratios or because they just want to see movies like they were watching through Robocop's helmet and they don't care if the IMAX original frame is cropped.
Wasn't the purpose of fighting for OAR to not see anymore cropping of frames?
No. The purpose of OAR is to see movies in OAR. TDKR and TDK have constant aspect ratio everywhere except IMAX. While the IMAX stuff looks impressive I think the aspect ratio switching is an annoying distraction and it'd be nice to have a version without it. Really I think Nolan should've shot the non-imax stuff in a squarish format, like Vistavision or full aperture Super35, and spared everyone this goofiness.
Putting both on one disc could be easily done done using seamless branching but that's too much work for the WB folks.
42041 is offline  
post #8 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 10:43 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

TDKR and TDK have constant aspect ratio everywhere except IMAX.
If you're talking about the theatrical showing of TDKR, yes. But if you read my post regarding TDKR cinematography, then no, there are at least 4 different aspect ratios.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Putting both on one disc could be easily done using seamless branching but that's too much work for the WB folks.
I'm open for that. Actually they could put 2 discs in the same package and stamping a big IMAX logo in the open matte version.
luca_frontino is offline  
post #9 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 10:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by luca_frontino View Post

If you're talking about the theatrical showing of TDKR, yes. But if you read my post regarding TDKR cinematography, then no, there are at least 4 different aspect ratios.
No, there are two. Whatever intermediate formats were used, the final masters do not reflect their native AR and are not meant to.
42041 is offline  
post #10 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 10:50 AM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by luca_frontino View Post

If you're talking about the theatrical showing of TDKR, yes. But if you read my post regarding TDKR cinematography, then no, there are at least 4 different aspect ratios.
I'm open for that. Actually they could put 2 discs in the same package and stamping a big IMAX logo in the open matte version.

But only 2 AR's in IMAX showings and one for the digital showings, it was matted for and filmed 2.39:1 safe.
Are you saying since all super 35 films are cropped that you want the missing picture info?
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #11 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 11:01 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Well, if you have valid information about how original masters are done, then I won't argue against it. But I'd still prefer if the masters had the full frames.
luca_frontino is offline  
post #12 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 11:11 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

Are you saying since all super 35 films are cropped that you want the missing picture info?
If the full frame is free from any obstructions from the stage, then yes. Like The Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions: I'd like to see them in full frame along with the scope CGI shots.
luca_frontino is offline  
post #13 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 11:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KMFDMvsEnya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 1,199
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 45
There are only two aspect ratios shown in IMAX, which makes the dubious pandora box speculation of an "All Ratios Presented Edition" moot.

Unlike TDK all the 35mm footage did not appear sharpened so the BR should not look as bad as the TDK does due to the DMR process.

The folks who have constant height setups are not hypocrites for wanting a 2.35:1 version of the film on disc, it is a legitimate concern although limited to a subset of the HT community. The film was shot with that ratio composition in mind for the majority showings; that does not mean the best composition will always be found in the center of the IMAX frame which is a problem for the CH folks.

Best Regards
KvE

Politics is like a corral, no matter where you are you'll always be shovelling it.

KMFDMvsEnya is online now  
post #14 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 11:23 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya View Post

There are only two aspect ratios shown in IMAX.
Where did I say the opposite? I even put an option in the poll for those who wants the IMAX THEATRICAL presentation with 2 aspect ratios. But the fact that the original material has 4 aspect ratios cannot be denied.
luca_frontino is offline  
post #15 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 11:28 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMFDMvsEnya View Post

that does not mean the best composition will always be found in the center of the IMAX frame which is a problem for the CH folks.
Which was the same problem with old Pan & Scan, cropping the 2.39:1 to 1.33:1 and see the frame shifting horizontally to match the scene composition. Good crap! And the CIH folks want that on their Blu-Rays?
luca_frontino is offline  
post #16 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 11:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KMFDMvsEnya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 1,199
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 45
There is a difference, most films are composed for a particular ratio; whereas TDK and TDKR were both shot with a 2.35/39:1 crop for general theatrical exhibition in mind.

Providing a scope ratio is appropriate though limited in its appeal, because the filmmaker intended there to be a scope version to be made. Since an IMAX frame has more height latitude the optimal pertinent visual information to be extracted for the 2.39:1 ratio may not necessarily lie in middle of the frame.

There in is the problem for CH setups, they can not simply crop or mask out the IMAX scenes because they will miss the optimal framing for that ratio.

Though what you are deriding by comparing it to P&S of old is not wholly accurate or relevant to this particular release due the fact the director kept that ratio in mind.

Now the opposite happened with MI4, the IMAX scenes were left cropped for scope on the BR. Personally I would have preferred a changing ratio but the director decided not to do that.

Best Regards
KvE

Politics is like a corral, no matter where you are you'll always be shovelling it.

KMFDMvsEnya is online now  
post #17 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 11:43 AM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by luca_frontino View Post

Where did I say the opposite? I even put an option in the poll for those who wants the IMAX THEATRICAL presentation with 2 aspect ratios. But the fact that the original material has 4 aspect ratios cannot be denied.

