Shaun Of The Dead - windowboxed? - Blu-ray Forum

Spymaster · 08-31-2009, 10:54 PM

Both Hot Fuzz and Shaun Of The Dead look like extraordinary BD presentations but does anybody know why Shaun has been "windowboxed" (i.e. black bars on all 4 sides)? Surely it would have been better framed against the left and right edges of the screen...?

Screen caps here:

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...82&show=review

xander · 08-31-2009, 10:58 PM

I've watched this twice this week and hadn't noticed. But yeah, I just checked and it is a touch.

anomynous · 08-31-2009, 11:18 PM

That's the aspect ratio it was filmed in?

borninusa · 08-31-2009, 11:27 PM

I just watched this flick for the very first time today....I have to say..its my pick of the month. It was great.
..back to the aspect ratio talk...

deadhatetheliving · 08-31-2009, 11:31 PM

As long as it looks and sounds good that's all that matters. I sure that it is in its OAR....I can understand it it was an Alliance release but Universal is a good company.

Blu-Malibu2009 · 08-31-2009, 11:34 PM

Turn on your TV's overscan if you want it to take away the black bars on the left and right sides.

RocShemp · 08-31-2009, 11:35 PM

I'm guessing it was shot at 2.20:1 (or close to it) and windowboxed at 2.35:1. Why? Who knows? Oddly enough, the clips of the movie that play throughout the main menu are not windowboxed.

Over at DVDtalk, I was told that the HD-DVD was also windowboxed. So it stems from the HD master rather than some recent screwup.

F-Man · 08-31-2009, 11:42 PM

Aspect ratio is the measurement of width compared to its height, so it has nothing to do with windowboxing. No matter the ratio, there's no reason a movie shouldn't touch two opposing sides of the screen.

It is really disappointing to see some Blu-rays are still like this (I have Wings of Honneamise and Paprika in my collection that do it) when overscan is a thing of the past. On an LCD, the black is rather obvious and distracting. In the end you still see the whole picture, so the movie's worth buying. I'm just hoping new masters don't do this anymore.

RocShemp · 09-01-2009, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F-Man

Aspect ratio is the measurement of width compared to its height, so it has nothing to do with windowboxing. No matter the ratio, there's no reason a movie shouldn't touch two opposing sides of the screen.

It happens all the time with 1.66:1 releases. Of course in those cases it makes perfect sense.

I'm just saying that, if you were to zoom the image to the edge of the screen, it looks like the intended aspect ratio was 2.20:1 rather 2.35:1. As to why it was windowboxed is anyone's guess. Maybe it was a misguided attempt to defeat overscan. A lot of Japanese BD's do that.

SlmShdy1 · 09-01-2009, 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadhatetheliving

As long as it looks and sounds good that's all that matters. I sure that it is in its OAR....I can understand it it was an Alliance release but Universal is a good company.

Nope, it's not in its OAR.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...82&show=review

OAR = 2.39:1
BD = 2.35:1

Quote:

Originally Posted by TTUBatfan2008

Turn on your TV's overscan if you want it to take away the black bars on the left and right sides.

Which defeats the purpose of these newer TV's displaying the whole image.

OARmaster · 09-01-2009, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlmShdy1

Nope, it's not in its OAR.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...82&show=review

OAR = 2.39:1
BD = 2.35:1

Which defeats the purpose of these newer TV's displaying the whole image.

Everywhere but here says the OAR for the film is 2.35:1

OARmaster · 09-01-2009, 01:46 AM

I'm not sure what is going on here. The OAR actually is 2.35:1. It is listed as such in the "Video" section of the review here, but the alternate aspect ratio is also listed at the very top of the review in the specs area. Very strange...

SlmShdy1 · 09-01-2009, 02:06 AM

Well, then I don't know. The review says it's presented in a 2.35:1 ratio but never mentions anything about the original aspect ratio.

OARmaster · 09-01-2009, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlmShdy1

Well, then I don't know. The review says it's presented in a 2.35:1 ratio but never mentions anything about the original aspect ratio.

2.35:1 is the original aspect ratio. 2.39:1 is what the screenshots appear to be.

RocShemp · 09-01-2009, 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OARmaster

2.35:1 is the original aspect ratio. 2.39:1 is what the screenshots appear to be.

But the screenshots are windowboxed as well.

F-Man · 09-01-2009, 03:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RocShemp

It happens all the time with 1.66:1 releases. Of course in those cases it makes perfect sense.

I'm just saying that, if you were to zoom the image to the edge of the screen, it looks like the intended aspect ratio was 2.20:1 rather 2.35:1. As to why it was windowboxed is anyone's guess. Maybe it was a misguided attempt to defeat overscan. A lot of Japanese BD's do that.

Nope, 1.66:1 releases touch the top and bottom of the screen.

You may be right about the aspect ratio being 2.20:1. I was addressing those who were thinking the windowboxing might be normal for the OAR used or something.

deado · 09-01-2009, 04:22 AM

When I saw this on HD-DVD ages ago, it was the same (small black bars either side). Haven't seen any other discs like this from memory. This BD is obviously a new transfer (AVC, the HD-DVD was VC1), and considering it's the same, I'm guessing it's the way it's meant to be.

Blu-Malibu2009 · 09-01-2009, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deado

When I saw this on HD-DVD ages ago, it was the same (small black bars either side). Haven't seen any other discs like this from memory. This BD is obviously a new transfer (AVC, the HD-DVD was VC1), and considering it's the same, I'm guessing it's the way it's meant to be.

Frost/Nixon features various interview scenes with this. Here's an example:

https://images.blu-ray.com/reviews/1299_10.jpg

And here's what the rest of it looks like:

https://images.blu-ray.com/reviews/1299_3.jpg

RocShemp · 09-01-2009, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F-Man

Nope, 1.66:1 releases touch the top and bottom of the screen.

