| Author |
Message |
MikeEby
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 5237
Location: Osceola, Indiana
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | MikeEby wrote: | Ok, Watched this last night great flix...What's the deal with bouncing between 2:40 and 1:78 aspect ratio? Or is this some my HTPC was doing it should have not been doing.
Mike |
About 20% of the movie was filmed with IMAX cameras. The aspect ratio of IMAX film is 1.43:1.
When this film was shown in IMAX theaters, the film was shown constant width with the IMAX parts shown in there proper format, and the other 80% letterboxed to 2.39:1.
The IMAX stuff was shot so that it could be "acceptably" center cropped to 2.39:1. When shown in most commercial theaters, the whole film was shown 2.39:1 (show you didn't see the top and bottom of the frame on the 20% of IMAX stuff).
The DVD release is a center crop to 2.39:1.
The BD release does a partial crop of the IMAX stuff (1.43:1) to 16:9 for that portion of the movie to more preserve artistic intent. It is unfortunate that the IMAX stuff is not pillarboxed which would achieve the full artistic intent.
I did not watch it in an IMAX theater, but I did see it in my local 4K digital theater. The digital "prints" offered the option to present it like the BD release which is what I saw--the movie was presented on a 1.85:1 scene with letterboxing of 80% of it. |
I see…That seems like it would raise havoc if you are doing CIH, what did you do….Crop the 1:85 stuff to 2:40? Wouldn't people doing zoom CIH see the image spill off past the mask? I didn’t look was there a way to lock the AR to 2:40 in the menus?
Mike
_________________
Doing HD since the last century!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MikeEby wrote: | | Person99 wrote: | | MikeEby wrote: | Ok, Watched this last night great flix...What's the deal with bouncing between 2:40 and 1:78 aspect ratio? Or is this some my HTPC was doing it should have not been doing.
Mike |
About 20% of the movie was filmed with IMAX cameras. The aspect ratio of IMAX film is 1.43:1.
When this film was shown in IMAX theaters, the film was shown constant width with the IMAX parts shown in there proper format, and the other 80% letterboxed to 2.39:1.
The IMAX stuff was shot so that it could be "acceptably" center cropped to 2.39:1. When shown in most commercial theaters, the whole film was shown 2.39:1 (show you didn't see the top and bottom of the frame on the 20% of IMAX stuff).
The DVD release is a center crop to 2.39:1.
The BD release does a partial crop of the IMAX stuff (1.43:1) to 16:9 for that portion of the movie to more preserve artistic intent. It is unfortunate that the IMAX stuff is not pillarboxed which would achieve the full artistic intent.
I did not watch it in an IMAX theater, but I did see it in my local 4K digital theater. The digital "prints" offered the option to present it like the BD release which is what I saw--the movie was presented on a 1.85:1 scene with letterboxing of 80% of it. |
I see…That seems like it would raise havoc if you are doing CIH, what did you do….Crop the 1:85 stuff to 2:40? Wouldn't people doing zoom CIH see the image spill off past the mask? I didn’t look was there a way to lock the AR to 2:40 in the menus?
Mike |
If you have a CIH set up, you have two choices:
1) Show it CIW to see all of it on the disc, or
2) Show it 2.37:1 with a center crop of the IMAX stuff
Number 2 is how almost every theater in America showed it and it was filmed to facilitate this. So, many CIH guys do number 2. I'm in favor of artistic intent, so I would advocate number 1.
Now, if you are zooming, then doing number 2 is an issue if you are a moron with a sloppy set up. If you have a zoom set up well done, then you have a masking panel at the PJ to block the letterbox bars so they are never projected on the screen wall. But, it you have a sloppy set up that projects the letterbox bars, then you are correct, those people (sloppy zoom set ups) are whining up a storm! there is a 200+ post thread on the AVS CIH forum where the sloppy zoomers are bitching up a storm. 
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WanMan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 10270
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They used mixed aspect ratios in the movie creation? Interesting. I wonder who thought that was ok.
