Disney's Robin Hood (1973) cropped a lot... - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 29 Old 08-07-2013, 01:47 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
nathanddrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 892
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 64
While Robin Hood is a dramatic improvement in picture quality over the DVD, and not the trainwreck of DNR that Sword in the Stone is, it appears to be greatly cropped. I had to compare it with my DVD to be sure, but this is unfortunate IMO. The 4:3 version is all I've ever known, so whether the new 1.66:1 version is correct I don't really care. Lots of missing artwork in that vertical space.



nathanddrews is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 29 Old 08-07-2013, 02:20 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 19,901
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 315
1973 was far into the widescreen era. By then, no theaters were equipped to project movies at Academy Ratio anymore (aside from some art houses that played a lot of old movies, perhaps). Although it may have been drawn with additional picture info on the top and bottom for TV safe protection, the movie was composed knowing that it would be matted to widescreen during theatrical projection.

This is really no different than an "open matte" live action movie.

The frames you posted do look a little awkward, I'll grant you that.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #3 of 29 Old 08-07-2013, 03:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Phantom Stranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Between the known and the unknown...
Posts: 3,022
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Animation is vastly different than live-action film and adherence to theatrical ratios for it is close-minded at best. Sadly, now that widescreen displays are so popular, there is intense commercial pressure for entertainment companies to crop older programs produced at squarer aspect ratios. Consumers fall into a panic and start complaining when their screen isn't filled to the brim.
Phantom Stranger is offline  
post #4 of 29 Old 08-07-2013, 03:12 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
nathanddrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 892
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

1973 was far into the widescreen era. By then, no theaters were equipped to project movies at Academy Ratio anymore (aside from some art houses that played a lot of old movies, perhaps). Although it may have been drawn with additional picture info on the top and bottom for TV safe protection, the movie was composed knowing that it would be matted to widescreen during theatrical projection.

This is really no different than an "open matte" live action movie.

The frames you posted do look a little awkward, I'll grant you that.

While I appreciate the history lesson, that's not what I was interested in. wink.gif

I did some more digging and found that the 1.33:1 Academy is the OAR of Robin Hood along with the other Disney films of the 70s. Shame.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

Sadly, now that widescreen displays are so popular, there is intense commercial pressure for entertainment companies to crop older programs produced at squarer aspect ratios.

Indeed.
nathanddrews is offline  
post #5 of 29 Old 08-07-2013, 05:48 PM
Senior Member
 
khronikos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 287
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
I honestly don't think it looks that bad in this ratio. At least they didn't ruin the damn thing for what is actually on screen.
khronikos is offline  
post #6 of 29 Old 08-07-2013, 05:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Osirus23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,219
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 180
Shame, I was gonna pick this one up. : \
Osirus23 is offline  
post #7 of 29 Old 08-07-2013, 05:53 PM
Senior Member
 
khronikos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 287
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
I don't see any reason not to. The framing was done knowing it would be in widescreen and the film itself looks excellent unlike another one.

I will be getting this at some point but I'm way too pissed about Sword in the Stone to even care about it atm.
khronikos is offline  
post #8 of 29 Old 08-07-2013, 05:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42Plasmaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,035
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by khronikos View Post

I honestly don't think it looks that bad in this ratio. At least they didn't ruin the damn thing for what is actually on screen.
Well, you are getting less picture though..

Disney appears to have 2 auto filters.
Crop or smooth(DNR scrub).
RH got the crop filter and was spared the DNR auto-scrub monster.

If they just cropped it, why does the lion look stretched compared to the DVD?

It seems we can no longer count on the Disney logo as a mark of quality.

2014
42Plasmaman is offline  
post #9 of 29 Old 08-07-2013, 07:48 PM
Member
 
NJPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanddrews View Post

While I appreciate the history lesson, that's not what I was interested in. wink.gif

I did some more digging and found that the 1.33:1 Academy is the OAR of Robin Hood along with the other Disney films of the 70s. Shame.
Indeed.

