This isn't an issue where opinions have any place. 2+2=4, not 5. The OAR of "Buffy" is 4x3, not 16x9.

So in summary when two valid versions are available you prefer to be told what aspect ratio is better rather than make up your own minds based on the evidence? Astonishing. It’s facile to compare opening up the frame as with Buffy R2 and imply that’s the same as Pan & Scan. One is expanding the amount of available information (which has been utilised with W/S framing in mind) and the other is restricting it. Just because Joss Whedon, writer, producer and (very) occasional director says he prefers 4:3, what, we should all just agree even if a direct comparison reveals the W/S to be superior? Oh, and the "gaffes and crew members are revealed by opening up the frame" argument is a little lame. Sure there are occasions when the boom mike comes into shot but then so are there on the full frame versions. On the W/S set this is more than made up for by the better picture composition. Wonder how all the other director’s and DPs feel about Whedon speaking for them and assuming they prefer full frame over the W/S ratio it was shot in? I’ll bet the majority are happier with the W/S framing than the full frame.

Come back and discuss this if/when you’ve seen those season 4 episodes in widescreen and 4:3 and I‘ll be happy to listen but until that time all the 4:3 Buffy proponents are berating something they haven’t even seen! Would you give credence to film critics who review without seeing the movie, book journalists who slate something without reading what they’re reviewing?

Be interesting to revisit this thread in 5 years time when all the sets are re-released in 16x9 in the US and see how many will upgrade and how many will cling to their "creator authorised" 4:3 versions. When HDTV is in place and all the Buffy re-runs are in widescreen I wonder if the old 4:3 R1 sets on EBay will be fetching a premium due to the fact they show less picture information.

Don’t think so.


A few pertinent sections from the DVDFile review:


Series creator Joss Whedon has stated that Buffy is composed for 4:3 and that he prefers it at that ratio, and so one would suppose that it ought to be presented that way on DVD. However, actually watching the episodes on these discs gives the opposite impression. Buffy in widescreen is practically a revelation. I have to wonder if the show's director of photography is on the same page with Whedon.

Although it is true that sometimes the extra image is unessential dead space, more often than not the wider framing really opens up the image, providing a nice sense of balance and a cinematic feel, and it makes the 4:3 version looks positively cramped and uncomfortable. Additionally, the special effects are often rendered to extend to the sides of the screen during things like vampire dustings........production flubs are visible at the sides of the widescreen picture in a few episodes, where they are not visible at all in 4:3.......in all there are barely more than half a dozen problems during the course of the whole season.......It certainly isn't as if earlier years (in 4:3) were free from errors like boom mics dipping into the frame or obvious stunt doubles. Flubs aside, I still find the widescreen framing of this season vastly preferable to that which has aired on television. Joss Whedon's opinion certainly deserves to carry some weight on the matter, but having seen both versions I am forced to respectfully disagree with him. In fact, I can't imagine why he would feel the way he does. Buffy just looks better in widescreen. Anyone with an eye for photographic composition should be able to recognize that.

Regardless, this is the best Buffy has looked up to this point, and it's even better in widescreen. Sorry, Joss.

So now it’s "creator" is it? It was always the director cited as the authority before which I guess makes Whedon in the "right" on only 10 episodes. Now who’s throwing out the rules? Maybe we should get a viewpoint from the runner on the show?

Anyways I’m done on this. It’s unfortunate that people feel as though they can speak with surety on something they haven’t even seen but I guess if that’s what you need to do in order to make peace with Fox and Whedon for foisting full frame product on you then so be it. Your loss.

Lets put it this way, it was filmed with 4:3 in mind, this is not to say that it's Pan&Scan since that would simply mean they pick a shot in the widescreen and go from there. the camera is set up to begin with and the ratio is set to begin with to catch only what is going on in that 4:3. I don't care if in five years all tv's are HD and they show it reruns on widescreen, it still wont be what the OAR was intended. is this to say that if Full Metal Jacket had a widescreen version out there even though it wasn't ment to be seen that way, that we should watch it because hey, we could see more brains on the wall and it makes the film look ooooh so much better on my HDtv? this is not about what looks better or how much more we could see. it's about seeing the correct amount that was originally intended to be seen. Maybe we should close this thread and re-open it in five years to discuss it more because hell, even if it's not as the director intended.. aslong as it looks good to us right..

