[Bionic Manaus]

I was under the understanding that the first Wide Screen was in CinemaScope and was called "The Robe" in 1953, I read a booklet sent to me in the snail mail which says 1953 1.85:1 Anamorphic "The Glen Miller Story" starring James Stuart and June Allyson. I checked it out on Amazon who also state it's a 1.85:1 Anamorphic, please straighten me out. Could there have been 2 wide screen formats in 1953 not just one?

 

[Ed Weinman]

Bionic Manaus,


I just checked out DVD Empire's back-of-DVD photo on "The Glenn Miller Story" and, indeed, the back jacket shows the film as 1.85:1 anamorphic.


I just checked my laser disc version which only indicates it being in stereo. I have not viewed the laser in a very long time and, as of this writing, can not tell if it is letterboxed (the laser album does not state letterbox).

 

[egcarter]

1.85:1 is NOT anamorphic. Anamorphic lenses were not in use until CinemaScope, which is wider than 1:85. In order to lure people out of their houses with the rise of TV, Hollywood studios started masking off the top and bottom of the flat Academy ratio images to make 1:85 "widescreen" movies in the Early 50's. I shudder when I see the use of the term anamorphic in DVD parlance to refer to anything that's not Academy ratio and/or "enhanced" for 16:9 viewing. It's not necessarily anamorphic, which refers to the camera lenses that optically squeeze the image during filming and the projector lenses that stretch that squeezed image back out for viewing on a really wide screen.


Eric

 

[Ed Weinman]

I repeat: the back of the DVD jacket states...1.85:1 ANAMORPHIC.


Make of it what you will.

 

[srgilbert]

Quote:

Originally posted by egcarter 1.85:1 is NOT anamorphic. Anamorphic lenses were not in use until CinemaScope, which is wider than 1:85. In order to lure people out of their houses with the rise of TV, Hollywood studios started masking off the top and bottom of the flat Academy ratio images to make 1:85 "widescreen" movies in the Early 50's. I shudder when I see the use of the term anamorphic in DVD parlance to refer to anything that's not Academy ratio and/or "enhanced" for 16:9 viewing. It's not necessarily anamorphic, which refers to the camera lenses that optically squeeze the image during filming and the projector lenses that stretch that squeezed image back out for viewing on a really wide screen. Eric

Ok, you do understand that words often have multiple meanings right? Anamorphic has a number of definitions including the fairly recent definition refering to the method of digitally unsqeezing a squashed 16x9 image on a dvd to it's proper ratio on a digital display.


I'm not saying you aren't correct (because you are for the most part) but in the dvd realm, the term obviously takes on a different meaning. To be fair though, the two processess are actualy VERY similar. One is simply optical while the other is digital.

 

[Vern Dias]

On a DVD, anamorphic and 16x9 mean the same thing.


It has no relationship to anamorphic projection (CinemaScope, Panavision, etc.)


Vern

 

[Bionic Manaus]

I disagree many 16 x 9 turn out to be 2.35:1 Letterbox, anamorphic or Enhanced for Wide Screen usually provide the correct OAR of the movie represented.

 

[srgilbert]

Quote:

Originally posted by Bionic Manaus I disagree many 16 x 9 turn out to be 2.35:1 Letterbox, anamorphic or Enhanced for Wide Screen usually provide the correct OAR of the movie represented.

I'm pretty sure he meant "enhanced for 16x9" and not the actual aspect ratio of the movie. And while we are nitpicking, anamorphic (or enhanced) DVD's are not usually considered "letterboxed," that label is almost always reserved for NON-enhanced (or non-anamorphic) widescreen movies (or widescreen VHS and laserdisks) where the movie frame resides inside a 4:3 frame and the black bars are actually part of the picture signal and not generated by the display.