The shape of the stock and the aspect ratio are far from the same thing
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #18 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 12:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by luca_frontino View Post

Well, if you have valid information about how original masters are done, then I won't argue against it. But I'd still prefer if the masters had the full frames.
Well, if it makes you feel any better, Vistavision was used for a handful of aerial shots in the intro and it has almost the same AR as IMAX, and 70mm/5perf isn't mentioned at all in the ASC writeup on the film so IMDB may just have some bogus info up there.
42041 is offline  
post #19 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 12:20 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

70mm/5perf isn't mentioned at all in the ASC writeup on the film so IMDB may just have some bogus info up there.
What's ASC?
luca_frontino is offline  
post #20 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 12:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by luca_frontino View Post

What's ASC?
The American Society of Cinematographers publishes a journal where the filmmakers discuss how films are shot. TDKR has a long article in the August issue.
42041 is offline  
post #21 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 12:40 PM
sb1
AVS Special Member
 
sb1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 77 Post(s)
Liked: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jive Turkey View Post

The switch between aspect ratios is a pain in the butt when using a masking system. In particular because mine is not automated.
Word.

Stephen.

Chances are very good that I was drinking when I posted the above.

sb1 is online now  
post #22 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 12:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Geoff D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Swanage, Engerland
Posts: 2,446
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 157 Post(s)
Liked: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by dvdmike007 View Post

As long as it is not an inconsistent DMR EE baked mess, like the last one was on disc!
At the end of the day Nolan will pick and that will be that, also 4 ratios on a disc?

Heh. The little bit of footage from TDK used at the beginning of TDKR had thick edge halos when I saw the new flick at the BFI IMAX (on 15/70). If the filmmakers can't even source a forcefield-free version, then I think we've just got to accept how the TDK Blu-ray looks and move on. The anamorphic stuff in TDKR had still clearly been sharpened, but it's nowhere near as aggressive as it was on TDK.

As for the TDKR Blu-ray, an alternating 1.78/2.35 version will do me just fine. Talk of a multi-multi aspect edition is nonsense. Plenty of special effects scenes have been shot using processes with different aspect ratios to the main feature, that doesn't mean that I want to see some bastardised version with the ratio hopping about like a frog on a hotplate for the sake of it. What matters is the final intent; we're seeing this alternating IMAX version because Mr Nolan wants us to, and asking for anything more is just onanistic wish fulfilment.
Geoff D is online now  
post #23 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 01:08 PM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
That is D M R and nothing more if Warner uses two sources there is no issue
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #24 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 01:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post

Heh. The little bit of footage from TDK used at the beginning of TDKR had thick edge halos when I saw the new flick at the BFI IMAX (on 15/70). If the filmmakers can't even source a forcefield-free version, then I think we've just got to accept how the TDK Blu-ray looks and move on. The anamorphic stuff in TDKR had still clearly been sharpened, but it's nowhere near as aggressive as it was on TDK.
Wonder how it looked in DCP projection? Inception looked completely silky and analog, though the Blu-ray has a small bit of visible sharpening in comparison.

Either way, since they wouldn't have to color grade everything due to Nolan's analog fetish it'd be pretty simple to just re-scan the IP.
42041 is offline  
post #25 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 01:25 PM
Member
 
Spiritual_Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 92
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

Nolan's analog fetish
He should be praised for it.
Spiritual_Chaos is offline  
post #26 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 01:29 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42041 View Post

The American Society of Cinematographers publishes a journal where the filmmakers discuss how films are shot. TDKR has a long article in the August issue.
Ok, thanks. I just read the article and I don't think they're dismissing at all IMDb information regarding the use of Panavision Super 70. And for being a technical magazine like that, calling the scope format 2.40:1 is... odd.
luca_frontino is offline  
post #27 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 01:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiritual_Chaos View Post

He should be praised for it.
I think it's an increasingly unreasonable and counterproductive position to take these days.
Okay, the analog IMAX stuff looks lovely, if you're near a theater than can show 70mm/15perf. Almost everyone else saw a DCP, which is of slightly lower quality than usual due to being struck from an IP (which certainly didn't do the IMAX blowups any favors either). Can you even see TDKR in 35mm in America anymore? The only theaters in my vicinity that still run 35mm are arthouse joints that didn't show it.
42041 is offline  
post #28 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 01:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 3,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by luca_frontino View Post

Ok, thanks. I just read the article and I don't think they're dismissing at all IMDb information regarding the use of Panavision Super 70. And for being a technical magazine like that, calling the scope format 2.40:1 is... odd.
Why is it odd? Whether it's 2.35, 2.39 or 2.4 is useless trivia to everyone except whoever makes the cameras and projector plates. The difference is completely negligible.
42041 is offline  
post #29 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 02:19 PM
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
So people in2012 would rather see a film like t2 in 4:3? Huh
Again, format AR is not intended AR!!!!!! Many great directors agree...
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #30 of 203 Old 08-18-2012, 02:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cinema13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff D View Post


As for the TDKR Blu-ray, an alternating 1.78/2.35 version will do me just fine. .

Agreed. I did not mind it on TDK at all and hope that the same is done with the DKR disc

cinema13 is online now  
Reply Blu-ray Software

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off