 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4  Previous Next
|
|
Correct behaviour of Full-Frame on HD-DVD/Blu-ray |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 3,197 |
| | Posted: | | | | All HD-media is 16:9 but that doesn't tell us anything useful about the content so why state the obvious. | | | | First registered: February 15, 2002 |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 5,494 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Patsa: Quote:
All HD-media is 16:9 but that doesn't tell us anything useful about the content so why state the obvious. That's true,, BUT 1:33 "within" two black pillars may equall 1.78:1 , But the Movie is still academy size and not letterbox.. Are the black and white classics from the fortys such as Casablanca and Citizen Kane on Bluray or HDD, High def (1:78.1) / widescreen? No way., that would be the same as colorizing them. | | | In the 60's, People took Acid to make the world Weird. Now the World is weird and People take Prozac to make it Normal.
Terry |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Peter von Frosta: Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
we use the industry definitions not yours.
Yes, we do. I just question if it's not better to change that since our medium is DVD/Blu-ray not film  You need to looby the industry to use your definition, of course that leaves the little problem of what to call the currently defined Full Frame images.  Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: January 20, 2008 |  Posts: 37 |
| | Posted: | | | | Interesting topic, this. Although I agree that 1.78:1 could also be called 16:9 full screen, the Full Screen/Frame terminology have and always will be bridged with the format 1.33:1 or 1.37:1 (Academy Standard).
The new HD formats require HD monitors to be viewed, and these all come in 16:9 format (previously called widescreen televisions, since 1.78:1 is a widescreen format). What I'm not sure of is whether or not the images are in fact hardcoded to 1.78:1 as some have pointed out. I have no equipment capable of showing me the raw image of the Blu-ray discs, nor do I yet have any release in the old Academy format on Blu-ray yet. But from what I've understood following the whole HD debate for some time is that with Blu-ray the whole issue of the screen size is, in fact, a non issue. No longer do they need to reformat the pictures anamorphically, no longer do they have to take into consideration the 3:2 pulldown of the NTSC signal, the speed up of the PAL signal, etc.
I've always believed that with that problem out of the equation, that they can just focus all of their encoding energy on making the picture as good as possible, without having to think about that you also have to encode the black on top and bottom of the picture. I've always believed that 2.40:1 movies are in fact hard coded as 1920*800 sized images on Blu-ray, and that the TV or player fills the rest of the screen with blacks itself. The fact that the blacks in these bars are always consistent, and some times blacker than the blacks in the encode strenghtens this theory for me. That way they can also use all available bit rate on the actual picture. Likewise with an old movie in 1.37:1 format, I believe the picture is in fact coded as 1480x1080, and that the TV or player adds the blacks on the sides. That's what would make most sense, anyway, considering the advantages of high definition contra standard.
Anyway, this is just what I've come to believe after following the HD debates. If someone knows for a fact that the black bars on top and bottom and/or sides of the screen are hard coded into the picture on HD releases, please enlighten me, preferably with some kind of proof of it being the case.
As to the whole Full-Frame question; it should still be 1.33:1, as it has always been. Anything beyond 1.37:1 is, by all accounts, in fact widescreen formats, and should be treated as such. |
| | Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Peter von Frosta: Quote:
Full-Frame on HD-DVD/Blu-ray is actually 1.78:1, not 1.33:1. However if I check Full-Frame on a Blu-ray it'll still say 1.33:1.
Shouldn't this be adressed? I can see your point, but the biggest problem I see is that I don't think there's any other way of recording 1.33:1 material on blu-ray without using the "full frame", so I believe we could keep it as full frame = 1.33:1, even though for HD material that is no longer true. And Skip, the only "jerk" in this thread is you! Not agreeing with someone is no justification for childish name-calling.  |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,494 |
| | Posted: | | | | One thing I know for sure,, is using HDMI/componant jacks cablewired back to a 16 x 9 Set.,, I can only use the 'Full' button feature on my remote., for 1:33 films., I Cannot get the TV to display 'Normal' unless I go thru RCA jacks or coaxial cable. The HDMI feature automatically fills the screen to 16x9 dynamics ( with the black pillars in place that is .. ) and it DOES not look squeezed either..  | | | In the 60's, People took Acid to make the world Weird. Now the World is weird and People take Prozac to make it Normal.
