It is currently 30 Mar 2024, 06:22




 Page 1 of 1 [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Why are so many scope films cropped to around 2.0:1?
PostPosted: 30 Jan 2024, 08:53 
True fan
True fan
User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2010, 20:03
Posts: 452
Location: TN, United States
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 7 times
I’ve noticed over the years that a number of scope films are cropped to about 2.0:1. At first I thought it was just because of early letterbox masters but it still happens occasionally on later discs.

Super wide films or the original 2.55:1 CinemaScope films were regularly cropped to 2.35 until years later but it’s still really weird seeing cropped but still nice looking versions of scope films. This is similar to how 70mm blowups would necessitate cropping of scope 2.35 to 2.21:1.

For Your Eyes Only is one of these, and I just watched Romancing the Stone which is another one. The worst is the first letterbox pressing of Flatliners which is actually cropped to 1.85:1 or so. I suppose that’s why it had a quiet second pressing reissue.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why are so many scope films cropped to around 2.0:1?
PostPosted: 31 Jan 2024, 06:11 
Honest fan
Honest fan
User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2023, 06:27
Posts: 83
Location: United States
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 21 times
I do not understand why "semi-wide-screen" versions of movies were released. Either you use the original aspect ratio, or you do not.

I remember being happy that "Ghostbusters 2" was in wide screen, until I noticed at the end that they had used the proper 2.35: 1 ratio, for the end credits only.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why are so many scope films cropped to around 2.0:1?
PostPosted: 31 Jan 2024, 12:14 
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 07 Aug 2002, 23:37
Posts: 4541
Location: Tokyo
Has thanked: 292 times
Been thanked: 1138 times
sdraper wrote:
For Your Eyes Only is one of these, and I just watched Romancing the Stone which is another one. The worst is the first letterbox pressing of Flatliners which is actually cropped to 1.85:1 or so. I suppose that’s why it had a quiet second pressing reissue.


Would that be specific to US releases? Could you clarify which releases?

(assuming the data is correct and the ratio was not only reported for opening credits)

For Your Eyes Only (1981) [ML101725] USA => 2.10:1
For Your Eyes Only (1981) [NJEL-52737] Japan => reported at 2.35:1

Romancing the Stone (1984) [1358-85] USA => 2.35:1, wrong?
Romancing the Stone (1984) [PILF-1603] Japan => reported at 1.95:1

Flatliners (1990) [50386] 1st LTBX
Flatliners (1990) [79036] 2nd LTBX

Julien
_________________
HARDWARE DATABASE
HLD-X0/9 LD-S9 OPPO 105/205 SL-1200G
LDD-1 MSC-4000 R2144 PONTUS II C45 MC257
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why are so many scope films cropped to around 2.0:1?
PostPosted: 31 Jan 2024, 17:17 
Absolute fan
Absolute fan
User avatar

Joined: 01 Feb 2018, 02:41
Posts: 1990
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 182 times
Been thanked: 383 times
Was Vittorio Storato involved with any of them?
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why are so many scope films cropped to around 2.0:1?
PostPosted: 31 Jan 2024, 18:12 
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 07 Aug 2002, 23:37
Posts: 4541
Location: Tokyo
Has thanked: 292 times
Been thanked: 1138 times
takeshi666 wrote:
Was Vittorio Storato involved with any of them?


Not for these post-production matting targeted for home video.
His Univisium 2:1 came later for mainstream productions, starting from 1998.

Most likely they didn't like how wide the letterboxed black bars were and did some zooming/matting to "fill up more of the screen" to please studio executives? Of course keeping opening and closing credits properly framed so that no ones' name would get cut.

Julien
_________________
HARDWARE DATABASE
HLD-X0/9 LD-S9 OPPO 105/205 SL-1200G
LDD-1 MSC-4000 R2144 PONTUS II C45 MC257
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why are so many scope films cropped to around 2.0:1?
PostPosted: 31 Jan 2024, 22:55 
Jedi Knight
Jedi Knight
User avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 2010, 09:44
Posts: 5971
Location: Ann Arbor
Has thanked: 1275 times
Been thanked: 1092 times
Yeah. A “mild letterbox” seems pretty common on LD. Back when TVs were small and square the loss of resolution and size was more important than aspect ratio. NTSC kinda sucks…and at 2:35 to 1 you have half-NTSC basically.
_________________
All about LD care, inner sleeves, shrink wrap, etc.

https://youtu.be/b3O-vHpHRpM
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why are so many scope films cropped to around 2.0:1?
PostPosted: 31 Jan 2024, 23:03 
Young Padawan
Young Padawan
User avatar

Joined: 16 May 2009, 18:05
Posts: 3569
Location: California, USA
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 314 times
takeshi666 wrote:
Was Vittorio Storato involved with any of them?


I was thinking him too. I think these uncommon aspect ratios were a European thing. At one point 1.66:1 was advocated in Europe. Paul Verhoeven’s Robocop was framed 1.66:1 in some European cinemas. Criterion later chose that aspect ratio too as the director approved version. I think 1.66:1 was chosen because it was a good compromise between the back then common 4:3 TV aspect ratio and the 16:9 widescreen for cinemas. Hence 2.0:1 is a good compromise between the now common 16:9 TV aspect ratio and 2.35:1 scope ratio.

After watching a couple of films in IMAX ratio, I believe the very widescreen is overrated. At typical screen distances, I don’t believe the human vision is that wide spread. I can see on some special occasions like in the Lawrence of Arabia when filming the very flat desert, a super wide aspect ratio could be very immersive but in general 1.66:1 to 2.00:1 is more adequate.
_________________
Coming Soon
Derman Labs
Anything Of Substance
Online
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why are so many scope films cropped to around 2.0:1?
PostPosted: 01 Feb 2024, 00:12 
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: 03 May 2004, 19:05
Posts: 8093
Location: Dullaware
Has thanked: 1218 times
Been thanked: 841 times
My only guess is due to the fact that widescreen was still new, people were still thinking they were actually loosing image with black bars in some
cases, and you didn't have places like IMDB to find out the correct aspect ratio so it would be OK to miss the mark a little.

Another thing is, could it be from the transfer equipment? Or taking into consideration the CRTs of the time and even monitors used when transferring?

Disclord would have known 100% but not sure if we will ever know.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why are so many scope films cropped to around 2.0:1?
PostPosted: 01 Feb 2024, 03:12 
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 07 Aug 2002, 23:37
Posts: 4541
Location: Tokyo
Has thanked: 292 times
Been thanked: 1138 times
substance wrote:
I can see on some special occasions like in the Lawrence of Arabia when filming the very flat desert, a super wide aspect ratio could be very immersive but in general 1.66:1 to 2.00:1 is more adequate.


That's also how NHK came up with their 5:3 ratio, based on human eyes/vision angle, in the 70's.

I don't think 2.35~2.55:1 was required but it boosted tickets sales with their panoramic screens, triple-synced projectors (Cinerama, Kinopanorama), 70mm reels (Super Technirama, Super Panavision, Ultra Panavision) to bring an experience that felt different from TV sets.

Then the whole home video frenzy started and VHS changed the game, people didn't want to "waste" screen space with black bars, so we zoomed, cropped, panned, pleased the customers. Super 35 was born from this era.

Julien
_________________
HARDWARE DATABASE
HLD-X0/9 LD-S9 OPPO 105/205 SL-1200G
LDD-1 MSC-4000 R2144 PONTUS II C45 MC257
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why are so many scope films cropped to around 2.0:1?
PostPosted: 01 Feb 2024, 03:49 
Young Padawan
Young Padawan
User avatar

Joined: 16 May 2009, 18:05
Posts: 3569
Location: California, USA
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 314 times
admin wrote:

I don't think 2.35~2.55:1 was required but it boosted tickets sales with their panoramic screens, triple-synced projectors (Cinerama, Kinopanorama), 70mm reels (Super Technirama, Super Panavision, Ultra Panavision) to bring an experience that felt different from TV sets.

Julien


A French man did this first. Abel Gance’s Napoleon had its ending projected onto 3 different screens.

Image
_________________
Coming Soon
Derman Labs
Anything Of Substance
Online
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Why are so many scope films cropped to around 2.0:1?
PostPosted: 02 Feb 2024, 23:53 
True fan
True fan
User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2014, 02:27
Posts: 428
Location: Washington State
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 2 times
On some releases I've always wondered if it was just the editing process. Even on discs released in the "correct aspect ratio", there is information missing. I noticed on Ghostbusters, in the ballroom scene, you can't see all the goggle/display graphs when Ray is looking for Slimer.
Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 1 [ 11 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: