|
|
Posted by Stan on 10/31/06 05:25
oshua Zyber" <joshzyber@comcast.net> wrote in news:V_-
dnchq6pITONvYnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d@comcast.com:
> You're not understanding the process. 35mm film has a negative aspect
> ratio of 1.37:1. A movie designed for 1.85:1 composition will be shot
> with the entire camera negative exposed, then the top and bottom of the
> frame are matted during projection.
This is not necessarily true. I work in a post production lab. We handle
dozens of 35mm features a year. I haven't kept statistics on this but I'd
guess that 75% of flat release prints have hard mattes, and for good
reasons...like microphones hanging at the top of the frame, partially built
sets, partial CGI. You certainly don't want some projectionist deciding
what part of a frame is to be seen by the audience.
> When it comes time for the video transfer, most 1.85:1 movies have the
> mattes slightly lifted to expose a tiny sliver of extra picture at the
> top and bottom of the frame.
Surely there must be some DVDs made from prints with 1.85 hard mattes. I'd
like to see what one of these looks like on my widescreen set.
> The difference between 1.85:1 and 1.78:1 is a few scan lines, and does
> not affect the compositional intent. Here are some photo examples:
>
> http://www.mindspring.com/~jzyber/Manchurian_16-9.jpg
> http://www.mindspring.com/~jzyber/Manchurian_185-1.jpg
Very interesting. Thanks.
> The extra picture information will be cropped off by overscan on most
> consumer televisions anyway.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there shouldn't be any need for overscan on
LCD or plasma TVs, should there?
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|