Terry | | | | Last edited: by widescreenforever |
| | Registered: January 20, 2008 | | Posts: 37 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting widescreenforever: Quote:
One thing I know for sure,, is using HDMI/componant jacks cablewired back to a 16 x 9 Set.,,
I can only use the 'Full' button feature on my remote., for 1:33 films., I Cannot get the TV to display 'Normal' unless I go thru RCA jacks or coaxial cable. The HDMI feature automatically fills the screen to 16x9 dynamics ( with the black pillars in place that is .. ) and it DOES not look squeezed either.. So by that assessment it's either hard coded OR the player adds the blacks. It only proves that it's not the TV adding the blacks, not that the black bars are encoded into the picture... |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
Quoting Peter von Frosta:
Quote:
Full-Frame on HD-DVD/Blu-ray is actually 1.78:1, not 1.33:1. However if I check Full-Frame on a Blu-ray it'll still say 1.33:1.
Shouldn't this be adressed?
I can see your point, but the biggest problem I see is that I don't think there's any other way of recording 1.33:1 material on blu-ray without using the "full frame", so I believe we could keep it as full frame = 1.33:1, even though for HD material that is no longer true.
And Skip, the only "jerk" in this thread is you! Not agreeing with someone is no justification for childish name-calling. North: I suggest you READ FIRST. I stated by giving accurate information. The response I got was with attitude and surliness, not unlike your typical post. I only responded to that attitude, just as I do with YOURS. So.............sir, and I use that term very loosely............. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting widescreenforever: Quote:
One thing I know for sure,, is using HDMI/componant jacks cablewired back to a 16 x 9 Set.,,
I can only use the 'Full' button feature on my remote., for 1:33 films., I Cannot get the TV to display 'Normal' unless I go thru RCA jacks or coaxial cable. The HDMI feature automatically fills the screen to 16x9 dynamics ( with the black pillars in place that is .. ) and it DOES not look squeezed either.. LOL, terry. A Full frame image fit to a 16 X9 screen would not be squeezed, it would be stretched only slightly, you would not notice it unless you had the two images side by side, but faces will appear slightly fatter than they should be. Squeezed is what Iused to have to watch, way back when, when they tried to fit a Widescreen image into a 4X3 box. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|  | W0m6at | | You're in for it now Tony |
| Registered: April 17, 2007 |  Posts: 1,091 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Quoting widescreenforever:
Quote:
One thing I know for sure,, is using HDMI/componant jacks cablewired back to a 16 x 9 Set.,,
I can only use the 'Full' button feature on my remote., for 1:33 films., I Cannot get the TV to display 'Normal' unless I go thru RCA jacks or coaxial cable. The HDMI feature automatically fills the screen to 16x9 dynamics ( with the black pillars in place that is .. ) and it DOES not look squeezed either..
LOL, terry. A Full frame image fit to a 16 X9 screen would not be squeezed, it would be stretched only slightly, you would not notice it unless you had the two images side by side, but faces will appear slightly fatter than they should be. Squeezed is what Iused to have to watch, way back when, when they tried to fit a Widescreen image into a 4X3 box.
Skip Actually skip, it's squeezed vertically, and what you watched was stretched vertically.  | | | | Adelaide Movie Buffs (info on special screenings, contests, bargains, etc. relevant to Adelaideans... and contests/bargains for other Aussies too!) |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,494 |
| | Posted: | | | | It's kinda hard to explain,, But If the image is either from HDTV or a STD DVD when played back thu 'HDMI/componant' my Sony KDF46E2000 LCD rear projection Monitor has 'four' settings for viewing.: 1. Normal 2. Full 3. Zoom 4. Wide Zoom I can't access Normal unless thru analog TV channels, and using RCA or coaxial cable (channel 3 ,) Zoom will zoom in and fill the screen cut the black borders and blowup the image so it is partially pix elated more., and wide zoom will stretch the image sideways . yechh . I prefer a Normal setting for regular 1:33 images (mostly TV), and analog signal, 1:33 images played back thru HiDef components will either play back in a rectangular square black box ( letterbox non anamorphic ), or Two black pillars on each side for full frame or standard academy ratios. This explains why it is when you are watching a HiDef signal from a hi-def cable box the images played back during commercials are constantly dancing between -, pillars and rectangles and full 16x9 images .. which is all played back on that ' full ' setting ( from the four I described) . NOW when playing back a BluRay or HDD DVD the image thru this HDMI/Component would be the exact same properties as I described with an HD signal from Television. and the only way to get it to play back without ever being squeezed (Never happens unless TV settings are wrong) as it is almost always an anamorphic signal . Which explains why there is no box to tick for anamorphic settings in the setup page for features under Invelos,, as BD and HDD (and HIDEF TV) is all anamorphic full screen (academy ratio) and wide screen.,(1:66 to 1:85.1) BUT a film playing back under those conditions that is academy size (1:37.1 or lower) will have black pillars, and the HDMI/component jacks will never squeeze this image unless you go to 'zoom' or Wide zoom' . anamorphic widescreen images such as 2:20 and higher give maybe 20% less black bars than a 4:3 TV set, which is a pleasant surprise when confronted with all this New fangled Technology .. like I said,, it's kinda hard to explain unless you 'analyze' the playback and the equipment.. | | | In the 60's, People took Acid to make the world Weird. Now the World is weird and People take Prozac to make it Normal.
Terry | | | | Last edited: by widescreenforever |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting widescreenforever: Quote:
It's kinda hard to explain,, But If the image is either from HDTV or a STD DVD when played back thu 'HDMI/componant' my Sony KDFE4600E LCD rear projection Monitor has 'four' settings for viewing.:
1. Normal
2. Full
3. Zoom
4. Wide Zoom
I can't access Normal unless thru analog TV channels, and using RCA or coaxial cable (channel 3 ,) Zoom will zoom in and fill the screen cut the black borders and blowup the image so it is partially pix elated more., and wide zoom will stretch the image sideways . yechh .
I prefer a Normal setting for regular 1:33 images (mostly TV), and analog signal, 1:33 images played back thru HiDef components will either play back in a rectangular square black box ( letterbox non anamorphic ), or Two black pillars on each side for full frame or standard academy ratios.
This explains why it is when you are watching a HiDef signal from a hi-def cable box the images played back during commercials are constantly dancing between -, pillars and rectangles and full 16x9 images ..
which is all played back on that 'full ' setting ( from the four I described) .
NOW when playing back a BluRay or HDD DVD the image thru this HDMI/Component would be the exact same properties as I described with an HD signal from Television. and the only way to get it to play back without ever being squeezed (Never happens unless TV settings are wrong) as it is almost always an anamorphic signal .
Which explains why there is no box to tick for anamorphic settings in the setup page for features under Invelos,, as BD and HDD (and HIDEF TV) is all anamorphic full screen (academy ratio) and wide screen.,(1:66 to 1:85.1) BUT a film playing back under those conditions that is academy size (1:37.1 or lower) will have black pillars, and the HDMI/component jacks will never squeeze this image unless you go to 'zoom' or Wide zoom' .
anamorphic widescreen images such as 2:20 and higher give maybe 20% less black bars than a 4:3 TV set, which is a pleasant surprise when confronted with all this New fangled Technology ..
like I said,, it's kinda hard to explain unless you 'analyze' the playback and the equipment.. I'm gonna have to get Ellie Mae after you.  Don't forget what she used to do to Jethro. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | All of this confusion could have been avoided had Profiler used the proper terms.
Full Frame is not a video format, it is a cinematography term that refers to the use of the full film gate at maximum width and height for 35 mm film cameras.
Full Screen, which is what we should be using in profiler, is a term used to describe a 4:3 aspect ratio for films, TV shows and TV sets.
Widescreen refers to any image with a wider and shorter aspect ratio than the standard Academy frame (1.37:1).
These are industry standards and we, with our little DB, probably aren't going to change them. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 452 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Quoting Peter von Frosta:
Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
we use the industry definitions not yours.
Yes, we do. I just question if it's not better to change that since our medium is DVD/Blu-ray not film
You need to looby the industry to use your definition, of course that leaves the little problem of what to call the currently defined Full Frame images.
Skip Please don't start insulting me just because you have a different opinion than me. This is DVD-Profiler. As you said more than once yourself the Profiler is inteded to record the status of the movie/show on our favorite discs itself. Remember saying "cast & crew from credits"? Only contribute what you see? Well if I watch Casablanca on Blu-ray I see a 1.33:1 pillarboxed picture on my HDTV (and yes that is correct and I have nothing against that and that's the way I want to watch that so please no comments about that). If I watch a 1.85:1 movie (Academy Flat) I see a letterboxed picture on my HDTV. If I watch an episode of Firefly I see a 1.78:1 picture an no black bars. What do we call a picture without black bars? Oh and by the way, in film there is no Full-Frame because the full frame is NEVER EVER used. Or why not scrap the whole thing, just have aspect ratio and a anamorphic checkbox because right now this feature makes no sense at all. |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 452 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
All of this confusion could have been avoided had Profiler used the proper terms.
Full Frame is not a video format, it is a cinematography term that refers to the use of the full film gate at maximum width and height for 35 mm film cameras. You never use the full frame on film because the edges are most of the time just garbage. |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |