Widescreen speech for school
08-09-05 | 02:15 PM
#52
Banned
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 15,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: NYC
I did a speech on widescreen/full screen for my public speaking class senior year of high school. Not only did i explain what widescreen was but i explained the different aspect ratios as well as Super 35. That was 10 years ago. I used Last Crusade as my 2.35:1 example. I used Black Rain as my Super 35. Can't remember my 1.85:1. I made a video tape from my laserdiscs with the widescreen version first and then the full screen version directly after it. Needless to say, I convinced most (if not all) of the class that WS was better and I had a lot of people come up to me and say that they finally understood the difference (whereas they hadn't before).
08-09-05 | 02:18 PM
#53
DVD Talk Legend
for the example of chopping off parts of the sides of the mona lisa or the last supper ...
why is it so important that art be viewed as the artist made it? what if a viewers personal tastes are such that they find an "altered" version just as pleasing or even more pleasing?
why is it so important that art be viewed as the artist made it? what if a viewers personal tastes are such that they find an "altered" version just as pleasing or even more pleasing?
08-09-05 | 02:28 PM
#54
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: DFW, TX
Originally Posted by RoyalTea
for the example of chopping off parts of the sides of the mona lisa or the last supper ...
why is it so important that art be viewed as the artist made it? what if a viewers personal tastes are such that they find an "altered" version just as pleasing or even more pleasing?
why is it so important that art be viewed as the artist made it? what if a viewers personal tastes are such that they find an "altered" version just as pleasing or even more pleasing?
That is pretty important to the mural...now, the Mona Lisa is not proportioned correctly for a demonstration like that.
08-09-05 | 03:14 PM
#55
Banned
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Sand Point
Originally Posted by RoyalTea
for the example of chopping off parts of the sides of the mona lisa or the last supper ...
why is it so important that art be viewed as the artist made it? what if a viewers personal tastes are such that they find an "altered" version just as pleasing or even more pleasing?
why is it so important that art be viewed as the artist made it? what if a viewers personal tastes are such that they find an "altered" version just as pleasing or even more pleasing?
08-09-05 | 03:48 PM
#56
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why is it so important that art be viewed as the artist made it?
what if a viewers personal tastes are such that they find an "altered" version just as pleasing or even more pleasing?
Main Entry: ig·no·rant
Pronunciation: 'ig-n(&-)r&nt
Function: adjective
1 a : destitute of knowledge or education <an ignorant society>; also : lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified <parents ignorant of modern mathematics> b : resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence <ignorant errors>
2 : UNAWARE, UNINFORMED
- ig·no·rant·ly adverb
- ig·no·rant·ness noun
synonyms IGNORANT, ILLITERATE, UNLETTERED, UNTUTORED, UNLEARNED mean not having knowledge. IGNORANT may imply a general condition or it may apply to lack of knowledge or awareness of a particular thing <an ignorant fool> <ignorant of nuclear physics>. ILLITERATE applies to either an absolute or a relative inability to read and write <much of the population is still illiterate>. UNLETTERED implies ignorance of the knowledge gained by reading <an allusion meaningless to the unlettered>. UNTUTORED may imply lack of schooling in the arts and ways of civilization <strange monuments built by an untutored people>. UNLEARNED suggests ignorance of advanced subjects <poetry not for academics but for the unlearned masses>.
Pronunciation: 'ig-n(&-)r&nt
Function: adjective
1 a : destitute of knowledge or education <an ignorant society>; also : lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified <parents ignorant of modern mathematics> b : resulting from or showing lack of knowledge or intelligence <ignorant errors>
2 : UNAWARE, UNINFORMED
- ig·no·rant·ly adverb
- ig·no·rant·ness noun
synonyms IGNORANT, ILLITERATE, UNLETTERED, UNTUTORED, UNLEARNED mean not having knowledge. IGNORANT may imply a general condition or it may apply to lack of knowledge or awareness of a particular thing <an ignorant fool> <ignorant of nuclear physics>. ILLITERATE applies to either an absolute or a relative inability to read and write <much of the population is still illiterate>. UNLETTERED implies ignorance of the knowledge gained by reading <an allusion meaningless to the unlettered>. UNTUTORED may imply lack of schooling in the arts and ways of civilization <strange monuments built by an untutored people>. UNLEARNED suggests ignorance of advanced subjects <poetry not for academics but for the unlearned masses>.
08-09-05 | 04:11 PM
#58
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A personal attack? Sorry, but lots of people mistake the word "ignorant" for "stupid". They're quite different, which is why I quoted the Merriam-Webster definition.
Last edited by jmj713; 08-09-05 at 04:14 PM.
08-09-05 | 04:14 PM
#59
Moderator
I was sold on going to widescreen by a Suncoast rep back when I was pre-ordering Jurassic Park as a 14-year old. They showed me a picture of the jeep being chased by the T-Rex after rescuing Ian Malcolm, and how without the widescreen, you only see the jeep and not the T-Rex. Turned me around 100%.
