I mainly buy...

[SteveDVD]

Whatever is the cheapest...

[rhegedus]

Definitely widescreen, fullscreen makes me shudder!!!

My opinion is if you're so concerned with the blackbars during a movie, you're obviously not paying attention to the movie in the first place. So my question is, did you rent/buy the movie to watch the movie, or to watch your tv set?

If you 'paid more attention' to fullscreen then you wouldn't 'shudder' so much.

If I've bought an expensive widescreen TV, then surely I'm entitled to use it to the full. However, checking the aspect ratios of the DVDs that I own, it appear that the directors cannot agree on how a film should be best seen. The 'widescreen' films I have are:

1.85:1
2.00:1
2.35:1

So even with a widescreen TV (16:9), there will be bars visible with most widescreen films - ranging from 4% (1.85:1) to 25% (2.35:1) of the screen. Is this what directors want us to see?

Regards,

Rob

[marisag427]

Rhegedus,

Regardless of what the aspect ratio is, the director certainly doesn't want you looking at your black bars. It's what's between them that's important. If you can't see that you're missing my point.

[tgpo]

Very true, what's between the black bars is what's important. So why are the black bars such a big deal? Plus if what's between the bars is the important part, why cut part of it off just to remove bars you don't even notice?

[Marco33]

My 16X9 tv plays DVD's full screen.

Why would I buy a pan&Scan dvd and have bars on the sides, I want the whole screen filled up.

See how stupid you sound.

[adam]

Check out some of the web pages that compare the two formats and look at some of the sample pictures taken from different versions of the same movie. Its well known that nothing should be center screen when filming. You never just center your focal point, you always put it to one side. With pan and scan everything is just centered because there is no room to work with, its completely different from how it was shot and it completely loses the feel that the director was going for. You literally lose almost %50 of the picture. Its not just unimportant stuff which would otherwise fall back into the scenery, most of the time that picture is really intregral to the scene. Needless to say, I hate fullscreen.

Some of the coolest shots are ruined by fullscreen. On the LOTR there is a shot where they show the kings of men that turned into the ring wraiths. There is this cool shot where you see all their heads arranged in a V shape. On the fullscreen version you see one big head and like half a head to each side. It looks ridiculous and doesnt make any sense. The worst is when the movie is shot in super8, like lotr was, (I think.) Not only do you lose picture on the sides, but you gain picture on the top which literally was meant to be cut off. In the river scene you can see telephone poles off in the distance. In resevoir dogs there is a great frame shot where they are walking along a brick wall. The motion looks all crazy cause there is no stable background to compare it to, its just a cool shot. On the fullscreen you can see the whole wall plus the hill behind it. It sounds subtle but it makes for a completely different shot. You don't realize what you are missing until you actually pay attention to the movie, then you just feel cheated.

rhegedus: Different DVDs don't use different aspect ratios because directors can't agree, they are different because they can change the perception of the movie. Its more of an artistic decision than anything else.

[rhegedus]

Rhegedus,

Regardless of what the aspect ratio is, the director certainly doesn't want you looking at your black bars. It's what's between them that's important. If you can't see that you're missing my point.

If you think it is acceptable to have black bars even on a widescreen TV then yes, I am missing the point.

Regards,

Rob

[marisag427]

Rhegedus,

Yes, black bars even on a widescreen TV are acceptable to me. Whether I have black bars on the top/bottom of my screen that are 2" or 4" or none at all does not bother me one bit. The reason is because I am seeing the film as it was intended to be seen by the director. Yes, my tv has the capability to stretch the film so that I don't see black bars if they appear, however, I prefer not to do that. Because then I am seeing people, things, etc. stretched out of proportion. And for what? Just to fill up my screen? When the lights are low and I'm involved in a movie, I don't notice the bars at all. It's the story that's my focus.

At a theater, all movies are different sizes. And what they do to compensate for the extra screen on the top/bottom is they drop the curtain around the film so that's all you see. They don't stretch it just to fill up the entire screen. That would look seriously wrong on such a big picture.

I don't know how else to explain it. It's just a matter of opinion I suppose.

[marisag427]

I'd like to add one more example of a widescreen vs. fullscreen shot as Adam has posted.

On PeeWee's Big Adventure, there's a shot where he's pulling a chain out of his bicycle's basket to lock up his bike. The chain seems neverending and he's just pulling and pulling and pulling. On the widescreen version it's funny because you just see part of the basket and the chain seems neverending as he pulls it out, and you wonder how it all fit in this tiny basket. Hence, the joke.

