Anamorphic encoded Blu-Rays on the Horizon !
1 - 20 of 130 Posts
Joined
·
79 Posts
Pray.
Joined
·
5,756 Posts
Thanks everyone, for checking in
![]()
We are making sure and steady progress with the studios and BDA. As you can imagine, getting in front of all of the right people is a time consuming task. However, I can report that one studio is moving to advanced testing of the process and we have two others lined up for presentations. Unfortunately, due to NDAs in place I can't really disclose much more.
We are making sure and steady progress with the studios and BDA. As you can imagine, getting in front of all of the right people is a time consuming task. However, I can report that one studio is moving to advanced testing of the process and we have two others lined up for presentations. Unfortunately, due to NDAs in place I can't really disclose much more.
John: That's good news, thanks. Well, it sounds like it is. Many of us here are pinned to the edge of the seat waiting on tidbits from your project. It would be outstanding to get anamorphic content on BRD. I'd take that over many other wish list items. Like 4-4-4 color.
I'd be grateful if you could keep tossing out a breadcrumb. Off-line or otherwise. It would be good to get some interest in the enthusiast community. Unless you prefer otherwise, I'll try to assist in that regard
![]()
Let us know how it goes, to the extent you can.
Cheers,
Scott
I'd be grateful if you could keep tossing out a breadcrumb. Off-line or otherwise. It would be good to get some interest in the enthusiast community. Unless you prefer otherwise, I'll try to assist in that regard
Let us know how it goes, to the extent you can.
Cheers,
Scott
Joined
·
1 Posts
This is very exciting news! I've always wondered why there wasn't a true anamorphic function on Blu ray since DVD had that function years ago. I'm stoked.
At the risk of opening a can of worms, I've been thinking now about all the possibilities that optical stretching can offer us.
What about using our anamorphic lenses in the vertical position so that they stretch 4:3 films to fill the entire 1920 raster? I did the math just now, and the optical stretch used to get 2.35 out of 16:9 (1.32x) is pretty much the same we'd need vertically to get a 4:3 image out of a 16:9 image. There's a difference, but it seems close enough.
If old 4:3 films were encoded this way, theoretically, no aspect ratio would need to lose any resolution anymore; no more letterboxes/pillar bars. You'd essentially have a 16:9 canvas of 1920x1080, and you'd either need to stretch if horizontally for scope, or vertically for classic 4:3. This is leaving out the odd balls like 1.85:1 films, 2.20:1 70mm, and the other odd ball ratios from the past. But it would cover probably 99% of the films we watch.
Thoughts? I have a feeling I missed something.
At the risk of opening a can of worms, I've been thinking now about all the possibilities that optical stretching can offer us.
What about using our anamorphic lenses in the vertical position so that they stretch 4:3 films to fill the entire 1920 raster? I did the math just now, and the optical stretch used to get 2.35 out of 16:9 (1.32x) is pretty much the same we'd need vertically to get a 4:3 image out of a 16:9 image. There's a difference, but it seems close enough.
If old 4:3 films were encoded this way, theoretically, no aspect ratio would need to lose any resolution anymore; no more letterboxes/pillar bars. You'd essentially have a 16:9 canvas of 1920x1080, and you'd either need to stretch if horizontally for scope, or vertically for classic 4:3. This is leaving out the odd balls like 1.85:1 films, 2.20:1 70mm, and the other odd ball ratios from the past. But it would cover probably 99% of the films we watch.
Thoughts? I have a feeling I missed something.
Joined
·
79 Posts
It;s not "close enough" it's exact... as long as your system has a way of expanding by one-third, instead of vertically stretching by one third. Of course a pre-expanded anamorphic version of the movie (the subject of this thread) would help. Otherwise you need to have the feature available on your projector. Not all have it.
Re. "Close enough": You're probably getting slightly confused by using "2.35:1" as your widescreen bench mark. A 16:9 screen expanded is actually 2.37:1.
How to...
