Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[cheez avenger]

Originally Posted by alchav21

How many Discs for the Snyder Cut, or did they squeeze it all on one Disc? Also to watch this 4 hour Movie will you watch it all at once or space it out, and if you do can you leave the Disc in or does the Player remember where you left off?

Disc specs and release dates have not been specified yet.

[PenguinInfinity]

Now look, I’m not going to make fun of directors choosing less common aspect ratios (I contend that First Cow, a quiet movie about a cow, which was also shot in 4:3, was robbed of its place on the Best Picture nominees list). But this does mean that HBO Max’s highest-profile film — one that was announced before the streaming service was even available, is exclusive to the service, and is very much meant to bring in new subscribers — is presented in the aspect ratio of a ’90s TV series and leaves about half the screen empty on most modern devices.

I never understand people who have a problem with 1.33:1 (which fills up approximately 75% of a 16:9 TV) but frequently watch movies in 2.39:1 (which fills up approximately 75% of a 16:9 TV). Why are black bars on the sides of the picture so much worse than black bars on the top and bottom?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

I never understand people who have a problem with 1.33:1 (which fills up approximately 75% of a 16:9 TV) but frequently watch movies in 2.39:1 (which fills up approximately 75% of a 16:9 TV). Why are black bars on the sides of the picture so much worse than black bars on the top and bottom?

Because we don’t see that way, we see things closer to how we experience widescreen. Bars at the side of the screen make the image look cramped.

[Lee A Stewart]

[Akibiyori]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

HBO offering the presentation in 4:3 aspect ratio I thought was strange.

Then I see this:
You will watch the Snyder Cut in 4:3 aspect ratio because HBO Max respects cinema - The Verge 3/18

Why do people compare JLSC’s aspect ratio to a TV ratio? Cinema was using it almost exclusively for the first 60 years of its existence and it was still used regularly in some parts up until about 1970.

I don’t know yet how well it works in JLSC, it sounds to me more like Snyder made an arbitrary change here, but it’s a perfectly cinematic aspect ratio.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

I never understand people who have a problem with 1.33:1 (which fills up approximately 75% of a 16:9 TV) but frequently watch movies in 2.39:1 (which fills up approximately 75% of a 16:9 TV). Why are black bars on the sides of the picture so much worse than black bars on the top and bottom?

I guess we will see how the 4K version looks detail wise with 1.33:1 compared to the zoom/stretch to 16.9:1 of the prior release for common scenes.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Akibiyori

Why do people compare JLSC’s aspect ratio to a TV ratio? Cinema was using it almost exclusively for the first 60 years of its existence and it was still used regularly in some parts up until about 1970.

I don’t know yet how well it works in JLSC, it sounds to me more like Snyder made an arbitrary change here, but it’s a perfectly cinematic aspect ratio.

That went out of vogue back in 1952 when Cinemascope was introduced.

Zack Snyder chose 1.33 just to be different. Different does not mean better.

[Admiral]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

So it's another case where digital forces a free upgrade on you whether you want it or not but physical media gives you a choice to either keep the existing version or buy the new one.

That's another win for physical media.

It's free upgrade to what is, in my opinion, a better version. I only see that as a positive.

[cheez avenger]

Since I loved the movie, I forgot all about the bars on the left and right. I was completely enthralled by the film, the fuss over the ratio was not a factor in my viewing. I also have a 65 inch set, so it being in full 4K with DV pulled me right in along with the immersive.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by Akibiyori

Why do people compare JLSC’s aspect ratio to a TV ratio? Cinema was using it almost exclusively for the first 60 years of its existence and it was still used regularly in some parts up until about 1970.

I don’t know yet how well it works in JLSC, it sounds to me more like Snyder made an arbitrary change here, but it’s a perfectly cinematic aspect ratio.

I plan on looking at the original 4k 1.33:1 detail of SCJL when it gets released on media and then zoom/stretch it to 16.9:1 to see how its PQ compares to the prior 4K theater version. I'm curious to see which works better?

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Admiral

It's free upgrade to what is, in my opinion, a better version. I only see that as a positive.

In this case you prefer it, but it's unlikely you'll always prefer the "upgraded" versions of everything. Any time there is a change some people like it and others don't, the option to stick with the previous version should never be taken away.

I will always contend that the option to buy a new version is superior to having a new version forced upon you for free. With physical media if I'm happy with what I have it is literally impossible for any studio or distributor to change it.

[Lee A Stewart]

I remember when Ben Hur was released on LD and the review came out on a little rag called Pond Scum I had subscribed to. The reviewer called it "Band Aid" TV as it had the original AR of 2.76 and at the time all TVs were 4x3. I had a 50" RPTV at the time and I swear 50% of the image was black bars,.

[Admiral]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

In this case you prefer it, but it's unlikely you'll always prefer the "upgraded" versions of everything. Any time there is a change some people like it and others don't, the option to stick with the previous version should never be taken away.

I will always contend that the option to buy a new version is superior to having a new version forced upon you for free. With physical media if I'm happy with what I have it is literally impossible for any studio or distributor to change it.

The multiple upgrades I've had to movies in my iTunes library have all been improvements. Could there be one I don't like in the future? It's possible, but not something I will worry about.

However, I would not want to re-purchase the movie for a new version.

[slimjean]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

That went out of vogue back in 1952 when Cinemascope was introduced.

Zack Snyder chose 1.33 just to be different. Different does not mean better.

The artist can pick how they want to film.

I don't get why black bars on the side are such a big problem.

I choose to enjoy what the artist presents as opposed to how I want them to be.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by slimjean

The artist can pick how they want to film.

I don't get why black bars on the side are such a big problem.

I choose to enjoy what the artist presents as opposed to how I want them to be.

Steedeel said it best . . . pillarboxed makes the images look cramped as opposed to 1.78 full screen or 2.40 letterbox:

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

Steedeel said it best . . . pillarboxed makes the images look cramped as opposed to 1.78 full screen or 2.40 letterbox:

[Show spoiler]

Why do you keep posting an image that shows that 2.40 and 1.33 are similarly sized while arguing against 1.33?

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

That went out of vogue back in 1952 when Cinemascope was introduced.

Zack Snyder chose 1.33 just to be different. Different does not mean better.

It doesn't mean worse either.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

It doesn't mean worse either.

Like all aspects of movies, personal opinions abound.

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

Like all aspects of movies, personal opinions abound.

Any aspect ratio can be used well or used poorly. Just because something is less popular doesn't mean it's worse.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

Any aspect ratio can be used well or used poorly. Just because something is less popular doesn't mean it's worse.

And it doesn't mean it's better either. See . . . I can play the game too!