AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 338 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,039 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Can anyone else confirm the following:


Is the Hulk on HD DVD supposed to be in 2:35:1 or 1:85:1 aspect ratio?

I got the Hulk as a gift and finally put it in my A2 to see it. The back of the box says 2:35:1, but on my 16:9 plasma set it seems to show it as a 1:85:1.


The reason I say it is a 1:85:1 aspect ratio, is because there are no black bars on the top or bottom of the movie on my TV (42" 16:9 Panny Plasma). The movie takes up all the 16:9 area of my plasma.


Yes, the A2 is set up on 16:9 for the TV.

Another thing I noticed, is that the picture in this 1:85:1 apect ratio seemed to have a small "transparent/black" bar on very top of the TV (about 2-3 pixels high running along the very top lenght of the TV).


I have never seen this on any SD DVDs or HD DVD movies presented in a 1:85:1 or 2:35:1 ratio for that matter.



Any thoughts anyone? Has anyone else experienced this?


Cheers


Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,269 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipper IV /forum/post/0


Hulk's label was incorrect; the movie is in 1.85, not 2.35.

They should make more movies in 1.85. I dont get why movies need to be shot in 2.35 when sports, tv shows and video games dont.


What is the purpose of widescreen tv's when 2.35( a widescreen format) still shows black bars. Shouldn't the input signal recognize 2.35 as widescreen and convert it so there are no black bars?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidML3 /forum/post/0


They should make more movies in 1.85. I dont get why movies need to be shot in 2.35 when sports, tv shows and video games dont.


What is the purpose of widescreen tv's when 2.35( a widescreen format) still shows black bars. Shouldn't the input signal recognize 2.35 as widescreen and convert it so there are no black bars?

1) Because that's what the artist (director) thought would best show his work.


2) No.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
949 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidML3 /forum/post/0


They should make more movies in 1.85. I dont get why movies need to be shot in 2.35 when sports, tv shows and video games dont.

No, the director should get to decide how to make his movie. There are many scenes that couldn't (and don't work) if they were reformatted to fill a tv screen. Opening up the height or cropping sides loses the tension or focus of the scene, that was the director and DP's intention and not to fill your tv screen.


Quote:
What is the purpose of widescreen tv's when 2.35( a widescreen format) still shows black bars. Shouldn't the input signal recognize 2.35 as widescreen and convert it so there are no black bars?

It's not going to recognize a 2.35 signal and make it 1.78 without distorting or removing parts of the image, math doesn't work that way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,039 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Thanks guys for the clarification on the aspect ratio.

but as for my second comment on post #1.

"Another thing I noticed, is that the picture in this 1:85:1 apect ratio seemed to have a small "transparent/black" bar on very top of the TV (about 2-3 pixels high running along the very top lenght of the TV). "


Any thoughts on this?


I have never seen this on any other movies that I have watched on my A2, SD DVDs or HD DVD movies presented in a 1:85:1 or 2:35:1 ratio for that matter.


Thanks again

Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
589 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidML3 /forum/post/0


They should make more movies in 1.85.

Agreed!

Quote:
I dont get why movies need to be shot in 2.35 when sports, tv shows and video games dont.

Some people will spout the "director's artistic intention" spiel, but it basically comes down to the movie being made to fit theaters, not home televisions.

Quote:
What is the purpose of widescreen tv's when 2.35( a widescreen format) still shows black bars?

Because most widescreen material is not 2.35. HD Network television, 16x9 made-for tv movies, and the 1.85 ratio movies all look great on a 16x9 widescreen tv.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
I've often wondered if the reason for 2.35 screens is sometimes about economics of building a theater?


If you take 2 screens with equal area but one is 2.35 and the other is 1.85, the building that houses the 1.85 will have to be taller (and therefore more expensive) than the one housing the 2.35.


Taken a different way, if you are putting theatres into an existing building/mall/whatever, you'll get a bigger 2.35 screen in than you can 1.85
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,867 Posts
Anybody who's seen Donnie Darko, would agree that 2.35 is magnificent, and screen-filling would be a sin
It's shown OAR on SD movies channels every time, for a reason!


I wish every film was shot 2.35 AR, nomatter what dimensions my display is.


Anybody who is bothered by Black Bars, should turn their lights off
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
682 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baronken /forum/post/0


Some people will spout the "director's artistic intention" spiel, but it basically comes down to the movie being made to fit theaters, not home televisions.

No offence but when was the last time you were actually in a movie theater? They show movies in BOTH aspect ratios. There are mechanical curtains that hide the top and bottom of the screen for 2.35 movies and are opened up for 1.85. To say theaters are only designed to only show 2.35 movies is nonsense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,269 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by lovebuzz#836 /forum/post/0


No, the director should get to decide how to make his movie. There are many scenes that couldn't (and don't work) if they were reformatted to fill a tv screen. Opening up the height or cropping sides loses the tension or focus of the scene, that was the director and DP's intention and not to fill your tv screen.


ok I'd understand cropping to fill a 4:3 screen but cropping for a widescreen tv doesnt make sense at all. Isnt the purpose of a widescreen tv is to be able to view 2:35 movies without the use of black bars and still get the entire shot?


