|
|
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Best Blu-ray Movie Deals
|
Best Blu-ray Movie Deals, See All the Deals » |
Top deals |
New deals
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() $74.99 1 day ago
| ![]() $35.99 11 hrs ago
| ![]() $44.99 | ![]() $24.96 1 day ago
| ![]() $33.49 19 hrs ago
| ![]() $33.49 21 hrs ago
| ![]() $99.99 | ![]() $29.95 | ![]() $30.48 | ![]() $70.00 | ![]() $24.96 | ![]() $35.99 17 hrs ago
|
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#1 |
Active Member
|
![]()
why is it that on dvd versions of a movie like talladega nights the screen is 2.40:1 and its anamorphic wide screen (fills up my 16X9 hdtv) but the blu-ray version which is also 2.40:1 has the black bars on top.........what gives????? i also noticed this on 2.35:1..........so why is the dvd version anamophic while the bluray version is the same ratio but has the black bars on top???? i did notice though that crank is 2.35:1 and is anamophic on bluray and it does fill up the entire screen. bottom line is that i want my bluray movies all in anamophic widescreen!!! i hate those black bars!!!
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Power Member
Oct 2006
|
![]()
Because either your DVD player or TV are set incorrectly to Zoom in on the picture! Doh..Aren't we over these threads by now?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Blu-ray Guru
May 2006
|
![]()
if i remember right, there is a thread on here stating that the box of night at the museum is mislabeled and is in a different aspect ratio
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
|
![]()
I know it has already been stated in a previuos thread, but unless the movie is in "anamorphic" you will have "black bars". the 1:85:1 aspect ratio is for the broadcast companies, not the movie industry. notice that if you are watching hd over the air, it fills up the screen, that is the way it`s supposed to be. i seriously doubt that the industry will listen to any of us and make all movies in either 1:85 aspect ratio or anamorphic, we`ll just have to live with it i guess, but i do agree, we paid some serious jack for our tv`s and i`ll be darned if we still don`t have black bars!! too bad we cant get a software upgrade for the ps3 to give us the "black bar eliminator" and not the stupid "zoom" feature that kills quality!
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Active Member
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | ||
Blu-ray Guru
May 2006
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
please read this thread before anyone responds https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=5528 |
||
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Active Member
May 2007
|
![]()
I for one am in favor of the bars if that is the original format of the movie. I'm a movie fan and I want to see the movie the way the Director intended me to.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
Power Member
Aug 2005
Sheffield, UK
|
![]() Quote:
Movies are shot in several different aspect ratios for different effects. It's an artistic decision. Personally I've no interest in artificially losing a chunk of picture or going with "TV safe" versions in order to fill the screen. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Member
|
![]()
Yes. some are in 1:58:1, and most are 2:35:1 or 2:40:1 in wich these two will have "black bars". I agree with previous post, it truly is an artistic aproch from the director. but if you have a tv screen bigger than a 46` then black bars are no problem. I went from a 30` widescreen to a 50` dlp-- I guess i can live with them, because even with the bars, my screen still is way larger than what i was watching. ( viewing the 1:85:1 aspect ratio on a standard tv[4:9] will have black bars)
|
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Blu-ray Samurai
|
![]()
Not like this really matters all that much, but I wish TV's were actually 2.35:1 instead of 1.78:1. Back in the day (and still present day), scope movies (2.35) were meant to actually be larger than flat ones (1.85). Well I'd much rather have a scope movie (like Lord of the Rings or Star Wars, or even Pearl Harbor... I think that might be a sin to mention Pearl Harbor along with the other ones actually...) fill the screen than a 1.85 one. I would like the bars on the side instead of top and bottom. That way when watching these scope movies, the screen is much larger and grander... but I think that's just me. However, no matter what, I like to keep the director's original aspect ratio and you will NEVER, hear me complain about a movie with black bars. Well... except for when the black bars seem brighter than what's in between then, which is just weird...
|
![]() |
![]() |
#16 | |
Active Member
Jan 2007
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Active Member
Jan 2007
|
![]()
For the record, anamorphic means if you set your DVD player or Blu-ray player up and tell it that you have a 16:9 TV then it squashes the image so it spreads out correctly over a widescreen TV. This emilinates the need to use any zoom functions. Anamorphic has nothing to do with 1.85:1 or 2.4:1. Also I prefer OAR and have since the days of VHS.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Site Manager
|
![]()
anamorphic means "changes shape"
35mm 2.39 format prints are anamorphic because the image in the actual print is squeezed into 1.2 wide shape and the 2x anamorphic lens unsqueezes it to the proper 2.4 on the screen again DVDs are ALL anamorphic because all the video images stored in them are squeezed or streched into a 1.5 wide digital frame (NTSC DVD 480 x 720) or a 1.25 wide digital frame (PAL DVD 576 x 720) no matter if the DVD is coded for 4:3 display or 16:9 display, and it is the display electronics (or computer software player) that reshapes it back to the proper display shape. HDTV formats (720 x 1280 or 1080 x 1920 digital frames) are NOT anamorphic because they don't change the shape of the signal when storing it. If Talladega Nights' aspect ratio is 2.39 and it fills your 4:3 or 16:9 display screen on DVD, there's something else happening there, like extra zooming of the image or improper set up of the shapes of the video signal on their way to the displays (or there is a DVD with a different "Full Frame" version of it) |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | |
Senior Member
Jan 2006
|
![]() Quote:
Because up until now, I had no clue, what 'anamorphic' ment. I only looked at the numbers, 2.35:1 etc. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Active Member
|
![]()
ok im super confussed, i though anamorphic widescreen ment it was a "full" picture meaning it would fill up you entire widescreen hdtv............ i keep seeing on the back of dvd's that 2.40.1 and 2.35.1 are anamorphic widescreen and then when i watch them they have the blackbars on top and bottom........also i have a sony 42" rear projection and i can zoom on the widescreen with blackbars on top and bottom and it then fills up the screen and only cuts off a little but the wierd thing is that it does not distort or make the picture look bad at all........ ANYWAY can someone please fill me in about this anamorphic widescreen crap and the 2.4.1 or 2.40.1 and 2.35.1 crap.......i dont understand if no one likes the black bars then why do they release them that way????
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||
thread | Forum | Thread Starter | Replies | Last Post |
Non-anamorphic widescreen DVDs | Movies | McGarnigal | 54 | 08-14-2017 12:36 AM |
Why Blu-ray don't had the option of full or widescreen like DVD do? | Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology | mugupo | 173 | 03-06-2012 05:41 AM |
dvd widescreen vs Blu-ray widescreen? | Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology | oppopioneer | 46 | 01-08-2011 12:16 AM |
Anamorphic DVD Question | Newbie Discussion | Lee Christie | 6 | 05-07-2008 01:24 AM |
Widescreen Blu-Ray movies? | Newbie Discussion | el_nacho | 13 | 01-21-2008 02:46 AM |
|
|