Not 1.37 Academy theatrically, they would have been 1.85 as I think Disney stopped using 1.75 by the late 60s.

EDIT: Disney's recommended ratio for this was 1.75. See post below for documentation.

NJPete is offline  
post #10 of 29 Old 08-07-2013, 08:16 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Matt_Stevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,818
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 48
This film was projected at 1.85:1.

Vimeo is the home of the Super8 Shooter...
http://vimeo.com/super8shooter
Matt_Stevens is offline  
post #11 of 29 Old 08-08-2013, 03:31 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
nathanddrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 892
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post

This film was projected at 1.85:1.

No, I get it, I just don't like it. Disney believed that the correct AR was the Academy AR with all their previous home releases (and it was shot that way), so to change it now feels like a betrayal. Remember, it's all I've ever known, so viewing it now definitely feels restrictive. The excellent PQ is more than welcome... I just wanted both.

Somehow I'll get through this... LOL
nathanddrews is offline  
post #12 of 29 Old 08-08-2013, 09:40 AM
Advanced Member
 
Otter0911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 523
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The first DVD was 1.33 but the 2nd DVD release Robin Hood most wanted edition was 1.85
Otter0911 is offline  
post #13 of 29 Old 08-08-2013, 10:03 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
nathanddrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 892
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 64
VHS and LD and DVD were all open, full frame. Theatrically, it very likely was shown in its original format in some theaters. Not every theater was widescreen presentation only. Disney is merely succumbing to market pressure for 16:9 content with MWE and this Blu-ray. So it could also be partly laziness in using a common master... but not so lazy as to ruin it with filtering ala SitS.

So yeah, if you don't mind the crop, buy with confidence. cool.gif
nathanddrews is offline  
post #14 of 29 Old 08-08-2013, 10:16 AM
Member
 
NJPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
The only theatres running films in Academy ratio in 1973 would have been revival and art houses, not first-run locations. Disney's Robin Hood played its premiere engagement at Radio City Music Hall in widescreen.

NJPete is offline  
post #15 of 29 Old 08-08-2013, 11:06 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 nathanddrews View Post

Disney believed that the correct AR was the Academy AR with all their previous home releases (and it was shot that way)
If SDTVs were not 4:3 then Disney would believe the correct AR for that venue would be something else. I don't see anything wrong with the movie being released as it was originally shown...(and since I believe the majority of films shot on spherical 35mm use the full 4:3 silent gate in the camera regardless of the intended AR being "shot that way" doesn't really mean much). Since there's extra artwork there it'd definitely be nice to have an option but barring that I'd rather have OAR.
42041 is offline  
post #16 of 29 Old 08-08-2013, 04:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 24
IMB lists the oar as 1.78:1 and others as 1.75:1, the difference is there would be thin blacks bars on the sides rather then thin blacks bars on the top and bottom with a 1.85:1 BD.
Comparing it to the 1.75:1 "Most Wanted" Edition would be more ideal.
wuther is offline  
post #17 of 29 Old 08-08-2013, 06:42 PM
Senior Member
 
khronikos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 287
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Well this one at least looks WAY better than Sword cropped. That one has honestly lost way too much picture for my liking. I am not sure about this one yet but it certainly isn't as bad and it seems they actually did 'make' this one to fit for widescreen from what I see. Sword in the Stone is a disaster on all levels.
khronikos is offline  
post #18 of 29 Old 08-08-2013, 07:39 PM
Member
 
NJPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanddrews View Post

VHS and LD and DVD were all open, full frame. Theatrically, it very likely was shown in its original format in some theaters. Not every theater was widescreen presentation only. Disney is merely succumbing to market pressure for 16:9 content with MWE and this Blu-ray. So it could also be partly laziness in using a common master... but not so lazy as to ruin it with filtering ala SitS.

