|
|
Posted by Bill Vermillion on 11/14/05 04:25
In article <5Lpdf.6928$8W.1907@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com>,
Biz <spamoff@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>"Bill Vermillion" <bv@wjv.com> wrote in message news:IpuLyG.n2v@wjv.com...
>> In article <ekm8n11u8ic1gadkrq9lpldmgbvpgacbre@4ax.com>,
>> John Harkness <jharkness@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>> >On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 22:38:59 -0800, Walter Traprock
>> ><wetraprock@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Note that it is standard practice when preparing full screen
>> >>transfers of soft matted films to ZOOM within the full frame,
>> >>thus losing substantial parts of the left and right sides of the
>> >>theatrical presentation; there being no truly full frame
>> >>transfer. Now, how often, or, is it also standard, to prepare
>> >>widescreen versions for home video that were ALREADY prepared
>> >>as full screen versions for TV/video, thus actually cropping
>> >>all four sides for a correct aspect ratio but zoomed widescreen
>> >>picture? The vast majority of films from the mid-1950s to the mid-1990s
>> >>are soft-matted, and first transfered for TV/video without any interest
>> >>in retaining the widescreen theatrical ratio, and the world of film
>> >>transfering is so secretive; IS IT SAFE to assume that no new
>> >>transfer is generally made at all, and older movies are simply
>> >>the ZOOMED IN un-matted frame and then further cropped to make
>> >>the resulting widescreen versions that are widescreen but
>> >>reduced on all four sides from the theatrical version?
>> >
>> >
>> >It's never safe top assume anything, and it's certainly not safe to
>> >assume what you're claiming.
>> >
>> >I wont' say that it's never happened, but I can't think of any
>> >widescreen films of that era that I've seen both theatrically and on
>> >DVD that have been transferreed in the manner you describe.
>>
>> And I have at least on film where the LD WS tranfer is slightly
>> wider than the DVD WS transfer. And the color-timing on the DVD
>> is poor compared to the LD. But the width is close - so you have
>> to look closely to see the differences.
>>
>> There are those who will never be happy until they can see the
>> frame line of the film at the top and the perfs at the side. :-)
>>
>> And I understand there are a handfull of DVD players that let you zoom out
>> so you can see what is actually on the disk - as many players tend to
>> crop a bit internally.
>So if you have at least one title, cant you at least do the
>courtesy and list what it is for others?
Sorry about that. The only one I've checked that closely is one of
my favorite films "Heaven's Gate". The DVD transfer is awfully
warm - more on the brownish side.
This is the 3rd disk vesion I have of this. The first was on
an RCA CED in P&S format.
I'm short an input on my system now - so my LD is not permanently
connected - and it was easy to still frame and perform an A/B on
the different video inputs.
Transfers seem to vary quite a bit.
I recorded "Midnight Cowboy" from TCM one night. I missed the
setting on my DVR by hitting record twice so I only got the first
hour.
Later it came up again on TCM and I missed the first hour. [that
movie must be jinxed].
So I used VideoRedo to put the pieces together.
The transfers were different - the framing was slightly different
and the color timing was slightly changed.
And from memory the one of the opening logos had the UA and MGM
progression and the later showing had the new standard MGM logo.
I'll try to be a bit more locquatious next time. I have a tendency
to make long posts, and I'm trying to be a bit more prudent when it
comes to length.
Years ago I made a post in an audio group that was about 35K long -
and I was asked for permission to reprint it as an article in a
magazine [actually more of small journal].
Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|