However, on the fullscreen version (at least on the older copies of this dvd), you see the entire basket which has a hole in the bottom and the entire loop of chain sitting on the pavement. Totally does not make sense. And not funny.

In the commentary for the movie, Tim Burton points out that he does not want the viewer to see this part since it ruins the joke, however, it was the only way to get the movie to fullscreen without reshooting.

The only movies that are done appropriately for fullscreen are the digital animation ones - i.e., Bugs Life, Monsters, Inc. and that is because they can re-render the scene since it's all done on computers.

[rhegedus]

The human visual field is defined by the bones that make up the orbit of the eye. From left to right we can see 180 degrees, up and down 135 degrees. This gives a ratio of 4:3. It is no coincidence that this is the aspect ratio of a ‘normal’ TV. Within this area, visual acuity varies greatly, with a focal point of about 10 degrees by 10 degrees having 5 times the acuity of neighboring areas, and about 10 times the acuity of areas 35 degrees away. This focal point is CENTERED, not off-centre. If you’re focusing on the action, you won’t know what’s going on to the sides, regardless of what the aspect ratio is. Don’t believe me? Focus on the first word at the start of any line I’ve written and, without moving your eyes, see if you can read what the last word on the line is.

I understand what you are all saying with respect to widescreen and if you check my first post, you’ll see that I voted for it too. But just because I’m not happy to still have black lines above and below the picture on my widescreen TV doesn’t make me stupid, just unwilling accept how a particular director thinks I should watch. If someone films in a 3:1 aspect ratio (40% of your screen will be black!), are you still going to be willing to watch it? Where will you draw the line (so to speak)?

As for focusing on the screen between the bars, I do, but still find the bars distracting - no matter how hard I concentrate. Next time you watch a film, turn the radio on as well and see how well you can concentrate. Get my point?

Best wishes and happy viewing,

Rob

[marisag427]

I certainly don't think anyone was calling you stupid - at least that was not my intention. I was merely trying to answer your questions about my preference to widescreen.

You mention something about focal point. A little beyond my knowlege regarding eyesight, however, I do know that when I'm watching a movie, regardless of at home or in the theater, I do watch the entire film - left to right. I notice the landscape, the people, and all the other things. It doesn't distract me from the story though. Not to say things aren't missed - that's how you can watch a movie several times over and still see new things - but it certainly makes for a better picture visually - but again, that's my preference.

You said you were "just unwilling to accept how a particular director thinks I should watch. A director makes a movie for his own vision. Sure he wants sales, but he doesn't care what kind of TV you have. If another director makes a movie in 3:1 ratio, so be it - that's his vision. It's not to say I have to like it. I do watch movies based on certain directors that I like because I usually like their work. Sometimes a storyline stinks but the directing was amazing. It's not always about the story. Look at XXX. Great movie, but lame plot and story. The visuals were exciting though.

Don't you think comparing turning the radio on with the black bars a bit extreme. It's not the same. Even without black bars, say you are watching a movie, you still have the TV cabinet around you movie - is that distracting too? Or how about the wall it's up against - maybe you have pictures hanging - are they distracting? I'm not trying to offend here so I hope I don't. I'm just trying to explain that we're talking about a few inches of black screen here. There' so much more around your tv after that - you have to tune all that out - it just doesn't seem that hard to tune out just a few more inches.

But it's all about the viewing experience so I guess whatever makes each one of us happy

[rhegedus]

w.r.t. black bars - they're closest to the point of vision - things in the periphery (cabinet, room etc.) will be ignored by the brain.

But it's all about the viewing experience so I guess whatever makes each one of us happy

Indeed!

Now for the next topic......what 'munchies' do you eat when watching your movies?

Regards,

Rob

[marisag427]

that's a great poll!!! I like good o'le popcorn myself!

[FT Shark]

Widescreen of course. I have a wide screen tv and i hate it when all I can rent is the fullscreen version of a movie, It looks wacky and streched out. I hate it even more when the aspect ratio of a movie is too wide, which will cause my widescreen tv to even show black bars. Why can't the movie industry make true 16:9 movies? Or make all of them animorphic?

[Tbear]

It's not why can't the movies makers make 16 x 9 movie. It's why can't the TV maker's make a TV that's 2.35:1 the same as cinemascope has been for the 50yrs.

[ChrisX]

I prefer widescreen for DVD's even though my TV is 4:3 "pan and scan" for normal TV broadcasting.

I have to balance broadcasting TV signals and the DVD on the TV, so the black bars on the top and bottom is fine for me when watching a DVD movie.

Anyway, widescreen TV is too expensive and not needed yet.