bluray question

jonny5 · Post by **jonny5** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:36 pm

i have watched several now, and i have noticed that most of them are not full screen on a 50in wide screen HDTV....what gives?

why make widescreen format movies that dont fit widescreens....im still getting letterboxing on the top and bottom?

seems odd to me....am i missing something or what?

thegreathopper · Post by **thegreathopper** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:45 pm

Films are made for cinema's not wide screen tv's.

SuperPang · Post by **SuperPang** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:45 pm

Because the original cinema aspect ratio isn't 16:9

jonny5 · Post by **jonny5** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:52 pm

blurays are made for HDTV's...not the cinema

im not paying to watch it in the cinema....i am paying to watch it on my HDTV...why not format it for 16:9....just seems silly to make stuff in HD resolutions but not max it out so its true HD resolutions

its says 1080p...but if its not fullscreen, its less than 1920X1080....so essentially its not 1080p

it just seemed odd to me

SharkSkin-Man · Post by **SharkSkin-Man** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:24 pm

jonny5 wrote:why not format it for 16:9....

Because the majority of people don't really want films shot in 2.35:1 to be cropped when they view them at home?

jonny5 · Post by **jonny5** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:27 pm

i guess that makes sense.....i just found it weird...cuz i grab bluray rips and they have been fullscreen full HD res's...but since i got a PS3 and started renting actual blurays and so far none have been full screen.....

is this the case for all blurays or some?

cuz like i said i have had HD rips that were full screen.....

at first i thought i had soemthing set wrong with the PS3, but i watched transporter 3 last night and the previews were fullscreen and it switched to letterboxing for the main feature

SharkSkin-Man · Post by **SharkSkin-Man** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:34 pm

Just depends on the ratio the original feature was shot in.

brokenhalo · Post by **brokenhalo** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:35 pm

like others say it's to preserve the original theatrical look. if they cropped it to fit an hdtv they would have to use shitty "pan and scan" techniques and you would lose a chunk of the picture. you could get one of these if you really wanted to though.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/29/phil ... -on-video/

D · Post by D » Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:36 pm

SharkSkin-Man wrote:
jonny5 wrote:why not format it for 16:9....
Because the majority of people don't really want films shot in 2.35:1 to be cropped when they view them at home?

Exactly,
If you really really must, just zoom it on your ps3 or on your tv to fill your screen. You will loose some parts on the left and right, but at least YOU will be happy.
You seem the kind of person that'd like to also stretch 4:3 broadcast to 16:9 just so you can see funny faces and look at a retarded reality.
Most people I come in contact with do this; they do not understand my fury.
The guy who posted this does though

:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthre ... ost6899646
So in other words you yourself can do this. I am someone who hates losing image and stretched image. I hate that 16:9 shows are cropped and boradcasted as 4:3. I hate movies that are cropped to 16:9 too.
I also hate 50 hz games which are squashed and slower. I want everything to be as good as it can be.
But if more people complain then eventually they will retardize blu rays to be cropped for 16:9 and I will have one more thing to bitch about. Good luck with 16:9.
~_0

jonny5 · Post by **jonny5** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 2:40 pm

whoa.....i am SOOOOO not that person D....i am like you...i would die before i stretched.....

this is why i am annoyed.....finally get a widescreen TV and they start putting out widescreen movies that are even wider....

i mainly made this thread to see if i was setting something wrong on my ps3...im not that familiar with next gen stuff

if this is how they are meant to be, this is how i will watch them.....

thanx for the responses guys

SharkSkin-Man · Post by **SharkSkin-Man** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:02 pm

I think it's actually becoming less common rather than more common anyway to shoot in 2.35:1 isn't it? Probably because of the whole 16:9 ratio of widescreen TVs.

KindGrind · Post by **KindGrind** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 5:25 pm

2.35 or 2.40/1 will always leave bars up and down.

If you want the movie to fit your screen entirely, 1.78/1 is the ratio you want. It's always mentioned on the DVD cover. Most animated features are in that format, while other "live action" movies are 2.35.

Edit: Typo.

thegreathopper · Post by **thegreathopper** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:28 pm

If a film has Jason Statham in you are better with a very narrow image or better still turn the television off.

jonny5 wrote: at first i thought i had soemthing set wrong with the PS3, but i watched transporter 3 last night and the previews were fullscreen and it switched to letterboxing for the main feature

jonny5 · Post by **jonny5** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:31 pm

indeed....i rented in on recommendation of a co-worker....i smacked him this morning when i got to work

jonny5 · Post by **jonny5** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 3:41 pm

so now im thoroughly confused...

i watched planet terror last night and the case said it was 2.35:1, yet it was full screen....checked both the PS3 and TV settings and nothing is being stretched....

so why was this one fullscreen and other 2.35:1 films ive watched werent?

