Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

letterboxing films


iclash
 Share

Recommended Posts

why is TCM formatting to fit the screen its wide screen films and not letter boxing them, even though martin scorsese  said, on the channel a few years ago, that tmc would never format its films because information contained in the films are lost.  so why does TCM continue to do it.  the perfect example of why not doing it is right is JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS,  just shown tonight.  in certain shots where there should be 7 skeletons walking there are only six because one walked off the shrunken screen.  this is not the first time they did it with this film and certainly not the first time for any film.

when will TCM live up to the high standards they used to have.  and films like SPARTICUS and 2001, although shown in letterbox, are so wide screen that the TCM letter boxing is not enough and information is still lost.

i really wish robert osborne was still around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iclash said:

why is TCM formatting to fit the screen its wide screen films and not letter boxing them, even though martin scorsese  said, on the channel a few years ago, that tmc would never format its films because information contained in the films are lost.  so why does TCM continue to do it.  the perfect example of why not doing it is right is JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS,  just shown tonight.  in certain shots where there should be 7 skeletons walking there are only six because one walked off the shrunken screen.  this is not the first time they did it with this film and certainly not the first time for any film.

when will TCM live up to the high standards they used to have.  and films like SPARTICUS and 2001, although shown in letterbox, are so wide screen that the TCM letter boxing is not enough and information is still lost.

i really wish robert osborne was still around.

As great as Mr. Osborne was, he had no control over the technical presentation of a particular film.  TCM, by and large, doesn't either, apart from trying to source the best available version of a film they can get.

In looking at this particular film, it seems that there have been two digital transfers done by the studio (Columbia/Sony) at different aspect ratios:  one at 1.75:1 and another at 1.66:1

1.75:1  is almost exactly the ratio for 16x9 HDTVs, and it appears it's this aspect ratio that was shown for the film on TCM (it would result in a full HD screen).  1.66:1 matches the ratio documented on IMDb as the "original ratio".

As to why TCM used the 1.75:1 version, we won't really know.   Maybe it's the only one Sony would release to them?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Movies should be presented in their original aspect ratios.  Let the viewer make the proper picture size adjustment to suit their taste, all modern TV sets has that feature.

adjust-picture-size-2.png?$ORIGIN_PNG$

 

My Toshiba has a Picture Size selection on the remote, the screen shows..

0   Full

1  TheatreWide 1

2  TheatreWide 2

3  TheatreWide 3

4  Normal

5  Native             or Dot by Dot depending on device

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NewYorkGuy said:

The Long, Long Trailer was on last week and it looked grainy.  Then I noticed it wasn't fully letterboxed.  So much for honoring Lucy as Star of the Month.

 

That one should had been shot in Ultra Panavision 70 (because of the long long trailer)

trailer-the-long-long-trailer-43182262-3

 

6a01053621420d970b01bb08634d3b970d-pi

:P

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...