_________________
Trust no one. Absolutely no one. Advice of the board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| WanMan wrote: | | They used mixed aspect ratios in the movie creation? Interesting. I wonder who thought that was ok. |
Christopher Nolan
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garyfritz
Joined: 08 Apr 2006
Posts: 12088
Location: Fort Collins, CO
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
And who thought it was OK to have the aspect ratio CHANGE during viewing. That has to be so distracting as to destroy any artistic intent that they hoped to achieve.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garyfritz wrote: | | And who thought it was OK to have the aspect ratio CHANGE during viewing. That has to be so distracting as to destroy any artistic intent that they hoped to achieve. |
I didn't find it distracting when I saw it at the 4K cinema. If you ask my wife, I bet she didn't even realized the ARs were changing! Further, I heard no complaints from those that saw it IMAX theaters about this.
As I said though, with a proper CIH set up, you can see it the way it was shown in most of the theaters.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeEby
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 5237
Location: Osceola, Indiana
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It wasn’t as noticeable as you would think…I watched it with two other people and they didn’t even notice…It seemed to only shift to 1:85 during action scenes.
Mike
_________________
Doing HD since the last century!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeEby
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 5237
Location: Osceola, Indiana
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: |
Now, if you are zooming, then doing number 2 is an issue if you are a moron with a sloppy set up. If you have a zoom set up well done, then you have a masking panel at the PJ to block the letterbox bars so they are never projected on the screen wall. But, it you have a sloppy set up that projects the letterbox bars, then you are correct, those people (sloppy zoom set ups) are whining up a storm! there is a 200+ post thread on the AVS CIH forum where the sloppy zoomers are bitching up a storm. |
Were going a little off topic here but couldn't projectors like the Panny that Cliff was showing off that is really setup for Zoom CIH just implement a firmware option to simply mask part of the panel off. Masking panels would really seem like a Rube Goldburg method because you would not get sharp focus since they are so far from the screen. Perhaps I don't understand this method.
Mike
_________________
Doing HD since the last century!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MikeEby wrote: | | Person99 wrote: |
Now, if you are zooming, then doing number 2 is an issue if you are a moron with a sloppy set up. If you have a zoom set up well done, then you have a masking panel at the PJ to block the letterbox bars so they are never projected on the screen wall. But, it you have a sloppy set up that projects the letterbox bars, then you are correct, those people (sloppy zoom set ups) are whining up a storm! there is a 200+ post thread on the AVS CIH forum where the sloppy zoomers are bitching up a storm. |
Were going a little off topic here but couldn't projectors like the Panny that Cliff was showing off that is really setup for Zoom CIH just implement a firmware option to simply mask part of the panel off. Masking panels would really seem like a Rube Goldburg method because you would not get sharp focus since they are so far from the screen. Perhaps I don't understand this method.
Mike |
First, one should note, there are tons of PJs with electronic focus and zoom (i.e. control the zoom and focus with the remote). The ONLY thing the panny adds is memory locations for these settings so they can be recalled.
That said, you may be thinking CRT. A CRT is emittive technology. It can choose to not emit light that it does not want (via blanking or whatever). Digital projectors where transmittive (LCD and LCoS) or reflective (DLP and LCoS) function much more like a film projector. A film projector can only attempt to block out light it does not want, but the full frame of the film will always be projected.
Same with digitals. The full panel of the PJ will ALWAYS be projected. When you zoom the PJ to fill up a scope screen, you are really just making a very big 16:9 image where 12.5% of the image (letterbox bars) is projecting above and below the screen. The only way to stop that light from hitting the screen wall is mechanical masking at the PJ like they do in real theaters.
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeEby
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 5237
Location: Osceola, Indiana
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok...I get it....The tread on AVS is pretty funny to read...Someone posted this.
It sounds like a lens and scaler is a must if your doing CIH because of this issue. From what I read there are going to be more releases that do this.
Mike
_________________
Doing HD since the last century!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Person99
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4899
Location: Flower Mound, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 11:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MikeEby wrote: |
It sounds like a lens and scaler is a must if your doing CIH because of this issue. From what I read there are going to be more releases that do this.
Mike |
NO, NO, NO!!!
If you are not an idiot, you can zoom this. All you need to do is make a masking panel for the PJ. This can be as simple as a piece of cardboard with a 2.39:1 rectangle cut out of it on a stand that slides in front of the PJ. This should be done all the time anyway when projecting scope content.
Basically, that thread is nothing more than a bunch of zooming morons with improper set ups complaining because this doesn't work on their improper set ups when they want to destroy the artistic intent of the director!
