Since 4:3 screens are slowly being replaced
by 16:9 or 2:35.1 where will the 4:3 be displayed?

On 2008-02-06 21:03:37 -0800, StormChaser <ringprint@surfglobal.net> said:

Since 4:3 screens are slowly being replaced
by 16:9 or 2:35.1 where will the 4:3 be displayed?

1.33:1 squeezed 2X, slightly blown-up, and printed full height within a
2.35:1 frame, for best illumination, or 1.33:1, significantly
blown-down and printed within the 1.85:1 frame which is itself a subset
of 1.33:1.

Of course, 1.33:1 is really 1.37:1 for sound, but it is really 1.33:1
for silent.

The crushing smash of the foot of 16:9
forever flattened 4:3.

StormChaser <ringprint@surfglobal.net> wrote:

The crushing smash of the foot of 16:9
forever flattened 4:3.

Funny... My 16:9 TV does 4:3 just fine.

I don't get your point. If you have separate screen and projector, then
your screen is X inches high, and it will display a 4:3 picture X inches
high. W:H ratio of the screen is irrelevant. Any physical screen cannot be
a perfect fit for all available program material. You make the most of the
space you have and then you watch the picture, not the blank area.

On 2008-02-06 21:03:37 -0800, StormChaser <ringpr...@surfglobal.net> said:

Since 4:3 screens are slowly being replaced
by 16:9 or 2:35.1 where will the 4:3 be displayed?

1.33:1 squeezed 2X, slightly blown-up, and printed full height within a
2.35:1 frame, for best illumination, or 1.33:1, significantly
blown-down and printed within the 1.85:1 frame which is itself a subset
of 1.33:1.

Of course, 1.33:1 is really 1.37:1 for sound, but it is really 1.33:1
for silent.
--
CinemaScope® - The Modern Miracle You See Without Special Glasses!
--
Peter

On Feb 7, 12:17 am, peterh5322 <peterh5...@rattlebrain.comminch
wrote:
Of course, 1.33:1 is really 1.37:1 for sound, but it is really 1.33:1
for silent.

Yep, Peter.
except no one looks at the soundtrack.
So it is 1.33:1.

Besides, you grew up with the Academy Ratio.
You're just going to ditch it for the 16:9
blonde bimbo down the street?

Mark
(Screens were brighter in the 1920's because
they had not yet been perforated with holes
for sound.)

On Feb 7, 11:31 pm, StormChaser <ringpr...@surfglobal.net> wrote:

Besides, you grew up with the Academy Ratio.
You're just going to ditch it for the 16:9
blonde bimbo down the street?

Mark
(Screens were brighter in the 1920's because
they had not yet been perforated with holes
for sound.)

What? Are you being ironic?

Almost every theatrical film in the last 50 years has been wide, so
what does it matter? You and I who watch films made from before 1980
are the minority, so what say do we have?

J. Theakston

On Feb 7, 11:31 pm, StormChaser <ringpr...@surfglobal.net> wrote:
Besides, you grew up with the Academy Ratio.
You're just going to ditch it for the 16:9
blonde bimbo down the street?

What? Are you being ironic?

Almost every theatrical film in the last 50 years has been wide, so
what does it matter? You and I who watch films made from before 1980
are the minority, so what say do we have?

16:9 is somewhere in-between modern "flat" and "scope" film formats and
it is not right for either.

J. Theakston <tomservoro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Feb 7, 11:31 pm, StormChaser <ringpr...@surfglobal.net> wrote:
Besides, you grew up with the Academy Ratio.
You're just going to ditch it for the 16:9
blonde bimbo down the street?

What? Are you being ironic?

Almost every theatrical film in the last 50 years has been wide, so
what does it matter? You and I who watch films made from before 1980
are the minority, so what say do we have?

Widescreen films are NOT 16:9, or even close. Most are wider than that,
and they have to either be cropped or letterboxed to fit properly on the
newfangled 16:9 video format.

16:9 is somewhere in-between modern "flat" and "scope" film formats and
it is not right for either.
--Scott
--
"Cuesta un Nagra. Crest suisse, et tres, tres precis."

That may be true but the term 16:9 is not for us but rather the
retailers
who needed a phrase that the proletariat could understand and retain.
Not an easy task.

Widescreen films are NOT 16:9, or even close. Most are wider than that,
and they have to either be cropped or letterboxed to fit properly on the
newfangled 16:9 video format.

16:9 is somewhere in-between modern "flat" and "scope" film formats and
it is not right for either.

Many films were shot with 1.66:1 plates for both 1.66:1 and 1.85:1
presentations. 1.37:1 was impossible, of course, for these hard-matted
(in the camera) productions, unless these were letterboxed, as they
often were for television release.