Look, what looks good to you might not look good to others. This goes back to the beating of the WS drum when it comes to J6P. We get bent out of shape because they are missing picture and of course they are not watching it as the CREATOR INTENDED, hell the OAR rules are thrown out here then since the way the creators intended it to be is not going to be followed simply because we want it the way we want it. This brings to light a good point now, Why beat on a WS drum when in reality, those J6P are just watching the film the way they like it. Even if it's not OAR, aslong as they are enjoying it the way they see it most pleasing to there eyes. either get on one ground or don't. It can't be both ways. you are either for OAR or you are for what you find pleasing and if so, you can't really go off on J6P wanting it fullscreen / Pan & Scan because hell, thats what they find to be most pleasing to there eyes.


Not to mention, even with HDtv, does this mean we should convert everything Fullscreen and P&S to a Widescreen format just so our tv could be filled.. oh wait, isn't that J6P's arguement on why they want fullscreen/ P&S films? to fill the whole screen... I say these films and shows are a form of Art. do we really need to see more background in certain great pieces of artwork in order to enjoy it more? As always, it should be as the creator intended it to be seen. simple as that.


P.S. that Pee Wee bike chain scene did suck when it wasn't in it's proper OAR..

I'm all for OAR, but I am also of the opinion that the 16x9 Buffys look better. I own the R2 discs and have seen the 4x3 versions on tv and for me there is no contest.

That being said I will keep buying the rest of the Buffy seasons, R1 and R2 (S6 comes out mid-May) but will always prefer the Widescreen.

I'm glad they are going to be full-screen as that's the way I've enjoyed them on tv for years. So what if some reviewer prefers the widescreen version. I really don't feel I'm missing out on anything as at no point during watching the show did I ever say to myself "this would look way better in widescreen".

Well said, johnathan.e! I bought the widescreen R2 sets after watching some of season 4 in syndication and I prefer them as well. Sorry again, Joss.

The problem I see with this issue is that when Joss states his preference for 4x3, is this what all the other Buffy directors feel? Obviously some of these episodes were shot with 16:9 in mind because they used the extra space to frame their shots.

One last thing, if we cater to Joss's wishes on Buffy because he's the creator, I guess we have no say in getting the original Star Wars trilogy since George (the creator) can do what he wants.

I don't have the R2 DVDs (and, for reasons such as the following, I'm quite pleased the 4:3 version is being released over here), but I did watch DVD rips of the fourth season in widescreen. Talks of 16:9 enhancement are subjective at the very best, and the very noticeable off-frame gaffes throughout the season made it quite plain (without influence of any of this controversy) that the show was framed with a 4:3 aspect in mind.

(This first scene actually has a rear-projection effect for the stuff in the 4:3 frame, in case that's not clear)





I'm inclined to think this might be the more "facile" view. Creative expression is not about "expanding...information;" quite the contrary, for there is an infinite amount of "information" that does not make it into a work, and it is up to the creative force to arrange and filter such into the finished item. More information =/= more art--it's really that simple.

Now, you could perhaps make an argument for fortuitous creative success in spite of the artist, and justify a WS preference like that--indeed, it seems to me that you might be trying to do so--but you've provided no specific examples of the benefits of the wider framing (and, though admittedly I've only seen a third or so of the S4 eps more than once, I cannot recall a blatant incidence of it). Without such, and in light of specific examples of obviously unintended, open-frame-induced mistakes even beyond the four above, the only reasonable conclusion seems to be that we go with the word of the best-personified "artist" behind this collaborative effort, and take the 4:3 ratio as the intended, proper aspect.

But, um, yeah, you can go and be all independent-minded and stuff.

EDIT: For what it's worth, two of these were directed by David Solomon, one by Michael Gershman, and one by Whedon. One of these, Gershman, has cinematography credit through 2001. Barring an ep-by-ep DP breakdown (and assuming that would be relevant), appealing to that position doesn't really help, it seems.

Astonishing how far some will go to justify the "formatted to fit my [16x9] screen" position. I'm not surprised by this, but I guess I'm surprised to find a moderator of this site coming down on that side.
jonathan, I respect your right to an opinion of your own, but I don't respect the opinion itself. It's not one iota different from the masses who find a full-frame or pan-and-scan presentation more "aesthetically pleasing" than a presentation at the intended ratio. They too do not consider the creator of what they're watching to be infallible, and they too prefer to trust their own eyes.

