•  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
Online Users:
542 guest(s), 13 user(s).

Anyone know how TCM choses letterbox over pan & scan versions?
Permlink Replies: 5 - Pages: 1 - Original Post: Aug 26, 2010 1:40 PM Original Post By: Sahav Threads: [ Previous | Next ]

Posts: 6,522
Registered: 10/20/09
Re: Follow up question about widescreen vs. 1.66:1
Posted: Sep 19, 2010 4:20 AM   in response to: Sahav in response to: Sahav
Click to report abuse... Click to reply to this thread
The IMDb says that the OAR of The Devil's Bride is 1.66:1. If TCM lists it as letterboxed, then it should have thin black bars on the top and bottom in SD. In HD, it should be a bit wider than a 1.33:1 film, with black bars on the sides.

Sadly, it isn't unusual for 4x3 TV shows to be cropped top and bottom, and shown in 16x9. More often, they are stretched in such a way that the center has little stretching, but the edges have more. I call that the fun house mirror effect. Another way of fitting 4x3 to a 16x9 screen is to zoom a bit, but leave thin black bars on both sides.

Posts: 12
Registered: 08/26/10
Follow up question about widescreen vs. 1.66:1
Posted: Sep 16, 2010 3:22 PM   in response to: ValentineXavier in response to: ValentineXavier
Click to report abuse... Click to reply to this thread
I noticed "The Devil's Bride (1968)" is being run in October.It is listed in letterbox. My question is can or does letterbox include showing this in the 1.66:1 OAR? What I'm really interested in is what to expect when I see this film in October? Will it actually be 1.33:1 or has it been re-matted? My wife love the TV series Poltergeist the Legacy and it was 1.33:1, but it's being shown in what I can only guess is 1.78:1 on a rival channel. Lot of scenes look like the top of people's hair is cut off.

I gather from what another post said about what is available at the film vault and who's working etc. makes sense, but here in this case was there ever a widescreen copy of "The Devil's Bride (1968)"?

Really curious now.

Posts: 2,838
Registered: 06/20/03
Re: Anyone know how TCM choses letterbox over pan & scan versions?
Posted: Sep 10, 2010 10:31 PM   in response to: Sahav in response to: Sahav
Click to report abuse... Click to reply to this thread
Sahav wrote: On a last note it seems a shame that TCM has such a hard time getting OAR at times.

Welcome to the boards. Sorry I'm late to the party, I haven't check this forum lately.

I think part of the problem is unfortunately just about all networks bow to the wishes of the vast majority of TV viewers who hate letterboxing because they can't stand "those damn black bars". That means that many times there are no copies in the film's OAR and when TCM orders one it has to be made especially for them.

Sometimes the original film elements no longer exist or are in such poor condition it would require a costly restoration to make a new copy. There have been a few cases where TCM has paid for a restoration, but obviously can't afford to do that for every film.

From experience, I've also learned that most of the people who work in the shipping departments of studios and distributors are not film buffs and may not even know the differences between pan & scan and letterbox. So if there's 200 copies of a film on the shelf, but only one is letterboxed, it's pretty easy to see how the wrong one is pulled and shipped to TCM.

It sure is tough for TCM being the only kid on the block who wants show films the way they were meant to be shown.

Posts: 12
Registered: 08/26/10
Re: Anyone know how TCM choses letterbox over pan & scan versions?
Posted: Aug 30, 2010 2:29 PM   in response to: ValentineXavier in response to: ValentineXavier
Click to report abuse... Click to reply to this thread
Thanks for the reply. I suppose we can only hope that with the advent of new technology, for example Blu-ray, will help move us further to getting more films in their OAR. I recently read that the Blu-Ray version of the original Star Trek series has the OAR "locked" so you have to watch it in 4:3, which I have no problem with. What gets me is TCM's competition (which I had to buy to get TCM) seems to totally disregard OAR. My wife has a Netflix account (Wi-Fi) and we tried it out on our new Blu-Ray player by streaming Jaws one night...ugh it was pan/scan. Maybe we can look forward to more "locked" OAR or at the least the choice of OAR as technology grows?

