Why wasn't anamorphic widescreen mandated by the dvd specs from the start?

[yoda313]

So I was wondering why weren't dvds mandated to have anamorphic widescreen when the specs were initiated?

I just finished watching my used copy of True Lies that I bought the other week. It looked great and was widescreen but was letterboxed. I also have the first release dvds of Generations, First Contact and Insurrection and they were all letterbox as well.

Isn't anamorphic widescreen merely a flag setting in the authoring of the disc?

Isn't that like no cost to the producer to add one setting in the production of the dvd?

I realize this was only symptomatic with earlier dvd releases in the early dvd releases. Now they are virtually all anamorphic - the major studio releases as far as I know at least.

Is it more complex than a simple flag? Does it actually have to be transferred specially? Were there any Laserdisc releases that were anamorphic? Would that have been possible on the analog format?

[manono]

Mandated? What about all the 1.33:1 movies and videos out there? Making them 16:9 loses resolution. Blame the DVD production companies and not the standards.

Isn't anamorphic widescreen merely a flag setting in the authoring of the disc?

No, 4:3 or 16:9 is determined during the encoding and not the authoring. You can't just change the flag after the fact, not without messing up the aspect ratio. The stored images of the same movie in 4:3 and 16:9 DVDs are quite different from each other. Take a look here:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/anamorphic/anamorphic235demo.html

[aedipuss]

anamorphic takes no more time than 4:3 or letterbox. it's just the checking of a box during the encoding process. back when the dvd spec came out all tv sets were 4:3 so letterbox made more sense back then.

[turk690]

So I was wondering why weren't dvds mandated to have anamorphic widescreen when the specs were initiated?

I just finished watching my used copy of True Lies that I bought the other week. It looked great and was widescreen but was letterboxed. I also have the first release dvds of Generations, First Contact and Insurrection and they were all letterbox as well.

Isn't anamorphic widescreen merely a flag setting in the authoring of the disc?

Isn't that like no cost to the producer to add one setting in the production of the dvd?

I realize this was only symptomatic with earlier dvd releases in the early dvd releases. Now they are virtually all anamorphic - the major studio releases as far as I know at least.

Is it more complex than a simple flag? Does it actually have to be transferred specially? Were there any Laserdisc releases that were anamorphic? Would that have been possible on the analog format?

I have DVDs from around 1997 or so that were also letterboxed, like the kvetchy madonna evita. I suppose, early DVDs being letterboxed is like, LaserDisc could have been anamorphic but publishers chose to waste so much screen real estate (and lower the actual resolution left) by letterboxing likely to accomodate the vast majority of 4:3 TVs then. I recall the kitchsy debate about "is letterbox better than pan-and-scan or not??"

[usually_quiet]

So I was wondering why weren't dvds mandated to have anamorphic widescreen when the specs were initiated?

I just finished watching my used copy of True Lies that I bought the other week. It looked great and was widescreen but was letterboxed. I also have the first release dvds of Generations, First Contact and Insurrection and they were all letterbox as well.

Isn't anamorphic widescreen merely a flag setting in the authoring of the disc?

Isn't that like no cost to the producer to add one setting in the production of the dvd?

I realize this was only symptomatic with earlier dvd releases in the early dvd releases. Now they are virtually all anamorphic - the major studio releases as far as I know at least.

Is it more complex than a simple flag? Does it actually have to be transferred specially? Were there any Laserdisc releases that were anamorphic? Would that have been possible on the analog format?

Anamorphic widescreen didn't offer any benefits back in the 1990's. TVs and computer monitors were all 4:3. Widescreen TVs and computer monitors didn't exist and apparently weren't foreseen.

[edDV]

Also they already had a library of quality letterbox masters prepared for Laserdisc. Wide anamorphic required a remastering process back to the film.

Any smart strategic thinker in the movie business realized they could sell letterbox or "full", then the customer would come back for wide anamorphic when he got a 16:9 TV and then come back again for HD. Same movie, 3 sales.

When it came time for anamorphic mastering in the early 2000's, HDTV was was starting so most did a 16:9 HDCAM (1440x1080i) 144Mb/s digital master (one each for NTSC and PAL) that could be used for both Anamorphic DVD and HDTV broadcast.

