Why are Criterions non-anamorphic
10-22-03, 01:01 PM
#1
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Thread Starter
Why are Criterions non-anamorphic
I was just wondering why Criterion's DVD's are non-anamorphic. I never really noticed before as I am relatively new to the HTheater world but I'm much more aware of anamorphic vs non-anamorphic now that I have a widescreen TV. I, and apparently many others on this forum, really enjoy the Criterion Collections because they put out great restored editions with really nice supplemental material. It just seems that these high quality DVD's should have anamorphic transers.
10-22-03, 01:04 PM
#2
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sitting on a beach, earning 20%
Posts: 9,917
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
A lot of the older ones are non-anmorphic, yes. Criterion put out the best versions of DVDs that could possibly be created at the time. With one or two exceptions, every release of theirs in the past couple of years (since Insomnia) has been anamorphic where apllicable.
Criterion often don't have teh rights anymore to their older releases, hence no anamorphic reissues, though they have done anamorphic reissues when possible (The 400 Blows and, I believe Beauty & The Beast).
Go to their site, www.criterionco.com, and it'll list which are anamorphic and not.
Criterion often don't have teh rights anymore to their older releases, hence no anamorphic reissues, though they have done anamorphic reissues when possible (The 400 Blows and, I believe Beauty & The Beast).
Go to their site, www.criterionco.com, and it'll list which are anamorphic and not.
10-22-03, 01:09 PM
#3
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: "Sitting on a beach, earning 20%"
Posts: 6,154
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Beauty in the Beast is 1.33 non-anamorphic
Criterion was slow to adapt to anamorphic. They worried about the quality of individual DVD players' anamorphic conversion (at least that was their reason). They've mostly switched to anamophic these days wherever applicable (academy ratio films like B and the B and Rashoman are not anamorphic of course). Some newer titles (Mona Lisa, Withnail and I) still aren't anamorphic because they can't seem to get the rights to the elements to make new anamorph transfers so instead we get DVD's made from old transfers.
Criterion was slow to adapt to anamorphic. They worried about the quality of individual DVD players' anamorphic conversion (at least that was their reason). They've mostly switched to anamophic these days wherever applicable (academy ratio films like B and the B and Rashoman are not anamorphic of course). Some newer titles (Mona Lisa, Withnail and I) still aren't anamorphic because they can't seem to get the rights to the elements to make new anamorph transfers so instead we get DVD's made from old transfers.
10-22-03, 01:09 PM
#4
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Thread Starter
Thanks for the reply, DonnachaOne. I was in fact browsing their website and checked about a dozen dvd's including Knife In the Water (a new release) and all were listed as non-anamorphic. It just seemed that they all were because I didn't find one in my initial semi-random search. Thanks for the heads up.
10-22-03, 03:28 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 788
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the FAQ on Criterion's webpages:
I started to write my own explanation, but Criterion's is much better.
Are all Criterion DVDs presented in their original theatrical aspect ratio?
Every Criterion DVD features an “About the transfer” section in the DVD insert. Here you will find the aspect ratio of the film listed along with information about the picture and sound elements from which it was transferred. We endeavor to present every film in its original aspect ratio (i.e., the ratio of height to width of the image), unless the filmmaker expressly requests a slightly different framing. What that means is that the Criterion bar is your guarantee that you're getting the complete picture as the filmmaker intended.
Criterion’s commitment to presenting films in their original aspect ratio has caused some confusion regarding films shown in 1.33:1 aspect ratio (aka “flat” or “Academy ratio”). This is due to the fact that the vast majority of films shot before (and many shot after) CinemaScope's 1951 debut were intended for presentation in the 1.33:1 aspect ratio—the same size of a standard television screen. For such films (including Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai), no mattes or letterboxing are necessary, because the whole picture will perfectly fit a standard television frame.
Every Criterion DVD features an “About the transfer” section in the DVD insert. Here you will find the aspect ratio of the film listed along with information about the picture and sound elements from which it was transferred. We endeavor to present every film in its original aspect ratio (i.e., the ratio of height to width of the image), unless the filmmaker expressly requests a slightly different framing. What that means is that the Criterion bar is your guarantee that you're getting the complete picture as the filmmaker intended.
Criterion’s commitment to presenting films in their original aspect ratio has caused some confusion regarding films shown in 1.33:1 aspect ratio (aka “flat” or “Academy ratio”). This is due to the fact that the vast majority of films shot before (and many shot after) CinemaScope's 1951 debut were intended for presentation in the 1.33:1 aspect ratio—the same size of a standard television screen. For such films (including Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai), no mattes or letterboxing are necessary, because the whole picture will perfectly fit a standard television frame.
Why aren't certain early Criterion DVDs anamorphically enhanced?
Criterion began releasing 16x9 enhanced DVDs with Insomnia (spine #47). Ever since, we have released anamorphic DVDs whenever possible. A large percentage of Criterion DVD releases are indeed enhanced for 16x9 televisions.
Criterion is considering the possibility of re-releasing some of our early DVDs in 16x9 enhanced editions. Please keep an eye on our website for any future news and updates regarding this project.