On a last note it seems a shame that TCM has such a hard time getting OAR at times. Not knowing if it was not available at the time or if the studio has lost the OAR copy. Also, while I understand some films were released with more than one OAR, I'd prefer the wider if available. I've read a few articles about film matting recently, amazing the technical aspects I never knew about many films. I guess I'm a bit more disappointed with a classic Hammer film as I get the impression they are making more of their titles available to the public. Any rate thanks again for the reply.

Posts: 6,522
Registered: 10/20/09
Re: Anyone know how TCM choses letterbox over pan & scan versions?
Posted: Aug 28, 2010 10:50 PM   in response to: Sahav in response to: Sahav
Click to report abuse... Click to reply to this thread
I'm surprised that someone more knowledgeable than I hasn't answered by now, but I'll take a shot -

It is my understanding that TCM's policy is to show films in their Original Aspect Ratio, whenever possible. But, as we both know, they aren't always in OAR. Some are not available in transfers that are in OAR. Sometimes TCM believes they are getting a film in OAR, but they were really sent a pan-and-scan version, and have to show it that way. Once in a while, TCM has both prints, and grabs the wrong one to show. TCMpgmmr has posted that for a film or two. BTW, The Green Slime is really in 2.35:1, and I started a thread, complaining about the 4x3 showing. In 4x3, we only see 57% of the film.

Then, there are some other factors:

When the film world was first moving to wide screen, often films were shot in 35mm Spherical, which means the image on the film was 1.37:1, but they were meant to be matted to 1.85:1. Because TV was 4x3, and VHS is 4x3, these films were sometimes shown in a full, unmatted, 1.37:1 version, and that is the only version ready to be shown on TV today.

1.66:1 films are rarely shown in their OAR. It is close enough to 1.33:1 that some (not me!) think it's okay to show in 1.33:1. Sometimes that is from a 35mm Spherical print, so there is nothing missing, it just hasn't been matted to 1.66:1, so we see some extra at the top and bottom, like with unmatted 1.85:1 Spherical films. But, sometimes a matted 1.66:1 film is rematted down to 1.33:1, so we lose some of the sides.

1.85:1 films, both Spherical films, and anamorphic films - which are first squeezed horizontally onto the 1.37:1 film frame, then stretched back to 1.85:1 during projection, and don't require matting - are almost always shown in 1.78:1 (16x9) when shown in HD, losing just a bit off each side. In the very few cases where a 1.85:1 film is shown in OAR, you will see a very thin black bar on the top and bottom of your screen, unless your TV has too much 'overscan.'

Also, there is now "Super 35," which is shot "open matte," because it is meant to be used to produce various aspect ratios from the same film. Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is an example of an open matte Super 35 film from which both 1.33:1 and 1.85:1 prints were made. Being more recent, these are usually in their intended theatrical aspect ratio on DVD, which is usually 1.85:1. But, they are usually shown in 1.78:1 on HDTV.

If I screwed up, or omitted anything, hopefully I will be corrected by some of the more knowledgeable people here.

Posts: 12
Registered: 08/26/10
Anyone know how TCM choses letterbox over pan & scan versions?
Posted: Aug 26, 2010 1:40 PM
Click to report abuse... Click to reply to this thread
I was wondering if anyone knows how TCM chooses letterbox over pan & scan versions? Example. I noticed Dracula Prince of Darkness is being run in October. However there is no note as to it being letterbox. I understand it was originally in 2.35:1 and would love to see it properly. I noticed the same issue with other films i.e. "War of the Planets" and Green Slime" was 1.85:1 and was shown in 1.33:1 where as the same day a companion film Wild, Wild Planet was in letterbox. TCM is my favorite channel and we pay extra for it to our local cable provider. Letterbox is on of the primary reasons I pay that extra for TCM. I really love the new trend toward showing films as they were intended. Before I got one of these new HDTV's I never really payed much attention to letterbox. But now it's a primary reason to chose TCM. So, this is far from a complaint, I was just wondering how they make their choices? I sent an e-mail and never heard anything back so was thinking maybe someone knows what their guidelines are?