Next came Blu-Ray and HD-DVD in the late 2000's. Planning ahead, many movies were remastered at 4Kx2K 24p for dual use in Digital Cinema and Blu-Ray.

[yoda313]

Thanks everyone. I should have started by stating "mandated" for widescreen movies. I know stretching 4:3 to widescreen is never a good idea. But I meant mandated for widescreen releases.

Yes I wasn't thinking about the lack of 16:9 tvs in the early to mid 90's. The penetration just wasn't there as there is now.

Also they already had a library of quality letterbox masters prepared for Laserdisc. Wide anamorphic required a remastering process back to the film.

So there is a different process for anamorphic? If they already have a distributable letterbox format couldn't they have simply marked it anamorphic during dvd creation or is that process more complex for major studio releases?

No, 4:3 or 16:9 is determined during the encoding and not the authoring. You can't just change the flag after the fact, not without messing up the aspect ratio.

Ok I think that answers my question. Its not a "quick" fix than...

[jagabo]

Laserdisc was created when there were no widescreen TVs. Widescreen movies were either letterboxed or pan-and-scanned (some anamorphic laserdiscs were made late in the game). So when DVDs were made from those masters they just used the letterboxed masters. Hence letterboxed DVDs.

[edDV]

Also they already had a library of quality letterbox masters prepared for Laserdisc. Wide anamorphic required a remastering process back to the film.

So there is a different process for anamorphic? If they already have a distributable letterbox format couldn't they have simply marked it anamorphic during dvd creation or is that process more complex for major studio releases?

The letterbox laserdisc video masters were 704x486i (D2 telecined NTSC) or 704x576i (D2 +104% speed PAL). Conversion to amamorphic wide would have required a lossy vertical upscale. Even if they did this, DVD players would have vertically recompressed them back to letterbox for 4:3 TV sets adding more loss. The pan/scan "full" versions were recorded full height 4:3 (sides missing).

An anamorphic remaster would have started with a new 16:9 transfer from film. 2.35:1 films would still have some letterbox.

The wide bit is only there to tell the player whether the video was mastered amamorphic (16:9) or not. A letterbox mastered DVD is handled by the player as 4:3.

[turk690]

[QUOTE=edDV;2013757]

Also they already had a library of quality letterbox masters prepared for Laserdisc. Wide anamorphic required a remastering process back to the film.

The wide bit is only there to tell the player whether the video was mastered amamorphic (16:9) or not. A letterbox mastered DVD is handled by the player as 4:3.

And then you set your DVD-player to, gasp!, zoom the letterboxed 4:3 up to get rid of the black surround on your widescreen TV...

[edDV]

[QUOTE=turk690;2014897]

Also they already had a library of quality letterbox masters prepared for Laserdisc. Wide anamorphic required a remastering process back to the film.

The wide bit is only there to tell the player whether the video was mastered amamorphic (16:9) or not. A letterbox mastered DVD is handled by the player as 4:3.

And then you set your DVD-player to, gasp!, zoom the letterboxed 4:3 up to get rid of the black surround on your widescreen TV...

No, you buy the anamorphic wide DVD version or the Blu-Ray.

[yoda313]

And then you set your DVD-player to, gasp!, zoom the letterboxed 4:3 up to get rid of the black surround on your widescreen TV...

If that is meant as a slight against me I leave the black bars intact whenever and wherever possible. I watch my letterboxed dvds on my xbox 360 and it has a perfect stretch mode that maintains the ratio without distorting the picture and preserves the black bars (but properly on a 16:9 set - not inside of a 4:3 matte - ie the postage stamp effect).

I was mearly wondering why anamorphic 16:9 wasn't there from the beginning in the dvd era and as I have mentioned earlier I do see the reasons now.

If it wasn't directed at me then I take it back.

No, you buy the anamorphic wide DVD version or the Blu-Ray.

Bingo!

However I do buy dvds used quite often and this does come up every now and then in early first edition releases of many movies. Though of course many "special editions" do come fully anamorphic and obviously bluray are.

--------------------------

Hey - theres a funny thought. Would any one go through the horrific situation of putting a widescreen movie in letterbox mode on a bluray disc??? That would be horrendous. Pay inflated bluray disc prices for a subpar edition that would have looked better getting a anamporphic dvd release (sans hd audio if it came with it of course).