Why are there widescreen tv's then? Why are there no tv's that would give you the entire shot(The way the director wanted you to see it blah blah blah)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,867 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidML3 /forum/post/0


ok I'd understand cropping to fill a 4:3 screen but cropping for a widescreen tv doesnt make sense at all. Isnt the purpose of a widescreen tv is to be able to view 2:35 movies without the use of black bars and still get the entire shot?


Why are there widescreen tv's then? Why are there no tv's that would give you the entire shot(The way the director wanted you to see it blah blah blah)?

Because every film is shot in different aspect ratios. And since the display can only be one, they chose a happy median 16x9 (1.78)


Think of your display as the frame that a painting is in. You don't cut up the Mona Lisa to fit YOUR specific frame


Also, it appears that you are using the term "cropping" to mean, the addition of black bars. In actuality, "cropping" refers to chopping off of a portion of the image, for the purpose of eliminating black bars. Black Bars are your friend, learn to live with them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
589 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by studiotan /forum/post/0


No offence but when was the last time you were actually in a movie theater? They show movies in BOTH aspect ratios. There are mechanical curtains that hide the top and bottom of the screen for 2.35 movies and are opened up for 1.85. To say theaters are only designed to only show 2.35 movies is nonsense.

Actually, it has been more years than I can remember.

I did not mean to imply that theaters ONLY show 2.35 movies. The use of the 2.35 aspect ratio is to provide a different viewing experience (wide!) to draw people out of their homes and into the theaters. That experience cannot be had at home using a 16x9 television where you black out 25% of the screen (not counting those anamorphic setups some people have).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,867 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baronken /forum/post/0


Actually, it has been more years than I can remember.

I did not mean to imply that theaters ONLY show 2.35 movies. The use of the 2.35 aspect ratio is to provide a different viewing experience (wide!) to draw people out of their homes and into the theaters. That experience cannot be had at home using a 16x9 television where you black out 25% of the screen (not counting those anamorphic setups some people have).

Well if that's the case, guess I better start selling off all my HT stuff and start reading books. Apparently my experience is dampened because YOU obsess about black bars


*sarcasm*


Oh, and 2.35 is NOT used to draw people to the Theater, it's used because it more closely represents the human eye's field of vision.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,325 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vipper IV /forum/post/0


Can someone close this thread before it becomes another 1.85 vs 2.35 battle? I think this board has already met the yearly quota of those types of threads.

Or at least combine it with the other similar "Hulk 1.85 or 2.35" threads in the past month:

Hulk HD-DVD fills in entire 16:9 widescreen, isnt it suppose to be 2:35:1?

or
Why So Many Universal Releases In 1:85:1?

or
Are there any Titles other than the Hulk in 1:85:1?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
589 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by alpha21 /forum/post/0


Well if that's the case, guess I better start selling off all my HT stuff and start reading books. Apparently my experience is dampened because YOU obsess about black bars


*sarcasm*

My apologies, I didn't realize you have a 40'-50' wide screen at home. Since you do, of course you experience the same thing as at the theater.

Quote:
Oh, and 2.35 is NOT used to draw people to the Theater, it's used because it more closely represents the human eye's field of vision.

Couple of quick quotes from this Wiki page :


"By 1932, the Depression had forced studios to cut back on needless expense and it wasn't until the 1950s that wider aspect ratios were again used in a vain attempt to stop the fall in attendance due, partially, to the emergence of television in the U.S."


and


"One rationale for widescreen is that, since the human eye has a field of view that extends farther to the sides than it does above or below, a widescreen image makes more effective use of the field of view, thereby producing a more immersive viewing experience. Critics of widescreen point out that the human field of vision, based upon the angular ratio of our fields of view (180 degrees horizontal, 135 degrees vertical), is in fact closer to the older ratio of 4 to 3, and not widescreen ratios such as 16:9 or 2.35:1. Consequently, large-format technologies like IMAX favor a 4:3."



Since the directors mostly get to choose the aspect ratio they want, we'll continue to see 2.35 movies in the theaters and at home (with black bars, of course)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,039 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Ok guys, I did not mean for this to start an argument on the 2:35:1 vs 1:85:1. All this talk, yet no one has responded to my second comment on post # 1 ( the reason I started the thread in the first place!

"Another thing I noticed, is that the picture in this 1:85:1 apect ratio seemed to have a small "transparent/black" bar on very top of the TV (about 2-3 pixels high running along the very top lenght of the TV)."


Thanks again in advance


paul.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
589 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by hidefpaul /forum/post/0

"Another thing I noticed, is that the picture in this 1:85:1 apect ratio seemed to have a small "transparent/black" bar on very top of the TV (about 2-3 pixels high running along the very top lenght of the TV)."


Thanks again in advance


paul.

Paul, could it be that your tv isn't fully overscanning* the picture? Since a 16x9 widescreen tv is actually 1.78:1, a 1.85:1 picture will actually have small black bars on top and bottom. Some (most?) tvs have overscan* that actually makes the 1.85 picture fill the 1.78 frame. Could be yours doesn't completely.


*terms might be underscan depending who you talk to
 
1 - 20 of 338 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top