_________________
Dave
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeEby
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 5237
Location: Osceola, Indiana
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok...That's all it takes....I think I could handle that.
Mike
_________________
Doing HD since the last century!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark_A_W
Joined: 15 Mar 2006
Posts: 3068
Location: Sunny Melbourne Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2008 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This movie DROVE ME BANANAS.
Up and down adjusting my manual masking system with NFI what was going on. Fiddling with the player, worrying my system was playing up.
Gave up and left the masks open, which even with a LC CRT looks SHITE. (Pisspoor Ansi contrast....cue Dave)
WHO'S STUPID IDEA WAS THE ASPECT RATIO CHANGES???
Artistic Integrity....bull****.
If I had of known I would have cropped the whole thing to 2.40:1 in Zoom Player and then gone back and watched the IMAX scenes for eye candy.
Great movie.
Totally ruined for me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark_A_W
Joined: 15 Mar 2006
Posts: 3068
Location: Sunny Melbourne Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2008 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Person99 wrote: | | Basically, that thread is nothing more than a bunch of zooming morons with improper set ups complaining because this doesn't work on their improper set ups when they want to destroy the artistic intent of the director! |
That's a load of crap Dave. Artistic Intent..my arse.
They should NOT change aspect ratios during a movie, especially due to an IMAX gimick.
It plays HAVOC with a masking system. And anyone who cares about the image has a masking system, the no.1 most essential tweak.
The BD should have been seamlessly branched, with 1.78:1 IMAX scenes as a option.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WanMan
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 10270
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2008 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with Mark with the IMAX elements optional. I just watched this movie with the wife, and it was long. Was the months of hype from box office to BD release what did it in, or was it the seemingly inability to care for any of the characters in the film? The first 60% was a take down of the joker only to spend the last 40% setting up criminal compete-time with two-face.
Amusing so, every time they showed Aaron Eckhart I kept thinking about Thank You for Smoking, which I've only seen the trailer. I think the I was also left off-balanced when Maggie Gyllenhaal was in-scene. While she's kind of pretty to look at, I kept thinking how much I missed Katie Holmes' version of Rachel Dawes.
_________________
Trust no one. Absolutely no one. Advice of the board.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gino
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 1363
Location: Trinity Beach, AUSTRALIA
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2008 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
I just watched the movie in 2.40:1 AR, with the 1.78 material cropped, didn't worry me at all, the framing was still good so no useful information was really left out.
_________________
( B ) ( G ) ( R ) Blendzilla Down Under ( R ) ( G ) ( B ) - Tubes of Fury
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
winduptoy
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 187
Location: Lunenburg, Nova Scotia
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The change in Aspect didn't bother me either. Even if there was no AR change, the difference in clarity is stunning. Those Imax aerials of Chicago and Hong Kong blew me away! I am very envious of you lucky (big) dogs that can watch that on a 9" machine.
- toy dog
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
timbo
Joined: 22 Jul 2007
Posts: 82
Location: Brampton, Ontario
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark_A_W wrote: | | WHO'S STUPID IDEA WAS THE ASPECT RATIO CHANGES??? |
Now available... for CHRISTMAS 2009...
THE DARK KNIGHT ... VIDEOPHILES EDITION
Remastered for consistent aspect ratio. Available on Blu-Ray Hi-Def and DVD. $25.99
_________________
intrepid enthusiast
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MikeEby
Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 5237
Location: Osceola, Indiana
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| winduptoy wrote: | Those Imax aerials of Chicago and Hong Kong blew me away!
- toy dog |
I watched it again last night...This time in the first row about .85 screen width away. I agree the Imax shots are the cleanest image I have ever seen on my 8" machine.
Mike
_________________
Doing HD since the last century!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I watched this last night on Blu-ray as well for the first time. To me the increased sharpness of the IMAX film stock was immediately obvious.
This is getting me excited for films shot 100% on IMAX film stock.
The 16x9 to 235:1 ratio changes didn't bother me at all. The other 3 audience members (non AV types, though one was my wife) didn't even notice the AR change at all until I pointed it out!
Kal
_________________
Support our site by using our affiliate links. We thank you!
My basement/HT/bar/brewery build 2.0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
