VideoHelp Forum




+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. I find the term FS (Fullscreen) to be misleading when associated with 4/3 AR. It seems that DVD Releases in 4/3 are labeled FS, but even 16/9 can be FS if viewed on a 16/9 Monitor. On the same note 4/3 can be viewed on a 16/9 Monitor and not be FS at all.

    What are your thoughts?
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    "Full screen" DVD is a marketing not technical term for cropped 4:3 aspect ratio.

    It means no letterbox on a conventional 4:3 TV. Nothing more.

    Usually the crop results from a pan/scan process across a wide aspect film transfer.
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  3. Always Watching guns1inger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Miskatonic U
    Search Comp PM
    I prefer to see three things

    1. The actual aspect ratio - 1.33, 1.37, 2.35 etc
    2. The encoding aspect ratio - 4:3 or 1:9
    3. If it si the original aspect ratio, or modified for DVD
    Read my blog here.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Are all films shot originally on Widesreen Format?

    Does FS always mean selective cropping, or it could sometime be a basic crop pan and scan style?
    Quote Quote  
  5. Always Watching guns1inger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Miskatonic U
    Search Comp PM
    No, not all films are shot widescreen, which is why the other information is important. Many older films, and even low budget films through to the early 70's were shot in 1.33 or 1.37 AR. Many older telemovies are also 1.33.

    I have no issue with material that was shot 1.33 or 1.37 being shown as 4:3 - that is how it was shot in the first place. Even 1.66 material can be framed as 4:3, so long as it has bars added. I hate material that was shot in wider formats being cropped to arbitrarily fill the frame, be it 4:3 pan and scan, or taking very wide formats like 2.35 and doing a 16:9 pan and scan to fill the screen of 16:9 televisions. I would like to watch the film as it was shot, in whatever aspect ratio that is. If a DVD has been cropped to something different to that, I would like to be told so I can make an informed decision as a consumer. Generally the decision will be not to buy the movie.
    Read my blog here.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Yes but what do you do when you have to deal with different AR? This is an issue especially with TV, even though more and more are turning digital and 16/9.

    But how do you deal when you have material with different AR? Cause most Monitors are 16/9 and at times you either get TV series at 4/3 or movies in anamorphic WS 2.35.

    How do you deal with that? Cropping is bad, stretching to fit is worse and letterboxing shrinks the image(I mean since the black bars takes a considerable amount of the screen)
    Quote Quote  
  7. Always Watching guns1inger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Miskatonic U
    Search Comp PM
    I have a 16:9 TV. The most annoying transfers for me are widescreen films encoded as 4:3. For some of these I use DVD Rebuilder to re-create them as 16:9 encodes. Otherwise I don't have any issues with aspect ratios. If is it 4:3, there will be pillarbox bars. If it is wider than 16:9 there will be letterbox bars. I don't notice them because I am watching the movie. It was the same when I had my (much smaller) 4:3 television. Many of my favorite films are 2.35 or wider, but that is the only way I will watch them. I even encode widescreen for my iPod.
    Read my blog here.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Well same here, but i dont like the bars. I especially find the pillarbox bars more distracting and unsual.

    How do you rebuid a file to 16/9?

    BTW Are there any anamorphic Monitors out there? I think Philips has recently released the firs one, but since there are none other publically available what's the point of 2.35? I think you can only make use of it if you own a projection system, right?
    Quote Quote  
  9. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    I don't want to see a film shot in 4:3 that was intended for a widescreen showing, as you'll see booms and other crap in the image that was intended to be cut out in post production. If not mistaken, Lord of the Rings is this way.
    Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
    FAQs: Best Blank DiscsBest TBCsBest VCRs for captureRestore VHS
    Quote Quote  
  10. Always Watching guns1inger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Miskatonic U
    Search Comp PM
    I believe we went round this roundabout a few years back, but anyways. James Cameron was a big fan of Super-35 for shooting. I believe Terminator, and certainly Aliens, T2 and The Abyss were all shot in Super 35. This means the full screen versions were the same width as the widescreen versions, but with image above and below to fill out the frame. The catch ? It is empty air.

    It is kind of like watching many US dramas (Law and Order is a good example) for the first few years after 16:9 became the norm. Yes, they fill the screen side to side, but all the action takes place in a carefully define 4:3 frame in the centre of the screen. Outside is is incidental and just empty air. Super 35 takes the same approach, but for widescreen, by putting empty air above and below. The advantage for the director in the case of Super 35 is that they don't have to suffer the indignity of having their work butchered to cater to the unwashed in TV land. They can just put out the full Super 35 frame instead of a P&S version.

    As for 2.35 (and 2.40 and even 2.60) - it is EPIC. It is the width of greatness. It is by far my favorite format for movies that need that extra breadth. It is perhaps not suitable for close up, warm and fizzy chick-flicks, but for something big, powerful, dramatic there is no better format.
    Read my blog here.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Video Restorer lordsmurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    dFAQ.us/lordsmurf
    Search Comp PM
    My Name Is Earl put HD jokes in their early runs, back in 2005, in the space to the left/right of screen where you could not see. It was very much dead space. At the time, my local NBC was not HD, and I didn't have a good ATSC tuner until 2007. In more recent years, the wide is important, so the show is matted for 4:3 televisions.

    Video doesn't have to "fill the screen" -- that's silly. As dumb as requiring a photo to "fill the paper"
    Want my help? Ask here! (not via PM!)
    FAQs: Best Blank DiscsBest TBCsBest VCRs for captureRestore VHS
    Quote Quote  
  12. Originally Posted by therock003
    Well same here, but i dont like the bars. I especially find the pillarbox bars more distracting and unsual.
    Learn to love (or ignore) the bars. What's most important is the Original Aspect Ratio (OAR). Do you really expect a TV for every aspect ratio just so you don't have to see black bars? Enjoy your 16:9 TV set where you get the best of both worlds ("Full screen" 1.33:1 movies and "Wide Screen" 1.78:1 and wider).

    What I really object to is the notice sometimes in the US before the showing of some Panned And Scanned piece of junk, "This film has been reformatted to fit your screen". Who the f**k are you to tell me the way in which I should be watching a movie, when you obviously know nothing and care even less? And it doesn't even fit my screen, you liars.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Originally Posted by therock003
    How do you rebuild a file to 16/9?
    For a letterboxed 4:3, using DVDRB:

    Options --> AVS Options --> Advanced (Expert) Options --> Convert from LB 4:3 to 16:9 --> Apply to All
    Pull! Bang! Darn!
    Quote Quote  
Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!