If PREDATOR is "Anamorphic Widescreen 1.85:1"....
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: The Poconos, PA
If PREDATOR is "Anamorphic Widescreen 1.85:1"....
then why does it looked slightly squashed from top to bottom and have the black bars...its not until I watch it in STRETCH mode that it looks normal like 1.85 is suppose to. There's also like 1-2 other movies like this....why does it do that? 1.85 movies always fill the whole screen on my widescreen rptv.
I've been to the sites explaining anamorphic and all that stuff, but that doesnt tell me anything.
I've been to the sites explaining anamorphic and all that stuff, but that doesnt tell me anything.
#2
DVD Talk Reviewer/ Admin
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 31,706
Received 2,803 Likes
on
1,864 Posts
From: Greenville, South Cackalack
Dumb question, but are you sure you're watching the anamorphic widescreen Predator and not the previous letterboxed, non-anamorphic release?
#3
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: The Poconos, PA
hhmmm...it was the one that came in the Schwarzenneger 4 pack.
so if its letterboxed AND non anamorphic...its gonna look squashed with bars? What purpose does that serve? I guess it looks squashed cuz my wide screen is stretching the image? So on a normal 4:3 tv it would look letterboxed but NOT squashed, correct? Ok, i think I get it now.
its confusing. Should just make every darn movie in 1.85
so if its letterboxed AND non anamorphic...its gonna look squashed with bars? What purpose does that serve? I guess it looks squashed cuz my wide screen is stretching the image? So on a normal 4:3 tv it would look letterboxed but NOT squashed, correct? Ok, i think I get it now.
its confusing. Should just make every darn movie in 1.85
#4
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
The anamorphic version of Predator has a silver banner across the top of the insert that reads 'Enhanced Widescreen' and 'DTS.'
The non-anamorphic version doesn't.
The non-anamorphic version doesn't.
#6
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Indianapolis
Originally posted by STEVEIGNORANT
"Should just make every darn movie in 1.85" uggh...JSP? Back on topic, hopefully Fox will do the special edition of this now that Aliens vs. Predator is coming next year.
"Should just make every darn movie in 1.85" uggh...JSP? Back on topic, hopefully Fox will do the special edition of this now that Aliens vs. Predator is coming next year.
#8
DVD Talk Godfather
Originally posted by boston george
Yeah, but this is a whole new breed of J6P to contend with. J6P with a 16x9 HDTV. We all knew this day would come
Yeah, but this is a whole new breed of J6P to contend with. J6P with a 16x9 HDTV. We all knew this day would come
As for the disc, i think you may just have the old version since you got it from the Schwarzengger 4 pack, which has old versions of Total Recall as well.
#9
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 1,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Easton, PA
Originally posted by vice86
hhmmm...it was the one that came in the Schwarzenneger 4 pack.
so if its letterboxed AND non anamorphic...its gonna look squashed with bars? What purpose does that serve? I guess it looks squashed cuz my wide screen is stretching the image? So on a normal 4:3 tv it would look letterboxed but NOT squashed, correct? Ok, i think I get it now.
its confusing. Should just make every darn movie in 1.85
hhmmm...it was the one that came in the Schwarzenneger 4 pack.
so if its letterboxed AND non anamorphic...its gonna look squashed with bars? What purpose does that serve? I guess it looks squashed cuz my wide screen is stretching the image? So on a normal 4:3 tv it would look letterboxed but NOT squashed, correct? Ok, i think I get it now.
its confusing. Should just make every darn movie in 1.85
The aspect ratio of 1.85:1 has nothing to do with it. The studios should have just released every DVD from day one in anamorphic or enhanced mode unless the OAR was less than 1.66:1. The 4:3 TV owners would then get a down converted image and the 16:9 owners would then get the hires version and nobody would need to worry about stretching this one but not that one.
#11
Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by chipmac
The aspect ratio of 1.85:1 has nothing to do with it. The studios should have just released every DVD from day one in anamorphic or enhanced mode unless the OAR was less than 1.66:1. The 4:3 TV owners would then get a down converted image and the 16:9 owners would then get the hires version and nobody would need to worry about stretching this one but not that one.
The aspect ratio of 1.85:1 has nothing to do with it. The studios should have just released every DVD from day one in anamorphic or enhanced mode unless the OAR was less than 1.66:1. The 4:3 TV owners would then get a down converted image and the 16:9 owners would then get the hires version and nobody would need to worry about stretching this one but not that one.
#12
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 1,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Easton, PA
Originally posted by hogfat
unless you've a proper 4:3 display which exhibits no overscan . . . only thing worse than anamorphic 1.66:1 is anamorphic 4:3.
unless you've a proper 4:3 display which exhibits no overscan . . . only thing worse than anamorphic 1.66:1 is anamorphic 4:3.
#13
Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i doubt there are very many tvs with no overscan, but there are plenty of displays without overscan. anamorphic 1.66:1 on such a display shows the same problem that non-anamorphic letterbox does on widescreen tvs. and there are a number of "extras" presented in anamorphic 4:3.




