Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum rules before posting.

Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free registration is required.

If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.

    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1 2  Previous   Next
When 1.85 is really 1.78
Author Message
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorDarklyNoon
No Godz, No Masterz
Registered: May 8, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Germany Posts: 1,945
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
I hate it when a film that is supposed to be 1:2.35 is broadcasted, released or w/e in 1:1.78.

It is a crime against the director 

They are just doing it so that the screen is fully filled with picture material 
Donnie
www.tvmaze.com
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantMrVideo
Unix works!
Registered: July 22, 2007
Posts: 348
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting DarklyNoon:
Quote:
I hate it when a film that is supposed to be 1:2.35 is broadcasted, released or w/e in 1:1.78.

It is a crime against the director 

They are just doing it so that the screen is fully filled with picture material 
Donnie


BTW is it 2.35:1 and 1.78:1. (H:V)

In any event, there are still way too many people who do not like black bars, either on the top/bottom or left/right.  Hence the broadcasting of 2.35:1 movies being pan-n-scanned to fill the 16:9 screen.

If it were released on Blu-ray that way I'd return it as defective.  I've personally not run across a Blu-ray that is formatted wrong.  Even the DVDs that I've purchased haven't done that.  Guess I've been lucky.

The U.S. broadcast networks are horrible for taking 2.35:1 movies and filling the screen.  I do not watch movies on broadcast TV.  I hate the commercial interruptions, the network bugs and snipes, etc.  If I want to see it, I have it on Blu-ray/DVD.
Mr Video Productions
If it isn't Unix, it isn't an OS :-)
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorTracer
Registered: March 13, 2007
United States Posts: 951
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting MrVideo:
Quote:
I've personally not run across a Blu-ray that is formatted wrong.  Even the DVDs that I've purchased haven't done that.  Guess I've been lucky.


You need to check out the Canada Blu-ray releases from Alliance.
Are you local?
This is a local shop the strangers you would bring would not understand us, our customs, our local ways.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorThe Movieman
DVDP User Since 2007
Registered: March 18, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 2,550
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting MrVideo:
Quote:
I've personally not run across a Blu-ray that is formatted wrong.  Even the DVDs that I've purchased haven't done that.  Guess I've been lucky.


One of the more interesting ones was Traitor. The Blu-ray was released with the original 2.40 aspect ratio while the DVD was 1.78... So odd.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantMrVideo
Unix works!
Registered: July 22, 2007
Posts: 348
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Tracer:
Quote:
You need to check out the Canada Blu-ray releases from Alliance.


Guess I'll never buy anything from them.

If no one else bought those discs, maybe they might get the idea as to why their releases aren't selling very well.  More so if people would send them e-mail complaining about the pan-n-scan 16:9 releases.
Mr Video Productions
If it isn't Unix, it isn't an OS :-)
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantMrVideo
Unix works!
Registered: July 22, 2007
Posts: 348
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting TheMovieman:
Quote:
One of the more interesting ones was Traitor. The Blu-ray was released with the original 2.40 aspect ratio while the DVD was 1.78... So odd.


Separate releases, or a combo release?

If the DVD came out first, it was probably mastered onto NTSC, which meant for the Blu-ray release they had to go back and remaster for HD and knowing that buyers wouldn't like a 16:9 full screen version, did it right.

If they had a NTSC master around and had already authored a DVD version, redoing it for a Blu-ray combo release just wasn't worth the expense.

Personally, for me, putting in a DVD version is a total waste of time, money and materials.
Mr Video Productions
If it isn't Unix, it isn't an OS :-)
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorThe Movieman
DVDP User Since 2007
Registered: March 18, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 2,550
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting MrVideo:
Quote:
Quoting TheMovieman:
Quote:
One of the more interesting ones was Traitor. The Blu-ray was released with the original 2.40 aspect ratio while the DVD was 1.78... So odd.


Separate releases, or a combo release?

If the DVD came out first, it was probably mastered onto NTSC, which meant for the Blu-ray release they had to go back and remaster for HD and knowing that buyers wouldn't like a 16:9 full screen version, did it right.

If they had a NTSC master around and had already authored a DVD version, redoing it for a Blu-ray combo release just wasn't worth the expense.

Personally, for me, putting in a DVD version is a total waste of time, money and materials.


No, separate (but on the same day).
 Last edited: by The Movieman
    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1 2  Previous   Next