Doesn't make them right, but they're secure in their opinion, and as DVD goes mainstream, the studios are listening to them. I'm quite sure they find much support in your opinion. The next time an advocate for full-frame and pan-and-scan releases posts on this forum, they'll find an ally in your words and I hope they quote them in support of their position. After all, directors aren't infallible and they should simply trust their own eyes, right?

Or is that deference only allowed for some of us?

Widescreen is better always because that's what I read on the internet!

The attitude of some of the people in this thread is downright Orwellian. When did "OAR is best" become "OAR is best, except when it's not"?

The intended aspect ration of Buffy is 4x3. Whether you like anamorphic 16x9 is irrelevant. To advocate any aspect ratio other than the intended one is wrong, whether it's because you don't like widescreen since you don't like the "black bars", or because you prefer 16x9 because it looks "better".

An anamorphic widescreen Citizen Kane might look "better" to some people, but that won't make it right.

I've got the R2 Buffy Season 4 and 5 sets(Season 6 is on preorder), and I have no problem with the WS framing for the show. I have to be honest though. I think my preference for the R2 versions is about a lot more than just the 16:9 transfers:

1) They're released months, if not over a year, before the R1 sets.

2) They include the "Previously on" intros.

3) The book design packaging is superior to the fold-out digipacks.


For me, being able to see the show in WS is just the icing on the cake. The only things the R1 sets have in their favor IMO are the lower prices, the lack of PAL speedup(which will be a big deal on the musical episode), and a handful of additional supplements.

I guess there are two types in this world. One one hand there are those who think everything is either black or white and need to have someone "in authority" tell them which of the two boxes to put everything in. And the other type which thinks most of the world is actually gray.

I fall into the latter category. Had I only the Whedon blurb and the arguments of the videophiles herein in evidence, I would have probably determined that the shade of grey that's right for me would be of the 4:3 variety.

But I've seen most of the seasons 4-6 episodes in 16x9 as well as ALL of them in 4:3 and to me it's a no-brainer. The 16x9 versions almost always look more esthetically pleasing.

To me, the few SNAFUs on the edge of the widescreen versions are a no-consequence diversion... they are infrequent enough to have no effect on my enjoyment of the material.

I'm amazed that so many here are willing to let others determine for them what is the choice to make. OK, I understand the need for this if one doesn't have the opportunity to see all the evidence, but having seen both, I wonder why anyone with this data in hand would choose 4:3.

What's astonishing about it, exactly? I didn't make "Buffy," so my opinion on how it should be presented is irrelevant. There's nothing for me to make up my mind about.

Quote:

It’s facile to compare opening up the frame as with Buffy R2 and imply that’s the same as Pan & Scan. One is expanding the amount of available information (which has been utilised with W/S framing in mind) and the other is restricting it.

It's as if OAR advocacy has no affect on the membership of these forums during its years of operation. Amazing and sad. Do you have any clue whatsoever why people prefer OAR? Hint: it has nothing to do with "expanding the amount of information available."

Quote:

Just because Joss Whedon, writer, producer and (very) occasional director says he prefers 4:3, what, we should all just agree even if a direct comparison reveals the W/S to be superior?

You don't have to agree about which looks "better," but you can't pretend that your opinion of what looks "better" means anything relevant to the question of how "Buffy" should be presented.

Quote:

Oh, and the "gaffes and crew members are revealed by opening up the frame" argument is a little lame. Sure there are occasions when the boom mike comes into shot but then so are there on the full frame versions. On the W/S set this is more than made up for by the better picture composition.

The extent to which excuses are being made to justify the 16x9 versions in this thread is just getting preposterous.

Quote:

Wonder how all the other director’s and DPs feel about Whedon speaking for them and assuming they prefer full frame over the W/S ratio it was shot in? I’ll bet the majority are happier with the W/S framing than the full frame.

Whedon produced the show and was always on the set. And you? I'll bet you have no idea what you're talking about.

Quote:

Come back and discuss this if/when you’ve seen those season 4 episodes in widescreen and 4:3 and I‘ll be happy to listen but until that time all the 4:3 Buffy proponents are berating something they haven’t even seen!

I've also never seen all of 2001 in pan & scan. Maybe I'll even thnk it looks better. Does this mean I'm not allowed to only want to see the OAR presentation and I can't properly state that the P&S version is wrong? Preposterous.

Quote:

Would you give credence to film critics who review without seeing the movie, book journalists who slate something without reading what they’re reviewing?