1. You expand a 4:3 movie by one third (or get a pre-expanded version from Folded Space). Everyone on-screen suddenly gets short and fat (art echoing life here, I think).
2. Rotate your anamorphic lens by 90 degrees (probably not a good idea for square prism systems - and some cylindricals - that don't rotate)
3. Your image will now be in 4:3 aspect, but larger, so you have to re-align your anamorphic, zoom your projector smaller (to 3/4 height), re-offset and re-focus it too (At last! A use for those "zoom memory" functions!")
You actually end up with a slightly brighter picture.
Here's why...
The reduction in size from having to zoom smaller increases the brightness by a theoretical 16/9 (1.78 times) - the inverse of 3/4-squared.
You then lose a few percent due to the reduced aperture (increased f-number) that zooming smaller causes, plus about 38% from the anamorphic lens (33% plus a few percent for transmission loss).
Say, 50% in all of your new brightness due to the smaller image is lost.
But you have an extra 78% to play with, so nett gain is around 25% to 30% in brightness over a same sized non-anamorphic image. Anamorphic finally makes something BRIGHTER!
There's some fiddling involved, but it does work OK. However, it's NOT something you'd do routinely. Best to save up a whole bunch of 4:3 movies for a marathon to make the best of the altered settings.
It;s not "close enough" it's exact... as long as your system has a way of expanding by one-third, instead of vertically stretching by one third. Of course a pre-expanded anamorphic version of the movie (the subject of this thread) would help. Otherwise you need to have the feature available on your projector. Not all have it.
Re. "Close enough": You're probably getting slightly confused by using "2.35:1" as your widescreen bench mark. A 16:9 screen expanded is actually 2.37:1.
How to...
1. You expand a 4:3 movie by one third (or get a pre-expanded version from Folded Space). Everyone on-screen suddenly gets short and fat (art echoing life here, I think).
2. Rotate your anamorphic lens by 90 degrees (probably not a good idea for square prism systems - and some cylindricals - that don't rotate)
3. Your image will now be in 4:3 aspect, but larger, so you have to re-align your anamorphic, zoom your projector smaller (to 3/4 height), re-offset and re-focus it too (At last! A use for those "zoom memory" functions!")
You actually end up with a slightly brighter picture.
Here's why...
The reduction in size from having to zoom smaller increases the brightness by a theoretical 16/9 (1.78 times) - the inverse of 3/4-squared.
You then lose a few percent due to the reduced aperture (increased f-number) that zooming smaller causes, plus about 38% from the anamorphic lens (33% plus a few percent for transmission loss).
Say, 50% in all of your new brightness due to the smaller image is lost.
But you have an extra 78% to play with, so nett gain is around 25% to 30% in brightness over a same sized non-anamorphic image. Anamorphic finally makes something BRIGHTER!
There's some fiddling involved, but it does work OK. However, it's NOT something you'd do routinely. Best to save up a whole bunch of 4:3 movies for a marathon to make the best of the altered settings.
Joined
·
79 Posts
Remember "Kong's Ring"? It was designed to do just that. $0 extra.
Joined
·
5,756 Posts
Keeping up interest in the enthusiast community is fine by me. If anyone has contacts within the studios or the BDA, even better. Even though we have good contacts we are working with now, you never know who the whole Folded Space idea will catch hold with and help push things along faster. As in everything, it all comes down to relationships.
Thanks everyone, for the cheerleading efforts
![]()
Thanks everyone, for the cheerleading efforts
I know the Dr. at the old Isco in Göttingen who received the Academy Award for Technical Achievement for cinema anamorphic work. He's German but regularly attends the Cinema trade shows and has contacts with Hollywood. If there is any kind of white paper etc you can share with me privately or otherwise I would be happy to see if we can get him engaged with his people. Of course I know the head guys with Schneider, too. Your project is important to all of us from my perspective. A bipartisan effort is appropriate
![]()
Joined
·
5,756 Posts
Thanks for the offer - much appreciated. I just sent you the white paper and marketing materials via e-mail. I've also attached our MFE / MFD Encode Decode and Maximize Your Experience Flyers here so folks can get an overview of exactly how our process works plus get a glance at some of our marketing material.
