AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
957 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Very good transfer and a 5.1 sound track. David Spade in a role which may end his career.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
716 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by wezar
Very good transfer and a 5.1 sound track. David Spade in a role which may end his career.
Yeah, it's been a hard year for current and ex-SNL'ers - remember Corky Romano? It amazes me that some of these projects make it past pre-production.


Greg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,895 Posts
It's funny, I was just comparing Joe Dirt on HBO HD (looks like a really DUMB movie) to What Women Want (which is the first true HD I've seen on Showtime HD...at least according to the schedule). I felt that Joe Dirt looked far sharper than What Women Want. I imagine it's possible that WWW is actually an upconvert since there are many errors in these schedules. I'm still surprised that most of what I see on Showtime fills the 16:9 screen. Either there's more material than I thought that's not actually OAR or they show a considerable about of 1:85 OAR movies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,123 Posts
Well theres always one way to find out about the OAR for a given movie.. go look it up. WWW is 1.78:1


And Joe Dirt is 1.85:1 which always helps on HBO because a number of the ones they crop seem to lose something (besides part of the movie).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,412 Posts
Great HD picture and I found the movie enjoyable. David Spade may not make it big in the movie theaters, but he still makes some nice movies to watch on HBO HD!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
380 Posts
You lose so little in a crop to 16:9 that it's almost worth it. I wouldn't make a big deal over OAR if you're talking 2.35->1.78, but I would if it's 2.35->1.33, thats a much more drastic chop. I don't know if there's anything in those couple of inches of screen to the sides to worry about.. it's not cutting out 40% of the picture like 4:3 pan-scan.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,827 Posts
Yep, losing *only* 25% of the picture from 2.35 to 1.78 isn't that bad.:rolleyes: Ugh.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
407 Posts
Does anyone know why there is both 1.85 and 1.78 since they are so close to each other. You would think that someone would have picked one, not both. I understand the origin or 1.33 and the reason for 2.35.


Any thoughts would appreciated.


-Brett
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,260 Posts
I liked the movie. Funny as heck, and disturbingly enough, somewhat inspiring from a be happy with your life point of view.


Dylan: Been there done that with the argument, and there are some people here who will be horrified by what you say. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,836 Posts
Quote:
You lose so little in a crop to 16:9 that it's almost worth it. I wouldn't make a big deal over OAR if you're talking 2.35->1.78, but I would if it's 2.35->1.33, thats a much more drastic chop. I don't know if there's anything in those couple of inches of screen to the sides to worry about.. it's not cutting out 40% of the picture like 4:3 pan-scan.
Kind of like this, right?


HBO CROPOVISION version:
http://www.net1.net/~fstearns/main/h...es/WLB_HBO.jpg



DVD version:

http://www.net1.net/~fstearns/main/h...es/WLB_DVD.jpg


Two actors, one actor, what's the difference.


Frank
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
957 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Hey, this thread is about the cinematic beauty of the film titled "Joe Dirt".


And now it has degenerated into a philosophical and technical debate over OAR.


I vote for OAR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
380 Posts
Frank, a rather extreme example wouldn't you say? Agreed, you lose some of the picture - precisely 24.6% of it going to 16:9. On most movies, there is nothing in that part - and if we want to sell HD, we need to stop explaining black bars to Joe6P and start filling the screens. OAR is optimal, but for HD Channels on HD-HBO and other HD networks, the format should be 16:9. Perhaps there can be an option to crop or show it OAR? I don't know if this is technically possible, but it's something to think about. In 99.99% of scenes, I'd bet there's nothing going on in that part - although it would be nice to keep it. Just think about the masses, and what they know about OAR.. zip. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
380 Posts
Another thing, I tried explaining the benefit of a widescreen television to my less-HT savvy family members when I watched a DVD that was 2.35:1 and it still had bars. The bars don't bother me so much, but they questioned having a widescreen TV at all when you are still going to have black bars. I understand that OAR is better, I understand that you are literally missing some of the movie, but I agree with HBO's choice to crop to 16:9 so that it looks like HDTV.


Actually isn't there an "open-matte" transfer for 16:9 movies which were originally 2.35 which actually shows more of the movie in 16:9 than you saw in 2.35? Why don't they do it this way?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,827 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Dylan Savage
Agreed, you lose some of the picture - precisely 24.6% of it going to 16:9. On most movies, there is nothing in that part...
This has got to be one of the silliest things ever stated on this forum. And that's saying something.


I guess that's why a lot of directors chose to shoot 2.35...because there's nothing of merit in the non-1.78 parts. In fact, Ben Hur was shot in 2.76 just to piss people off--everyone knows that all the stuff outside of the 1.78 frame is just junk anyhow. That Wyler, what a cut up. And the Venus de Milo? Used to have outstretched arms--but they didn't fit the exhibit space at the benefactor's house, so whack, off they went.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
If a 2.35 film was shot in Super 35, then yes you can have an open matte transfer to 16 X 9. You're still not seeing the composition the director intended.


If the 2.35 film was shot in Panavision, then a 16 X 9 transfer (without letterboxing) is either cropped or panned. You lose visual information.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
Gee, now I can walk out on it again in glorious high definition !


Brainless, heartless drivel. A new low for society.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top