So yeah, if you don't mind the crop, buy with confidence. cool.gif

1.75 is Disney's recommended aspect ratio. See photo of the original press book, bottom left side.


NJPete is offline  
post #19 of 29 Old 08-09-2013, 08:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Matt_Stevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 13,818
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 48
What's unfortunate is that 1.66:1 is rarely used and only has very small black bars on the side as most sets overscan too much. Numerous Japanese animated films were released 12.66:1 in theaters but have been horrifically cropped for Blu-Ray (Galaxy Express 999 and its sequels for example).

1.75:1 would have absolutely no visible bars at all on 90% of the sets out there.

I'm all for absolutely sticking to the intended aspect ratio and the press book is pretty convincing evidence that 1.75:1 is correct.

Vimeo is the home of the Super8 Shooter...
http://vimeo.com/super8shooter
Matt_Stevens is offline  
post #20 of 29 Old 08-09-2013, 12:24 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 19,901
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom Stranger View Post

Animation is vastly different than live-action film and adherence to theatrical ratios for it is close-minded at best.

This was a theatrical movie intended for theatrical release in movie theaters. The theatrical ratio is the "OAR," regardless of how much extra may have been drawn on the animation cels for later TV safe framing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanddrews View Post

Disney believed that the correct AR was the Academy AR with all their previous home releases (and it was shot that way), so to change it now feels like a betrayal.

Just because previous home video releases were altered for TV doesn't make that the "correct" aspect ratio.

Take a look at this first comparison.



While the widescreen version looks a smidge too tight, especially on the top of the frame, the open matte version has a really awkward amount of dead space at the bottom.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #21 of 29 Old 08-09-2013, 04:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post

What's unfortunate is that 1.66:1 is rarely used and only has very small black bars on the side as most sets overscan too much. Numerous Japanese animated films were released 12.66:1 in theaters but have been horrifically cropped for Blu-Ray (Galaxy Express 999 and its sequels for example).

1.75:1 would have absolutely no visible bars at all on 90% of the sets out there.

I'm all for absolutely sticking to the intended aspect ratio and the press book is pretty convincing evidence that 1.75:1 is correct.

Ok getting off-topic a bit but I would be very surprised if anybody who reads this site has their TV set to overscan since any modern one should already have the option to turn that SD era feature off.

As for the Japanese anime BDs since reviews with image caps are very rare I avoid buying them. I would love to get the Yamato TV BD but at $400US I am not going to buy it unless I get a lot caps showing it has pq to match the price tag.
wuther is offline  
post #22 of 29 Old 08-10-2013, 03:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 268 Post(s)
Liked: 272
Without seeing other full vs wide scenes for comparison, it might be that the proper widescreen cropping should have taken more of the bottom of the frame out and left the top of the frame largely intact going by what I see here. It's also possible the cells were composed for possible widescreen theatrical release on a scene by scene basis and Disney just did a sloppy center line crop.

The latter is what happened to the original widescreen DVD release of Back to the Future 2. After much gnashing of teeth, Universal finally released a fixed version. Hard to know, yet, if Disney did the same thing here.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #23 of 29 Old 08-10-2013, 08:21 PM
Member
 
NJPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

Without seeing other full vs wide scenes for comparison, it might be that the proper widescreen cropping should have taken more of the bottom of the frame out and left the top of the frame largely intact going by what I see here. It's also possible the cells were composed for possible widescreen theatrical release on a scene by scene basis and Disney just did a sloppy center line crop.

The latter is what happened to the original widescreen DVD release of Back to the Future 2. After much gnashing of teeth, Universal finally released a fixed version. Hard to know, yet, if Disney did the same thing here.

Theatrically, you run matted widescreen films in a dead center crop.

NJPete is offline  
post #24 of 29 Old 08-10-2013, 11:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
giantchicken's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The aspect ratio for "Robin Hood" to achieve that OO-DE-LOLLY GOLLY screen image is 1.75 to 1.