Encode-Decode Flyer.pdf 1223k .pdf file
Maximize Flyer.pdf.pdf 4545k .pdf file
Quote:
Originally Posted by GetGray /t/1436729/anamorphic-encoded-blu-rays-on-the-horizon#post_22560838
I know the Dr. at the old Isco in Göttingen who received the Academy Award for Technical Achievement for cinema anamorphic work. He's German but regularly attends the Cinema trade shows and has contacts with Hollywood. If there is any kind of white paper etc you can share with me privately or otherwise I would be happy to see if we can get him engaged with his people. Of course I know the head guys with Schneider, too. Your project is important to all of us from my perspective. A bipartisan effort is appropriate![]()
Thanks for the offer - much appreciated. I just sent you the white paper and marketing materials via e-mail. I've also attached our MFE / MFD Encode Decode and Maximize Your Experience Flyers here so folks can get an overview of exactly how our process works plus get a glance at some of our marketing material.
Encode-Decode Flyer.pdf 1223k .pdf file
Maximize Flyer.pdf.pdf 4545k .pdf file
Joined
·
5,756 Posts
Here is a copy of the White Paper plus a mock-up of a Blu-ray cover that we created. The Blu-ray cover was created to demonstrate to studios the "four viewing options on one disc" concept.
Demo Blu-ray Cover.pdf 4205k .pdf file
whitepaper-FS-v3.pdf 805k .pdf file
Demo Blu-ray Cover.pdf 4205k .pdf file
whitepaper-FS-v3.pdf 805k .pdf file
Joined
·
5,756 Posts
Sure - and feel free to use any of this material. BTW, I will have updated flyers in the next day or so and will post them here. The White Paper is up to date. Mainly I will be adding the "UHD" descriptor to 4K references.
Thanks!
Thanks!
Not quite right. DVD is still natively 4 x 3. It has been used as a transitional format allowing an upgrade path to 16:9 by way of anamorphic enhancement. There was a time when (FOX) R1 titles were being released without the 16:9 enhancement. R4 pretty much had all their titles (except THE ABYSS) in 16:9 enhanced from the start so we didn't have the double dip issues you guys faced - we just had to wait a bit longer for the titles to be released.
Blue ray is natively 16:9. Phillips was the first to release 16:9 TVs in the early 1990s back when the world was 4 x 3. Now they have released 21:9 in a 16:9 world and anamorphic enhancement added to BD will once again provide that path to the next great thing. It will support everything BD has now including 3D and seamless branching.
Folded Space is awesome because it offers a range of viewing options from true Scope (21:9) back to letter boxed Scope as well as a cropping option for those that hate black bars but have no intention of moving away from 16:9. The studios would crazy not to adopt this because one disc pressing now caters for 4 markets including the anamorphic projection market.
Not quite right. DVD is still natively 4 x 3. It has been used as a transitional format allowing an upgrade path to 16:9 by way of anamorphic enhancement. There was a time when (FOX) R1 titles were being released without the 16:9 enhancement. R4 pretty much had all their titles (except THE ABYSS) in 16:9 enhanced from the start so we didn't have the double dip issues you guys faced - we just had to wait a bit longer for the titles to be released.
Blue ray is natively 16:9. Phillips was the first to release 16:9 TVs in the early 1990s back when the world was 4 x 3. Now they have released 21:9 in a 16:9 world and anamorphic enhancement added to BD will once again provide that path to the next great thing. It will support everything BD has now including 3D and seamless branching.
Folded Space is awesome because it offers a range of viewing options from true Scope (21:9) back to letter boxed Scope as well as a cropping option for those that hate black bars but have no intention of moving away from 16:9. The studios would crazy not to adopt this because one disc pressing now caters for 4 markets including the anamorphic projection market.
1 - 20 of 130 Posts
Join the discussion