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:08 pm

Blu rays often have mislabelled shit on the packaging.

The official reason your seeing black bars is because not all movies use the same aspect ratio.

So lets say you have a 16:9 TV. That relates to 1.78:1 or thereabouts.

Anything that is 1.77:1 or less will make bars appear on the sides (example 1.33:1 is 4:3 standard)

Anything that is 1.79:1 or above will make bars appear on the top and bottom.

The more or less it is, the thicker the bars will get.

Since blu ray is a hardcore format, meaning that people purchasing the movies want exactly as the director intended. The OAR (original aspect ratio) is kept. Otherwise, if its full screen, some picture is missing either from the top/bottom or the sides. Think of it as zooming in on the picture until the black bars are gone, then obviously some picture would be outside of the screen and that information is then lost to the viewer.

http://new.picturehousecabinets.com/tab ... fault.aspx

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:12 pm

If you want it laymans terms, this youtube goes to great lengths to show you what your missing when you go full screen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSiE9famFJs

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 4:07 am

Knowing - Best Blu ray for picture quality i've seen.

jonny5 · Post by **jonny5** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:06 pm

sin city was jaw dropping....best i have seen yet i think

the spirit was quite nice as well.....i ve been grabbing up HD rips of older films.....terminator and the early rambos looked quite good....

also grabbed the re-releases(retail blurays

) of day of the dead and dawn of the dead, both of which i have the special edition multi disc dvd sets, and the picture quality was stunning.....well worth re-buying for me, but im a zombie nut

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:12 pm

I think Knowing is more of an accomplishment since it doesn't use much in the way of CGI or blue screen.

Just watching FF7 advent children. I don't like the movie much but the CG is phenomenal on bluray. Puts pixar to shame.

jonny5 · Post by **jonny5** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:41 pm

i was gonna 'grab' that but i could only find the non-subbed japanese release in 1080p.....and they wanted like $70 bux for it at my local HMV

im trying to track down the akira re-release....ive been told it is jaw dropping, and it has the original voice cast, not the re-done one from the 90's

PC Engine Fan X! · Post by **PC Engine Fan X!** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 6:16 pm

jonny5 wrote:i was gonna 'grab' that but i could only find the non-subbed japanese release in 1080p.....and they wanted like $70 bux for it at my local HMV

im trying to track down the akira re-release....ive been told it is jaw dropping, and it has the original voice cast, not the re-done one from the 90's

The re-release of Akira on Blu-Ray is quite jaw dropping indeed. It showcases the Akira film version that was shown by Streamline Pictures in the USA back in 1990. Keep in mind, that there are some slight changes between the original version Akira shown in Japan and Streamline Picture's version listed here:

*Tetsuo's gf, Kaori, has a key frame where her nipples are shown when she get's suckered punched straight in face by one of the Clown's posse in the original Akira film whereas in the USA version, that key frame is omitted.

*The scene Tetsuo moving slowing whilst in infantile stage towards the end does show his genitials whereas in the USA version, it is carefully covered up with some high-tech appendage covering of some sort.

So you might want to go with the Japanese Blu-Ray version of Akira if you want the unedited and unaltered version as it was meant to be. ^_~

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Tue Aug 04, 2009 7:27 pm

SuperPang wrote:Because the original cinema aspect ratio isn't 16:9

65mm versus 70mm, and like three different companies calling themselves "Natural Vision Pictures". RURGH

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 2:47 am

Cinema aspect ratio's are quite different.

If my knowledge is correct it goes anywhere from 1.33:1 all the way to 2.55:1.

That means to fill your screen perfectly you would need a TV in all these aspect ratios

1.33:1
1.78:1
1.87:1
2.35:1
2.40:1
2.55:1

With cinemas, the curtains draw a border round the edges. If you notice going from adverts/commercials to main event, the curtains usually go wider. Aspect ratio has little or nothing to do with 35mm/70mm film. The aspect ratio is more to do with how wide the lense captures. Star Wars for example they wanted lots of panning space ships so they made the aspect ratio really wide for it (2.35:1). This will always give black bars even on 16:9 TV. If you want full screen, just press the zoom function of your TV. It will do exactly the same thing as the movie disc would do if it were encoded full screen. IE, shove lots of image data outside of the screen where you can't see it. This is why the OAR (original aspect ratio) is always used. Its then up to the viewer if they prefer to see all the image, or have it full screen with some of the image off screen. You simply can't have it both ways.

