randyba

Could be a way to get more Blu-Ray buyers as that is the only way to get it in WS.

Jay G.

The shows on FOX are broadcast simultaneously in 4:3 SD and 16:9 HD. In that case, both aspect ratios are the OAR, i.e. the aspect ratio the show was originally shown in. In those cases it would be be left to the creators of the show to decide which is their intended or preferred aspect ratio.

Since HSM2 was first aired only in 4:3, 4:3 is the OAR. However, one shouldn't assume that the OAR is always the correct AR. Sometimes directors may be overruled, and the OAR was not was originally intended.

However, one shouldn't assume that just because the WS image has more image that it's the correct image. Just like WS films that were shot "open matte" to 4:3, there's a number of instances where 4:3 shows are shot "open matte" at 16:9 to meet studio demands. Buffy the Vampire Slayer was shot and edited in 16:9, although show creator Joss Whedon has said that 4:3 has always been the only intended ratio for the show. FOX overruled his decision in some overseas DVD releases, incorrectly showing an aspect ratio that's wider and shows more image, but is incorrect. Some people even prefer the altered WS image, which makes them akin to "foolscreen" fans who favor what image they personally prefer, for whatever reason, over what the creators originally intended them to see.

Scrubs has also always been shot in 16:9, although it's only ever been edited and shown in SD 4:3, with one exception. Still, there's the possibility of the studio going back and remastering the series in 16:9 in HD, against the creators' wishes.

So, while it's nice that a lot of the show simulcast in both 4:3 and 16:9 get a 16:9 DVD release, it's only because the creators of the show prefer that version. If they preferred the 4:3 version, and a 16:9 DVD came out, that'd be as much of a travesty as a 4:3 version of a WS film.

Sometimes they are getting more image in the 4:3 version, due to open-matting. The proper aspect ratio isn't a matter of just getting more image, it's about getting the correct, originally intended image.

cardaway

You post that like somebody posted something different. Obviously I was posting about those who think the P&S copies of newer films are the way to go.

As for the rest, obviously some people have forgot defintion of "original". Between that and the pot shots, I've had enough.

Jay G.

Somebody did: you.
Your implication is that because it was filmed in a ratio of 16:9, it was intended to be viewed that way by its creators. I provided examples to the contrary and felt the need to emphasize the difference between the "captured" aspect ratio and the intended aspect ratio.

OAR has aways meant "the aspect ratio originally presented in." This is why Criterions that have an aspect ratio that's been altered by the director mention "Director's preferred aspect ratio" instead of OAR. This is also why open-matte 4:3 DVDs are considered altered and not OAR , even though it's the image of the film as it was "originally" shot.