That was cute. I bet that press materials aren't that charming these days.

PETER JACKSON: The theatrical versions are the definitive versions.
giantchicken is offline  
post #25 of 29 Old 08-11-2013, 03:42 AM
Senior Member
 
khronikos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 287
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
People need to stop quoting that stupid book.

Robin Hood looks fine in its widescreen presentation. Not because some ridiculous press release says so. Because it is obvious watching it that the animators intended this image to be in the screen.

This doesn't apply for Sword in the Stone and The Jungle Book which have OBVIOUS AS DAY cropping issues and came out years before the practice of the animators was to animate knowing it would be mostly widescreen.

I have looked Robin Hood over quite well. It doesn't look like Jungle or Stone in any way and most shots may even look better. A lot of space was clearly just space in Robin Hood. Not so with the others.

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=204278

All it takes is one gander at Sword vs Robin Hood and you can easily see Robin Hood fairs much better in the widescreen department.
khronikos is offline  
post #26 of 29 Old 08-11-2013, 10:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 268 Post(s)
Liked: 272
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJPete View Post

Theatrically, you run matted widescreen films in a dead center crop.

I know that, but they would have to prep the framing for the widescreen release by adjusting the image off the camera negative scene by scene (as they had to do for Back to the Future 2, since it was not framed via the center line throughout). This could be done if they created a hard matte release print (black framing bars burned in), rather than a soft matte presentation.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #27 of 29 Old 08-11-2013, 01:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wuther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by khronikos View Post

People need to stop quoting that stupid book.

Robin Hood looks fine in its widescreen presentation. Not because some ridiculous press release says so. Because it is obvious watching it that the animators intended this image to be in the screen.

What in screen, you mean 1:66.1?
wuther is offline  
post #28 of 29 Old 08-20-2013, 06:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Phantom Stranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Between the known and the unknown...
Posts: 3,022
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by khronikos View Post

Robin Hood looks fine in its widescreen presentation. Not because some ridiculous press release says so. Because it is obvious watching it that the animators intended this image to be in the screen.

This doesn't apply for Sword in the Stone and The Jungle Book which have OBVIOUS AS DAY cropping issues and came out years before the practice of the animators was to animate knowing it would be mostly widescreen.

I have looked Robin Hood over quite well. It doesn't look like Jungle or Stone in any way and most shots may even look better. A lot of space was clearly just space in Robin Hood. Not so with the others.

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=204278

All it takes is one gander at Sword vs Robin Hood and you can easily see Robin Hood fairs much better in the widescreen department.
In my estimation the cropping is still overly tight on Robin Hood, though I think a casual viewer would only notice in a handful of scenes. I am not going to rail against Disney or burn my copy, it is still a magnificent presentation of their currently chosen aspect ratio for the film. I simply wish they had included the complete open-matte transfer as an option.

The transfer has been selectively filtered, as some scenes are artificially cleaner than others. I assume if one went through the film frame by frame, we would find missing lines and other minor features in the art. This BD is not a particularly faithful representation of how the film first appeared in theaters, but its overall clarity and brilliance can't be understated. The movie itself looks better than ever on Blu-ray and represents a quantum leap in picture quality over its DVD counterpart.
nathanddrews likes this.
Phantom Stranger is offline  
post #29 of 29 Old 09-23-2013, 10:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TSHA222's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: barely within my means
Posts: 1,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt_Stevens View Post

Numerous Japanese animated films were released 12.66:1 in theaters but have been horrifically cropped for Blu-Ray.

I all for 2.40:1 cih in my home theater but I'll be damned if I'm going 12.66:1 !!! wink.gif Well it was a funny typo to me biggrin.gif

Back to RH, I only remember it 4:3 on home video too, but if it was shown theatrically at 1.85, that's how I want to see it in my ht room. Just mho...
TSHA222 is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

Tags
Robin Hood 40th Anniversary Edition Blu Ray Dvd Digital Copy

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