Posted by Joshua Zyber on 12/24/06 00:08

"dgates" <dgates@spamlinkline.com> wrote in message
news:a5ero2dbfb8m1tu2cqc4h2ip2ammvto2vj@4ax.com...
> I recorded Rosemary's Baby off an HD movie channel the other night.
> Before using this recording to introduce it to my girlfriend, I'm
> wondering about the ratios.
>
> My first thought, scanning a few scenes was "Hmm, does it look like
> the left and right sides have been slightly lopped off?"
>
> However, checking IMDB, it says that the ratio is 1.66 to 1 -- which
> would be *narrower* than our 16x9 TV.
>
> If that's the case, then how is this picture filling our 16x9 screen?
> Is it being stretched? Are the top and bottoms being lopped off? Is
> IMDB just wrong about the ratio?
>
> Scanning a couple of DVD sites, I see them referring to the film (or
> at least the DVD) as 1.85:1. Not Netflix, which lists it as 1.66:1,
> but a couple other DVD sites.
>
> Can anyone enlighten me? What will we be losing or gaining if we
> watch this HD recording?

A movie like Rosemary's baby would have been photographed with the
intention of playing in Europe at 1.66:1 and in America at 1.85:1, and
should have been protected for both ratios. A 16:9 transfer splits the
difference. You're not missing anything that was seen in American
theaters.

A 1.66:1 movie can be viewed on a 16:9 TV in one of two ways. Either the
top and bottom of the frame can be minimally cropped, or the picture can
be pillarboxed with black bars on the left and right sides of the frame.
The pillarbox bars would be so small that they'd be covered up by
typical TV overscan anyway.

I haven't seen the HD broadcast of Rosemary's Baby to know which it was.
In either scenario, what you're getting is a perfectly valid
representation of the movie.

[Back to original message]