Would you be interested in properly framed IMAX UHD releases?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Bn43

Okay, but I still don't get part of the argument. So, 1.43:1 isn't ideal, but why wouldn't I take 1.85:1 when the creators went out of their way to make the movie presentable in the more open framing? Nothing is lost by erasing those black bars. If you can't focus on the middle, that's on you. I find cinemascope and the like narrow a lot of the time, and I know it was made for cinemas, not TVs. I don't despise it like the guy above me, but I see where he's coming from. Few people complained about The Wire's widescreen presentation filling the sides with unintended information, so I don't see why filling unused space at the top and bottom of a 16:9 TV is any worse.

Why wouldn't you? Because you want your screen filled. I don't, I want the framing as it was expressly intended - be it square, oblong, circular, rhomboid, whatever - and, in the case of BR2049, the movie's Oscar-winning cinematographer has categorically stated that the 2.39 was the primary intent and everything else that's tacked on (IMAX, 3D) is mostly just marketing guff, which IMO is designed to hook gullible types into paying dat IMAX/3D premium.

Plenty of people complained about The Wire, Buffy, X-Files etc but it helps that in The Wire's case they went the extra mile to paint out flubs (you know, from revealing information at the sides that was captured but not intended to be seen, hint hint) and they also reframed the 16:9 image in select shots to best represent the intent of the original 4:3 shot. I'd buy a 4:3 HD version of all those shows mentioned (and more) in a heartbeat but nope, we're left with either the screen-filling HD versions or the OAR on a ****ing DVD.

[Bn43]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Why wouldn't you? Because you want your screen filled. I don't, I want the framing as it was expressly intended - be it square, oblong, circular, rhomboid, whatever - and, in the case of BR2049, the movie's Oscar-winning cinematographer has categorically stated that the 2.39 was the primary intent and everything else that's tacked on (IMAX, 3D) is mostly just marketing guff, which IMO is designed to hook gullible types into paying dat IMAX/3D premium.

Plenty of people complained about The Wire, Buffy, X-Files etc but it helps that in The Wire's case they went the extra mile to paint out flubs (you know, from revealing information at the sides that was captured but not intended to be seen, hint hint) and they also reframed the 16:9 image in select shots to best represent the intent of the original 4:3 shot. I'd buy a 4:3 HD version of all those shows mentioned (and more) in a heartbeat but nope, we're left with either the screen-filling HD versions or the OAR on a ****ing DVD.

I wasn't complementing The Wire's widescreen presentation, but merely making a point about hypocrisy. I don't care so much about the additional informational, but am pretty bothered by all the information that has been lost. Almost every single shot has been zoomed in the widescreen presentation. I really wish they had compromised for something between 4:3 and 16:9. Most of the scenes could have been expanded on the sides without losing the top and bottom.

Anyway, looking at screenshot comparisons of Blade Runner 2049, I don't get the impression that filling in the black bars would hurt a 16:9 presentation at all. Neither of us is ever gonna see it, though, so who knows?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Bn43

I wasn't complementing The Wire's widescreen presentation, but merely making a point about hypocrisy. I don't care so much about the additional informational, but am pretty bothered by all the information that has been lost. Almost every single shot has been zoomed in the widescreen presentation. I really wish they had compromised for something between 4:3 and 16:9. Most of the scenes could have been expanded on the sides without losing the top and bottom.

Anyway, looking at screenshot comparisons of Blade Runner 2049, I don't get the impression that filling in the black bars would hurt a 16:9 presentation at all. Neither of us is ever gonna see it, though, so who knows?

Well, I've got the 1.78 open matte version of BR2049 and to be perfectly honest it's not the most offensive such example of dumping the black bars that I've ever seen, the camera doesn't move a great deal so the framing doesn't seem to have as much conspicuous headroom. It's very much an isolated case though, I saw the 1.78 open matte of Skyfall (shot by the same DP) and it looks much too 'distant', which is precisely why 'IMAX' in the home is mostly wasted on me. Close ups become mediums, mediums become wide shots and wide shots look even more indistinct, for even though the relative width of the imagery is not changing the actual emphasis on it from the framing most certainly is.