Criterion began releasing 16x9 enhanced DVDs with Insomnia (spine #47). Ever since, we have released anamorphic DVDs whenever possible. A large percentage of Criterion DVD releases are indeed enhanced for 16x9 televisions.
Criterion is considering the possibility of re-releasing some of our early DVDs in 16x9 enhanced editions. Please keep an eye on our website for any future news and updates regarding this project.
10-22-03, 05:13 PM
#8
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Thread Starter
I understand about 1.33:1 film aspect ratio, although the term Academy Ratio, was new to me. I was asking about 1.85:1 films like Silence of the Lambs and Time Bandits, which are "not anamorphic" according to their webpage.
10-22-03, 05:27 PM
#9
DVD Talk Legend
It was pretty lame that Criterion didn't do anamorphic from the start. There was no excuse for that.
I would love to own anamorphic version of Andrei Rublev, Picnic at Hanging Rock, and Cleo from 5 to 7.
I would love to own anamorphic version of Andrei Rublev, Picnic at Hanging Rock, and Cleo from 5 to 7.
10-22-03, 05:57 PM
#10
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: You have moved into a dark place. It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Posts: 4,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot of companies won't anamorphically enhance 1.66:1 aspect ratio titles to make them fit into a 1.78:1 window.
Above all Criterion respects ORIGINAL ASPECT RATIO. If you anamorphically enhance a 1.66:1 image you'll have to chop off the sides slightly.
Yes, they could window-box the image (add black bars to either side, as opposed to letter-boxing which ads them to the top and bottom of the frame) but is that really any better than a non-anamorphic transfer?
It's a sticky wicket with that half-breed ratio.
Above all Criterion respects ORIGINAL ASPECT RATIO. If you anamorphically enhance a 1.66:1 image you'll have to chop off the sides slightly.
Yes, they could window-box the image (add black bars to either side, as opposed to letter-boxing which ads them to the top and bottom of the frame) but is that really any better than a non-anamorphic transfer?
It's a sticky wicket with that half-breed ratio.
10-22-03, 06:32 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 788
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by chente
I understand about 1.33:1 film aspect ratio, although the term Academy Ratio, was new to me. I was asking about 1.85:1 films like Silence of the Lambs and Time Bandits, which are "not anamorphic" according to their webpage.
I understand about 1.33:1 film aspect ratio, although the term Academy Ratio, was new to me. I was asking about 1.85:1 films like Silence of the Lambs and Time Bandits, which are "not anamorphic" according to their webpage.
Silence of the Lambs (spine #13) was released 7/14/98
Time Bandits (#37) was released 3/30/99
Anamorphically enhanced DVDs must be made from high-definition masters (which are expensive to make). In the early days, Criterion was at the mercy of the masters they licensed from the studios, and couldn't afford to do hi-def masters themselves. I think money was the main reason they were a "late-adopter": they waited to make sure that consumers were going to really buy into HDTV, before they invested a lot of resources unto making anamorphic transfers.
Just to reiterate, Criterion wasn't the only DVD producer late to the anamorphic game: the beloved Buena Vista dragged its feet longer than Criterion did.
10-22-03, 06:39 PM
#12
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Thread Starter
Originally posted by FilmFanSea
As stated above, Criterion's first anamorphically enhanced DVD was Insomnia (spine #47), released July 13, 1999.
Silence of the Lambs (spine #13) was released 7/14/98
Time Bandits (#37) was released 3/30/99
Anamorphically enhanced DVDs must be made from high-definition masters (which are expensive to make). In the early days, Criterion was at the mercy of the masters they licensed from the studios, and couldn't afford to do hi-def masters themselves. I think money was the main reason they were a "late-adopter": they waited to make sure that consumers were going to really buy into HDTV, before they invested a lot of resources unto making anamorphic transfers.
Just to reiterate, Criterion wasn't the only DVD producer late to the anamorphic game: the beloved Buena Vista dragged its feet longer than Criterion did.
As stated above, Criterion's first anamorphically enhanced DVD was Insomnia (spine #47), released July 13, 1999.
Silence of the Lambs (spine #13) was released 7/14/98
Time Bandits (#37) was released 3/30/99
Anamorphically enhanced DVDs must be made from high-definition masters (which are expensive to make). In the early days, Criterion was at the mercy of the masters they licensed from the studios, and couldn't afford to do hi-def masters themselves. I think money was the main reason they were a "late-adopter": they waited to make sure that consumers were going to really buy into HDTV, before they invested a lot of resources unto making anamorphic transfers.
Just to reiterate, Criterion wasn't the only DVD producer late to the anamorphic game: the beloved Buena Vista dragged its feet longer than Criterion did.
10-22-03, 06:46 PM
#13
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: You have moved into a dark place. It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Posts: 4,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And look how nice most BVHV transfers look NOW.
And even Criterion's non-anamorphic xfers are lovely to behold.
And even Criterion's non-anamorphic xfers are lovely to behold.
10-22-03, 06:53 PM
#14
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Making a 1.66:1 anamorphic widescreen transfers does NOT require chopping of the sides. Instead, the image is reduced slightly...thus black bars on the SIDES.