08-09-05 | 04:16 PM
#60
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by jmj713
A personal attack? Sorry, but lots of people mistake the word "ignorant" for "stupid". They're quite different, which is why I quoted the Merriam-Webster definition.
I know about math and ratios. I know what the difference is between 1.33:1 and 1.85:1, etc.
I just don't give a shit.
I'm sick and tired of all this high-class wannabee snobs who think they're so fucking awesome because they can look their noses down at people who prefer something different.
08-09-05 | 04:29 PM
#61
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally Posted by RoyalTea
then how am I "ignornant"
I know about math and ratios. I know what the difference is between 1.33:1 and 1.85:1, etc.
I just don't give a shit.
I'm sick and tired of all this high-class wannabee snobs who think they're so fucking awesome because they can look their noses down at people who prefer something different.
I know about math and ratios. I know what the difference is between 1.33:1 and 1.85:1, etc.
I just don't give a shit.
I'm sick and tired of all this high-class wannabee snobs who think they're so fucking awesome because they can look their noses down at people who prefer something different.
Secondly, you're ignorant because you're unaware. Anybody who prefers fullscreen is unaware: either unaware of the way fullscreen alters the director's work, or unaware of just how disrespectful it is to put somebody else's product, their hard work and effort under the knife because you "just don't give a shit."
-JP
08-09-05 | 04:29 PM
#62
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sorry if you took offence. I didn't intend for that. But how is not giving a shit not being ignorant? Do you give a shit if The Last Supper is hanged on a wall with its sides cut off, or another painting - doesn't really matter. Do you give a shit if your favorite film or TV show is edited to remove certain scenes filmed by the director and acted out by actors (or animated, in case of cartoons)? And do you give a shit when a song you heard on the radio sounds differently on the CD? Or do you give a shit when you go to a store to buy a gallon of milk, only to receive a quart?
And there's no need to start calling me a "high-class wannabee snob", and resorting to profanity.
There are certain things artists and creators indend. A filmmaker intends to have his or her film viewed in a certain aspect ratio. You can't overrule that just because you want to. It's impossible and wrong.
Sorry, but you can't have a preference in something that's clear-cut right and wrong. You're either right, or wrong. That's it.
And there's no need to start calling me a "high-class wannabee snob", and resorting to profanity.
There are certain things artists and creators indend. A filmmaker intends to have his or her film viewed in a certain aspect ratio. You can't overrule that just because you want to. It's impossible and wrong.
people who prefer something different.
Last edited by jmj713; 08-09-05 at 04:41 PM.
08-09-05 | 04:48 PM
#63
DVD Talk Legend
I just don't understand why there's this clear cut, solid rule where everybody has to cater to the artists whims.
I like photography. If I take a picture, and I send it to my family and friends, and someone crops it down so it's only a part of the original that I took, am I going to go crying, acting as if the way I framed the shot is the only way anybody can look at my picture? fuck no.
You act like me watching a full frame movie is akin to kicking the director's dog or something.
I'll bet freaking out over OAR really reels in the chicks, doesn't it.
I like photography. If I take a picture, and I send it to my family and friends, and someone crops it down so it's only a part of the original that I took, am I going to go crying, acting as if the way I framed the shot is the only way anybody can look at my picture? fuck no.
You act like me watching a full frame movie is akin to kicking the director's dog or something.
I'll bet freaking out over OAR really reels in the chicks, doesn't it.
08-09-05 | 04:59 PM
#64
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I take a picture, and I send it to my family and friends, and someone crops it down so it's only a part of the original that I took, am I going to go crying, acting as if the way I framed the shot is the only way anybody can look at my picture?
I'll bet freaking out over OAR really reels in the chicks, doesn't it.
Last edited by jmj713; 08-09-05 at 05:02 PM.
08-09-05 | 06:41 PM
#65
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Portland, Oregon
Originally Posted by RoyalTea
for the example of chopping off parts of the sides of the mona lisa or the last supper ...
why is it so important that art be viewed as the artist made it? what if a viewers personal tastes are such that they find an "altered" version just as pleasing or even more pleasing?
why is it so important that art be viewed as the artist made it? what if a viewers personal tastes are such that they find an "altered" version just as pleasing or even more pleasing?
Think of the time and effort that went into each brushstroke. On every inch of the canvas. Cutting much of that away trashes what might have been hours of work. To use an oft-used analogy, it's very much like ripping out pages of what you deem unimportant content in a book, reducing it to almost half its original length, so it will fit better on your shelf.
Originally Posted by RoyalTea
I like photography. If I take a picture, and I send it to my family and friends, and someone crops it down so it's only a part of the original that I took, am I going to go crying, acting as if the way I framed the shot is the only way anybody can look at my picture? fuck no.
--THX
08-09-05 | 07:49 PM
#66
New Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Groucho
The majority of new releases (last 10 years or so) are open matte, the majority of old films are pan and scan.
...therefore the problems with boom mics and other things that are just out of frame appearing in an full screen version using the open matte definitely exist.
Also "This open matte for the most part has a little additional information added to the bottom but there is a bit of information that has been cropped from the sides too. That's why this is more of an Open Matte + Pan & Scan. Not only are you seeing stuff the director may not have intended you to see, you are missing out on some stuff that he wanted you to see!"
08-13-05 | 09:01 PM
#67
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Portland, Oregon
Originally Posted by okcomputer
Are you kidding? The majority of new released are open matte? Even if they are technically filmed that way (which is definitely not the majority)...
.
.
.
Also "This open matte for the most part has a little additional information added to the bottom but there is a bit of information that has been cropped from the sides too. That's why this is more of an Open Matte + Pan & Scan. Not only are you seeing stuff the director may not have intended you to see, you are missing out on some stuff that he wanted you to see!"
.
.
.
Also "This open matte for the most part has a little additional information added to the bottom but there is a bit of information that has been cropped from the sides too. That's why this is more of an Open Matte + Pan & Scan. Not only are you seeing stuff the director may not have intended you to see, you are missing out on some stuff that he wanted you to see!"
Point two: Less than a handful of scenes in open matte are actually panned. There is no unnatural panning of 99% of any recent open matte film I have seen. Those slivers of information missing from the sides are simply ignored in open matte unless characters are at extreme opposite ends of the scope frame. Even if large sections of picture are stripped away, open matte stays steady. Yes, panning is involved, but so rarely--maybe in two or three scenes at most--that I don't personally consider the film to be "panned-and-scanned."
This has been my experience, anyway.
--THX
08-14-05 | 05:28 AM
#68
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: The Other Side
So it seems we have someone here who is deadset against "black bars on his or her DVDs". Interesting. Can I ask, why? The minute I learned that 40% of the 2:35 was being chopped off, and the second I noticed that artificial scan in P&S, I've been a widescreen advocate (or, rather, more accurately, OAR-advocate). I don't care how small my laptop monitor is, I want to see the director's and DP's composition.
The composition of a picture can speak volumes about what the photographer is trying to express. You can say things with imagery that could not be otherwise conveyed. If the photographer has made a statement, and someone comes around and alters the work, the statement is lost.
08-14-05 | 06:37 PM
#70
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Portland, Oregon
Originally Posted by chileorgullo
sorry if this is late notice, but on Die Hard Five Star Collection, there is a great 3 minute featurette entitled 'Why Letterbox'. Very convincing.
--THX
09-16-05 | 09:09 PM
#71
Member
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just had someone order a DVD I was selling through Amazon. The person then emailed me and said that he made a mistake; he meant to order the full screen version. I emailed him back and said he could have a refund if he wanted but I also included an explanation of widescreen vs. fullscreen along with a helpful link. The DVD in question was Jaws. I pointed out that this movie especially suffers in cropped presentations.
here's the amazing part: He was convinced. He now wants the widescreen version!
I have explained patiently the importance of OAR again and again to many people over the past 10 years but this was my first convert.
here's the amazing part: He was convinced. He now wants the widescreen version!
I have explained patiently the importance of OAR again and again to many people over the past 10 years but this was my first convert.
Last edited by brisco32; 09-16-05 at 09:15 PM.
09-16-05 | 09:25 PM
#72
DVD Talk Hero
also another good way to show widescreen vs. full screen, and pan and scan is in pulp fiction. In the scene early in the morning, where Jules is talking to Brent, he suddenly whips out his gun and shoots a guy on the sofa. In the widescreen version, it plays as a shock as we don't expect it to happen. But in the full screen version, as soon as he whips out the gun, the camera makes a really awkward pan across the screen to show him killing the guy on the couch.
09-17-05 | 01:07 PM
#73
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Rypro 525
also another good way to show widescreen vs. full screen, and pan and scan is in pulp fiction. In the scene early in the morning, where Jules is talking to Brent, he suddenly whips out his gun and shoots a guy on the sofa. In the widescreen version, it plays as a shock as we don't expect it to happen. But in the full screen version, as soon as he whips out the gun, the camera makes a really awkward pan across the screen to show him killing the guy on the couch.
09-17-05 | 04:10 PM
#74
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Maine
I did a speech in college about Widescreen vs. Fullscreen about ten years ago. I didn't get too technical about it, it basically boiled down to "your not seeing the whole picture fools!!" Used a scene from Empire Strikes Back as an example.
09-17-05 | 06:02 PM
#75
DVD Talk Special Edition
I actually prefer Fullscreen, if the 1.85:1 is open matte, but some 1.85:1's show quite a bit more on the sides, like Cruel Intentions in some scenes. But always prefer Super 35 and Anamoprhic 2.35:1
Also, have you noticed certain movies that were originally filmed in 2.35:1 anamorphic, don't look all that bad in Fullscreen? Most I've seen are awful, but some don't look too bad for some reason. Like "Halloween", "Over the Top" and "Urban Legend" for example.
Also, have you noticed certain movies that were originally filmed in 2.35:1 anamorphic, don't look all that bad in Fullscreen? Most I've seen are awful, but some don't look too bad for some reason. Like "Halloween", "Over the Top" and "Urban Legend" for example.
Last edited by Yeti4623; 09-17-05 at 06:15 PM.