All of your emphasis on seeing it is irrelevant. No one needs to see a single episode of "Buffy" to know the proper AR for it. This is nothing like being a critic and reviewing. This isn't a subjective topic where opinions count.

Quote:

Be interesting to revisit this thread in 5 years time when all the sets are re-released in 16x9 in the US and see how many will upgrade and how many will cling to their "creator authorised" 4:3 versions. When HDTV is in place and all the Buffy re-runs are in widescreen I wonder if the old 4:3 R1 sets on EBay will be fetching a premium due to the fact they show less picture information.

Don’t think so.

Yeah, and those 4x3 Citizen Kane discs will also probably be selling for cheap on eBay, as those who think their opinions on what looks better matter more than anything else purchase 16x9 widescreen discs.

Quote:

So now it’s "creator" is it? It was always the director cited as the authority before which I guess makes Whedon in the "right" on only 10 episodes. Now who’s throwing out the rules? Maybe we should get a viewpoint from the runner on the show?

This fallacy has already been exposed, but perhaps you're not actually reading the thread or what Whedon wrote. Whedon said: ""The BUFFY's I (and others) shot were framed for traditional TVs." No rule is being thrown out; someone who is in a position to know has informed us how all of the episodes were shot.

Quote:

Anyways I’m done on this. It’s unfortunate that people feel as though they can speak with surety on something they haven’t even seen but I guess if that’s what you need to do in order to make peace with Fox and Whedon for foisting full frame product on you then so be it. Your loss.

I think it's unfortunate that people think that their opinion of what looks better matters more than preservation of and respect for artistic intent. Those people used to get flamed on DVDTalk for being trolls, but apparently OAR is meaningless to many on this forum now. At least you'll be able to enjoy all of the new and awful reformatted-for-16x9-regardless-of-OAR-but-it-looks-more-immersive discs that will be coming at us in the future. I sure won't.

DJ

what gray is there for OAR of a 4:3 show?

it was a 4:3 show and I am watching it in 4:3 on my 16x9 Tv because that is how it was originally presented.

I am not allowing anyone to make a choice for me. I want to watch movies and Tv in the original aspect ratio and I am doing that when you are not.

why are you not because someone made a choice for you to alter the ratio to fit the screen of your tv.

It is you who is allowing someone to make a choice for you.

If Two Towers was released today in full screen and i had to wait to see it in the original aspect ratio I would wait. Why because i am not going to allow someone who is releasing a version early in the wrong aspect ratio to make a choice for me. I do not care what the ratio of my Tv is. when i had a 4:3 Tv I bought OAR movies that did not fit the TV's aspect ratio. Now i own a 16x9 Tv and i do not buy a movie just to fill the Tv's aspect ratio.

It appears that we have a new category of viewers Joe 12 packs

First time I've heard that but I bet not the last.

To take the OAR argument to a new level, do all the "purists" out there refuse to listen to covers of songs? Maybe Jimi Hendrix's versions of All Along the Watchtower or Like a Rolling Stone aren't the way Bob Dylan intended them to be played. So what? I and many others out there enjoy these versions way more than Bob Dylan's. Same with Stevie Ray Vaughn's version of Voodo Chile....IMO his version of that song on Live at the El Mocambo blows away anything Hendrix ever did with it. Does that make me an uniformer listener of music? No, it makes me someone who can differentiate between different versions of a work of art and not kow-tow to the some "rule" that a certain way to view a work of art is always the "right" one.

The choice to watch Buffy on 16x9 rather than 4x3 is similar. Maybe 4x3 was the "intended" aspect ratio, but if a person enjoys it more in 16x9 then what's the big deal? Does it make them any less of a fan of Buffy? I think not and those who would argue otherwise are just a bit too full of themselves.

I completely understand and agree with the people who think 4:3 is the original aspect ratio of Buffy, and that 4:3 is the way it should be presented. However, at the same time I completely understand and agree with the people who think Buffy looks better in 16:9 - and this is an informed decision after seeing both. I imported the R1s for seasons 1-3 (I live in the UK), but I've chosen to get the R2s for seasons 4+, so that I have the choice - I can either watch them in 16:9, or use WinDVD's centre crop feature to watch them in the OAR of 4:3. Choice =

EDIT: Just in case this wasn't clear, I watch most of my DVDs on my PC monitor, which of course is 4:3. So there'll be no "you just want it to fit the shape of your TV" here, thank you very much

how is this the same?