Elixir · Post by **Elixir** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 10:59 am

I was always under the influence that quality loss would be present if the video was not originally filmed in 16:9 for Blu-Ray movies. I mean, you can take an image and resize it horizontally, with a proper aspect ratio so it doesn't become stretched. Then you can canvas it in height so there's no quality loss, and that way the image is resized but there's still image loss in the end.

On that note, importing Blu-Ray movies is insanely expensive, and I'd probably do it if it weren't for the region locking that I keep forgetting about since, well, when I think "PS3" I automatically think "region free".

PC Engine Fan X! · Post by **PC Engine Fan X!** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 3:41 pm

Elixir wrote:On that note, importing Blu-Ray movies is insanely expensive, and I'd probably do it if it weren't for the region locking that I keep forgetting about since, well, when I think "PS3" I automatically think "region free".

If you have a Japanese region PS3 console, it can play those USA region Blu-Ray discs without any problems and vice versa if you have a USA region PS3 can play the Japanese Blu-Ray discs. ^_~

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

neorichieb1971 · Post by **neorichieb1971** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 5:22 pm

Elixir wrote:I was always under the influence that quality loss would be present if the video was not originally filmed in 16:9 for Blu-Ray movies. I mean, you can take an image and resize it horizontally, with a proper aspect ratio so it doesn't become stretched. Then you can canvas it in height so there's no quality loss, and that way the image is resized but there's still image loss in the end.

On that note, importing Blu-Ray movies is insanely expensive, and I'd probably do it if it weren't for the region locking that I keep forgetting about since, well, when I think "PS3" I automatically think "region free".

No movies are filmed in 16:9. Sometimes they are cropped to fill the screen.

If your in the US there isn't much reason to import. But at the moment you can use amazon.co.uk which have really good import prices. Monsters inc is already out and its about $23 delivered (region free). Charlie and the chocolate factory as well. There are quite a few. But really, in the US you have so much choice already. Japan has the best version of Brandon Lee's "the crow". Importing Japanese wares is very expensive.

brentsg · Post by **brentsg** » Wed Aug 05, 2009 10:33 pm

Almost Famous is a good, solid Blu-ray import (from the UK) if you live in the USA. It's pretty cheap on Amazon UK as well.

Ganelon · Post by **Ganelon** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:27 am

Elixir wrote:I was always under the influence that quality loss would be present if the video was not originally filmed in 16:9 for Blu-Ray movies. I mean, you can take an image and resize it horizontally, with a proper aspect ratio so it doesn't become stretched. Then you can canvas it in height so there's no quality loss, and that way the image is resized but there's still image loss in the end.

Like neo said, videos aren't ever filmed in 16:9. The closest are a few direct-to-video cartoons (like some of Disney's releases Mulan 2 and Pocahontas 2) originally drawn in 16:9 aspect ratio with a 16:9 TV in mind.

Quality loss would be present for any analog-digital transition even if a movie had the correct aspect ratio because it's not possible to capture every single characteristic of 1.85 film, even if your eyes can't tell the difference.

Ed Oscuro · Post by **Ed Oscuro** » Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:33 am

neorichieb1971 wrote:
Elixir wrote:I was always under the influence that quality loss would be present if the video was not originally filmed in 16:9 for Blu-Ray movies. I mean, you can take an image and resize it horizontally, with a proper aspect ratio so it doesn't become stretched. Then you can canvas it in height so there's no quality loss, and that way the image is resized but there's still image loss in the end.

On that note, importing Blu-Ray movies is insanely expensive, and I'd probably do it if it weren't for the region locking that I keep forgetting about since, well, when I think "PS3" I automatically think "region free".

No movies are filmed in 16:9.

Indeed, The Bat Whispers' 65mm version wouldn't even FIT in 16:9 (it's 2:1!)

Here it is again, in the usual 35mm format:

Of course, nobody does stuff like that anymore.

Makes me reminiscent for the 360-degree panoramic film at one of the Disney World pavilions being shown for years (I think it was filmed in the '70s, fun stuff anyway).

shmups.system11.org

bluray question

bluray question

Film format.

Transporter.

Re: bluray question

Re: bluray question

Re: bluray question

Re: bluray question

Re: bluray question

Re:

Re: bluray question

Re: bluray question

Re: bluray question

Re: bluray question

Re: bluray question

Re: bluray question

Re: bluray question