Aspect Ratios - encoding to exact .. 'The Wizard of OZ' .. ?

[vhelp]

Hi peoples.

I was thinking about capturing "The Wizard of OZ" tomorrow (Sundy 12.19.04)
but I'm not sure about it's true Aspect Ratio.

The previews look all widescreen and all, and no fullscreen hint
what-so-ever. So, it's got me wondering

I thought that this movie was fullscreen (never widescreen)
and I seem to be confused with this. I'd like to try and keep it
in the aspect ratio (during my editing/encoding routine) that it
was presented to me (still using my Antenna) and I'm not sure
then, what AR is this movie in.
.
It looks like it's either in 1.85 or 1.778 but I'm not sure. I
am sure its not 2.35 (otherwise, the widescreen preview would have
looked pretty squished)

Now, considering the above. The only thing that I can think of
that makes it widescreen, is if they use a trick.
.
Ok. Let me exlaine. This is in case they never shot this movie
in widescreen to begin with.., and if i'm correct, they didn't
shoot in widescreen back then (1939)
.
Lets say that the movie was shot fullscreen. What is the movie
was always chopped off a bit at the top (and we never seen this
area of movie data) and its just enough, that they can make it a
1.85 or 1.778 but cropping off 60 x 60 top/bottom and maybe do
just a tadd bit of stretching a little, that it just makes it
enought to believe that it's widescreen

Still, why would they go through the lengths of this, if it was
in fact fullscreen to begin with ??
.
So, my theory above seems to fly by me because this could very well
be the case. They had some video data top/bottom, and decided to
utilize some tweaking to get it to look widescreen (which would not
be incorrect)
I shoot footage w/ my dv cam in 4:3 mode, and in order for me to
make it widescreen, I cut off pixels 60 x 60 top/bottom and encode
w/ 16x9 settings.. and they look greate (interlaced and all) on my
tv set. I consider this *my* directors cut version. After all,
no one has ever seen my footage, and there fore, would never know
what was missing. I beleive that the same applies to the above
movie ??

Feel free to comment.
-vhelp

[ZippyP.]

I was thinking about capturing "The Wizard of OZ" tomorrow (Sundy 12.19.04) but I'm not sure about it's true Aspect Ratio.

Look here.

[ZippyP.]

edit

[vhelp]

So that satisfies my theory.. that the AR was higher then fullscreen
(1.33:1) vs. the movies' actual 1.37:1 AR.

So then. They had some pixel area to play with. Probably areas that
were never seen on screen, due to the director's release of their
final format. What ever that means

-vhelp

[FulciLives]

I have seen movies and tv shows advertised in a widescreen format only to play back in full screen during the actual presentation meaning that yes only the ads for the movie/tv show was widescreen.

The USA NTSC DVD release is full screen and this was a very recent DVD video release ... came out September 2004. So one would think they got it right.

I know you like a capture challenge but the USA NTSC DVD can be bought at AMAZON.COM for instance for the very reasonable price of $13.97 USD plus shipping.

In fact Deep Discount DVD has it for only $11.88 with free shipping (within the USA).

If you like the movie enough and the aspect ratio thing worries you then just buy the DVD and ... stop making your life so freakin' difficult :P

Don't take this the wrong way ... I love you man ... you just drive me crazy sometimes

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[yoda313]

Hello,

If you're referring to the WB presentation tonight I believe it will be in the "smaller widescreen" presentation - ie not the full 2.35:1 format.

I watched the Lord of the Rings presentation on WB and it was in the smaller widescreen presentation.

Word of warning - they will post animated preview ads (short only lasting 10 seconds or so) in the bottom of the screen after just about every commerical break to promote their shows. If you have any intention of using a logo remover to remove them it will be difficult as they don't appear the whole time and take up a portion of the actual picture and the black bars (at least on a 4:3 tv - don't have hdtv ).

Kevin

[vhelp]

Thanks fulci (and others)

Yeah. I like a challenge every so often :P
And, sorry for driving you crazy man.. znot my aim.

I was gonna pop a pic of what I saw, and was hoping (huntching) that
someone would do a quick compare w/ their DVD to see how the cropped any
missing areas or something.
.
But, my system is a mess, and keeps crashing on me (I must have logged on 10
times today) I'm down to only an graphics card and my modem, nothing else.
And, so far, no more crashes - I don't know what's going on though) Anyways.

I dont' really care much for the logos. They don't really bother me much.
I rather have them then always be noticed w/ a pointer to the blemish in the
ares where I used a filter to wipe them out with.

I'm not all that crazy about this movie, but I noticed it was being
percevied (by me) as being widescreen. Just thought that if it was
going to be (its also airing in HD format too, if that matters) that I
just wanted to know what Aspect Ratio they were going to air it in.
And, the closest I could come up on (based on my analigy of things (above))
was either 1.85 or 1.778 AR. A 2.35 would kill it.

Thanks again,
-vhelp

[vhelp]

Well.., it looks like I was wrong.

They are airing it Fullscreen ahead

Thanks guys, for your comments and things,
-vhelp

[vhelp]

Oh. By the way. There were absolutely NO logo interuptions
during this movie And I'm stumped.

-vhelp

[junkmalle]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032138/technical

The movie was originally shot in 4:3 -- there was no widescreen in 1939. Rereleased as 16:9, presumably by masking.

[Cornucopia]

It was "Academy" format which was pert near close to 4:3 (always a little straying), but I wonder what they'll do for the HD broadcast (16:9 by nature)--side windowboxing, or cropping, or stretching?

Scott

[vhelp]

Well, in tonights airing (already finsihed here in NY) was
in Fullscreen view.

I guess the letterbox preview was just to *entice* us to
watch, thinking that we were gonna see something new
for a change. What I sucker I am, hehe..

-vhelp