Hopefully someone is knowledgeable about this. The DVD appears to be 16:9. The movie apparently was 1.85.
Did they crop a bit off the sides or did they squeeze it horizontally?
I'm noticing a lot of problems with aspect ratio in the video world.
16:9 is approx. a 1.75 ratio, so a 1.85 film can be fitted fully with very little loss.
shareThat didn't answer it.
shareI have the DVD. The opening titles are in 1.66 ratio but the rest of the film is 1.75 or 16:9. The film was made in VistaVision which lends itself to cropping. The studios knew that many theaters cropped films in the projector, so they left room at the top and bottom of the film to accommodate this. If it was filmed originally in 1.66. then it was trimmed a little from the top and bottom to fill the widescreen TV.
In any case your not missing much, at least not on this film. It looks fine to me.
Just saw this in a theater and was wondering "is this 1.85? It doesn't look like it." My guess is that what I saw was 1.66.
shareThanks for the reply. But IMDB says it was filmed in 1.85. Correct or not?
I'm trying to get confirmation that they would cut parts off the side, instead of squeezing it horizontally (distorting it a bit) or vertically.
Do they ever squeeze things that way and say what difference does it make, no one will notice?
Same with old films shot in 1.37, now released as 1.33. I want assurance whether they are squeezing those. They often look too narrow to me. Know what I mean.
Actually since these titles are 1.66 I suspect IMDB is wrong.
Your suspicion that IMDb can be wrong is correct! Lots of luck trying to get a correction. I've tried for years and nothing comes of it.
Anyway...This ratio thing is very confusing to a lot of people. As far as squeezing a picture, you would notice the distortion right away. Films can be cropped vertically or horizontally to fill the 16:9 wide TV screen. There is no set standard. It depends on the film and the DVD company. Good company's will letterbox there wide screen films to show the entire frame. The Standard Academy ratio films - 1.37 - can have a thin sliver taken off the sides to fill a standard 1.33 TV or the better company's will window box it to show the full 1.37 frame. The difference there is very small.
If you look through a motion picture camera viewfinder {I have} you will see a smaller box etched inside the larger frame. That is where the camaraman frames the main action. The outer edges vertically and horizontally is space to compensate for cropping in the theater or TV.
Don't ever buy a pan and scanned wide screen film! Always get the letterbox version. If there is a little taken off the sides it's no big deal.
Now I know.
Or is it knough I no.
BTW & FYI...
Choosing an aspect ratio for a film is purely an artistic decision by the film maker on how the film should look. The most popular modern ratio is 1.85 {Standard U.S. Widescreen} because it is the ratio of a persons normal vision looking from one side to the other. looking straight ahead you vision is 1.66 {Standard European Widescreen} That is my favorite ratio. It approximate's the mathematical 'Golden Ratio' of 1.618 and is most pleasing to look at and was the favorite of classical painters. The Standard Academy ratio of 1.37 is simply as wide as you can get on 35mm film using four perforations per frame and allowing for an optical sound track. 1.66 & 1.85 are just cropped versions of 1.37. wider version are squeezed {Anamorphic} pictures like Cinamascope, 70mm flat or squeezed or 35mm VistaVision with 8 perfs. on its side.
I hope this helps to understand somewhat a confusing 'aspect' of film making.