If you wanted to make a "cover" of buffy by refilming it with new actors and filming it in 16x9 go for it. personally I probably would not buy it but who knows. If you did the original aspect ratio of your "cover" would be 16x9 so I would buy it in 16x9 the OAR.

unless you meant to talk about DJ remixing then that might be more similar in this case since the music is still the original artists however they do add their own beats and mixes to the music so it would still not be the same as what we are talking about.

DOWN WITH OAR! BLARGH!

as long as you know that the center crop might not produce OAR enjoy.

No one is saying you do not have the right to buy Buffy or anything that is edited or altered from the OAR. Enjoy it if you want.

It will though. The 4:3 version is no more and no less than a centre crop of the 16:9 version.

what gray is there for OAR of a 4:3 show?

The gray is the making of the determination of which is best. You are rigid in this determination and are letting Mr Whedon make this decision for you. You seem to trust this one piece of data exclusively in making your decision. I have more information than this...what I've seen with my own eyes having viewed both. Please forgive me for deciding to buy which looks best (by far) to me rather than basing my decision on someone else's opinion.

You may want to have a look-see at DVD File's review of the R2 Season 4 for someone else's opinion on this.

I am not allowing anyone to make a choice for me. I want to watch movies and Tv in the original aspect ratio and I am doing that when you are not.

Rather than which looks best? Have fun marching to the beat of somebody else's esthetic tastes.

Why are you not because someone made a choice for you to alter the ratio to fit the screen of your tv. It is you who is allowing someone to make a choice for you.

We both know that isn't so. I choose 16x9 because it looks better than the 4:3 version to me. Someone chose to put the shows in 4:3 before my eyes, and someone else chose to put the 16x9 version before my eyes. I have seen both and not being blind, I chose based on what I saw.

Now i own a 16x9 Tv and i do not buy a movie just to fill the Tv's aspect ratio.

Neither do I. This is irrelevant to our discussion.

You're taking this a little too literally. The fact remains that watching the show (or any movie for that matter) in 4x3 or 16x9 represent different experiences. While I do agree that covers of songs represent a completely new approach as compared to the original work (as would a remake of a movie), the basic concept is still the same, namely that it is not represent the original intent of the director, songwriter, etc.

You're acting as if this doesn't already happen the very moment that you decided to watch a movie or TV show. The writers, directors, sound designers, production designers, and the rest all involved in any film or TV show create something that marches to the beat of their aesthetic tastes. To then act like, because you're choosing which AR you prefer, you're not marching to the beat of someone else's aesthetic tastes is laughable at best and downright delusional at worst. The only way to avoid marching to the beat of anyone else's aesthetic tastes is to not read/see/hear/etc. any work of art not created by yourself. Otherwise, the moment you pop "Buffy" into the DVD player (4x3 or 16x9), you've already started to march.

"You like to watch "Buffy" the way it was written? You're just a sucker who is marching to the beat of someone else's aesthetic tastes! I like to randomly skip around chapters and make up my own story and dialogue! I don't march to the beat of anyone else's aesthetic tastes!"

DJ

Where is this argument when things are released open matte 4:3? Buffy 16:9 is an open matte transfer. It looks less cramped because there's all this non-critical picture information on the sides, giving it more space. It is open matte. It is non-OAR. Is OAR only important when it's widescreen?

Where's the mass outrage at the Babylon 5 DVDs? IIRC, the episodes originally aired fullscreen, and we're getting a matted widescreen presentation. There's information gone missing! And the nature of the CGI scenes makes them look pretty bad in the anamorphic encode. But we're told that the widescreen AR is, in fact, what the show's creator was ultimately aiming for, and so people are okay with it. Because it's OAR. Even if the quality of some of the scenes on the DVD suffers because of it.

Maybe the Buffy directors all really suck, their composition sucks, and their shots all look better in MAR. It doesn't impact the OAR aspect of the debate in any way. While Whedon doesn't direct every episode himself, he was almost certainly instructing new directors on how to shoot, and what AR to shoot for. It's not about blindly following in the direction someone points; it's about respecting a director's right to set up a shot in any way they see fit, even if they're not very good at it.

IF B5 were released in both aspect ratios and perchance I happened to see both and determined the 4:3 looked better for some reason (perhaps because of the loss of true widescreen special effects elements), then I indeed would choose the one which looked best...the 4:3.

In short, I would not make the decision based on someone else's idea of what "true" OAR is..I would trust my tastes over this factor.