I meant in the sense that there are bars on the side. They're pillarboxed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by F-Man

You may be right about the aspect ratio being 2.20:1. I was addressing those who were thinking the windowboxing might be normal for the OAR used or something.

Gotcha. I know what you mean and, you're right, it's not normal. That's why I think it was an overzealous attempt to defeat overscan. That should be up to the display device. Not the source media.

Afrobean · 09-01-2009, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F-Man

Aspect ratio is the measurement of width compared to its height, so it has nothing to do with windowboxing. No matter the ratio, there's no reason a movie shouldn't touch two opposing sides of the screen.

Shifting aspect ratio.

If a film starts at 1.85:1 and opens up to 2.4:1, the early 1.85:1 portion SHOULD be windowboxed.

I know that's not the case here, and you're probably right about overscan, but there are cases where windowboxing is necessary.

Another possibility: it's just slightly less-wide than 2.4:1 and they window boxed it for people with constant height displays. Don't those work by automatically cropping at like 2.35:1 or something?

08-31-2009, 10:54 PM	#1
Spymaster Senior Member Member since:Sep 2008 Location:Cheshire, UK Blu-ray collection:236	Shaun Of The Dead - windowboxed? Both Hot Fuzz and Shaun Of The Dead look like extraordinary BD presentations but does anybody know why Shaun has been "windowboxed" (i.e. black bars on all 4 sides)? Surely it would have been better framed against the left and right edges of the screen...? Screen caps here: https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movie...82&show=review

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
Shaun of the Dead vs. Hot Fuzz	Movie Polls	Sussudio	120	09-24-2020 11:27 PM
Shaun of the Dead Blu on Amazon UK	Blu-ray Movies - North America	BluStan	38	10-13-2007 08:02 PM
shaun of the dead	Blu-ray Movies - North America	Odium69	0	08-01-2007 05:21 AM

08-31-2009, 10:58 PM	#2
xander Blu-ray Samurai Top contributor Member since:May 2008 Location:Just Outside of the Alliance's Reach 4K collection:1 Blu-ray collection:720 iTunes collection:1 Blu-ray reviews:4 Trading Score:4	I've watched this twice this week and hadn't noticed. But yeah, I just checked and it is a touch.

08-31-2009, 11:18 PM	#3
anomynous Blu-ray Guru Member since:Sep 2008 Blu-ray collection:185 Trading Score:40	That's the aspect ratio it was filmed in?

08-31-2009, 11:27 PM	#4
borninusa Power Member Member since:Oct 2008 Location:Ohio Home Theater Gallery:4 Blu-ray collection:1883 Blu-ray reviews: 2 Trading Score:20	I just watched this flick for the very first time today....I have to say..its my pick of the month. It was great. ..back to the aspect ratio talk...

08-31-2009, 11:31 PM	#5
deadhatetheliving Blu-ray Samurai Top contributor Member since:Jan 2008 Location:Virginia Beach, VA Home Theater Gallery:51 4K collection:812 Blu-ray collection:2693 DVD collection:90 Prime collection:1 Blu-ray reviews:5 Trading Score:7	As long as it looks and sounds good that's all that matters. I sure that it is in its OAR....I can understand it it was an Alliance release but Universal is a good company.

08-31-2009, 11:34 PM	#6
Blu-Malibu2009 Blu-ray Guru Member since:Apr 2008 Location:Texas Blu-ray collection:207	Turn on your TV's overscan if you want it to take away the black bars on the left and right sides.

08-31-2009, 11:35 PM	#7
RocShemp Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Jul 2009 Blu-ray reviews:2	I'm guessing it was shot at 2.20:1 (or close to it) and windowboxed at 2.35:1. Why? Who knows? Oddly enough, the clips of the movie that play throughout the main menu are not windowboxed. Over at DVDtalk, I was told that the HD-DVD was also windowboxed. So it stems from the HD master rather than some recent screwup.

08-31-2009, 11:42 PM	#8
F-Man Senior Member Top contributor Member since:Oct 2008 Home Theater Gallery:1 4K collection:3 Blu-ray collection:282 Trading Score:1	Aspect ratio is the measurement of width compared to its height, so it has nothing to do with windowboxing. No matter the ratio, there's no reason a movie shouldn't touch two opposing sides of the screen. It is really disappointing to see some Blu-rays are still like this (I have Wings of Honneamise and Paprika in my collection that do it) when overscan is a thing of the past. On an LCD, the black is rather obvious and distracting. In the end you still see the whole picture, so the movie's worth buying. I'm just hoping new masters don't do this anymore.

09-01-2009, 01:46 AM	#12
OARmaster Banned Member since:May 2009 Blu-ray collection:8	I'm not sure what is going on here. The OAR actually is 2.35:1. It is listed as such in the "Video" section of the review here, but the alternate aspect ratio is also listed at the very top of the review in the specs area. Very strange...

09-01-2009, 02:06 AM	#13
SlmShdy1 Blu-ray Guru Top contributor Member since:Nov 2007 Location:Honolulu, HI PlayStation® PSN: SlmShdy1 Home Theater Gallery:39 Blu-ray collection:292	Well, then I don't know. The review says it's presented in a 2.35:1 ratio but never mentions anything about the original aspect ratio.

09-01-2009, 04:22 AM	#17
deado Senior Member Top contributor Member since:Sep 2007 Location:Australia Blu-ray reviews:2 Trading Score:8	When I saw this on HD-DVD ages ago, it was the same (small black bars either side). Haven't seen any other discs like this from memory. This BD is obviously a new transfer (AVC, the HD-DVD was VC1), and considering it's the same, I'm guessing it's the way it's meant to be.

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals