How to letterbox his films

Started by mutinyco, June 22, 2003, 09:36:03 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RegularKarate

My god could we argue a little more about this.

Cowboy Kurtis, I'm glad you've decided to stop arguing because 35mm is 1.33, there is no question, I've shot 35mm, we masked, giving us 1.85, but the print was 1.33.

The only thing I'm not sure Mutinyco is right about is the projection.  I've shot film and projected it and most American theaters will only present 1.85 or 2:35.  Otherwise, like Cecil was saying, the image would show over the top and bottom of the screen.

When they show 1.33 films in the theaters now days (Gone with the Wind, Wizard of OZ, and Blair Witch were all like this while I was a projectionist), they black box it, which is cropping the top, bottom, left, and right of the frame so that when masked, the 1.33 image shows in the center of the screen and black bars appear on the left and right.

The deal with Kubrick... I really think he has no problem with Letterboxing, I just think he prefers to utilize the whole negative.

What leads me to believe this is that throughout Strangelove (the letterboxed version), the aspect ratio changes from a bizarre 1.37:1 to 1.66:1.  Such an unnoticable switch, but I think that's just him showing as much of the frame as he could at any given time of the video presentation.

modage

Quote from: RegularKarateMy god could we argue a little more about this.

I DISAGREE!
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

mutinyco

He actually shot Strangelove in multiple aspect ratios. I've never quite understood why, though when he created the restored print he went straight for 1.33 -- however, because of the cropping on some of the scenes you can still see borders.

By the way, he personally created the restored print by setting up a Nikon still camera in front of a print of the movie -- and he personally photographed each frame...

Regardless of how they achieve a 1.33 in theaters, the point is that the shape of a 35mm negative is 1.33. Interestingly, Super-35 is 1.4, yet when its transfered to anamorphic for projection, you're back to 2.35. On DVD, however, many of those movies go back to the original aspect ratio -- Minority Report, for instance is approx. 1.39...
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

Keener

I wish I had half of the knowledge you guys have. This stuff interests me and I'm trying to follow all your posts. Keep up this conversation!
Alabama Film Forum
Uniting film lovers and filmmakers of Alabama

cowboykurtis

Quote from: RegularKarateMy god could we argue a little more about this.

Cowboy Kurtis, I'm glad you've decided to stop arguing because 35mm is 1.33, there is no question, I've shot 35mm, we masked, giving us 1.85, but the print was 1.33.

.

i admit i was wrong. i have only shot super 16 -- i assumed the same applied to 35mm. My hat goes off to the both of you. Karate, what have you shot on 35mm? just out of curiousity. would love to see it... is there any way of posting our shorts on here?
...your excuses are your own...

ono

Quote from: cowboykurtisjust out of curiousity. would love to see it... is there any way of posting our shorts on here?
http://www.xixax.com/viewtopic.php?t=69

RegularKarate

Quote from: cowboykurtis. Karate, what have you shot on 35mm? just out of curiousity. would love to see it...

In school we shot a twenty five minute short on 35mm... it was the final project.

The way we did it was everyone basically applied for the position they wanted and based on the knowledge they've shown, they would get an appropriate position.

The film is kind of a sore spot for me because they way they chose the screenplay was that everyone wrote one, the students narrowed it to five and that Instructors picked from there.  Well... they picked the worst of the five (and it was extra insulting to me because one of mine was being considered)... I don't mean this in a bitter jealous way, it was written by someone who couldn't even properly speak english... it was like a bad dubbed German soap opera... what a waste of a great opportunity.

Anyway, I had gone the whole year wanting to go for director and had basically been told that it would be between me and two others, but based on the screenplay, I decided I would learn more if I were in the camera department so I became the First AC.  Experience-wise, it was a great decision because I learned more shit on that shoot than I did almost the entire time I was there.

But it's seriously nothing I would really want to show to anyone else because of how bad it really is story/dialogue/acting wise.  I wouldn't want to post it and make people think that I made that movie because I just helped shoot it.

Sorry about the length of this post.

ono

Heh, that's no problem in my opinion.  I'd like to see more long posts like that.  And, you have an excellent point I'd never thought of.  Don't take credit for a picture unless you are happy with having creative control.  And yeah, definitely a smart move getting camera experience, too.  Lesson learned, and hey, you can always shoot your screenplay on your own at a later date, when you get to do it your way.

yarnboy

RegularKarate: I'm new here, but I already know, just from reading, you went to Full Sail. When did you graduate? What films did you work on? We may know each other :wink:
"signature quotes are dumb"

Pubrick

woo new ppl are saying things! and they know RK!

this is good.
under the paving stones.

Jeremy Blackman

So... does anyone know a good DVD player for Mac that can crop?

aclockworkjj

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanSo... does anyone know a good DVD player for Mac that can crop?
I dunno if this is still the case, but it's all I found just quickly looking for something.
Quote from: http://www.wormintheapple.gr/macdvd/faq.html#3Currently the only software DVD player for the Macintosh which offers "professional" quality is Apple's DVD player, which comes with the operating system in all Mac models which have a built-in DVD-ROM drive.

mutinyco

Audrey Tatou is too cute. She should've played Monica Belucci's role in Irreversible.
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

Jeremy Blackman

Quote from: mutinycoAudrey Tatou is too cute. She should've played Monica Belucci's role in Irreversible.

I think I would be scarred for life. That would be completely different, for some reason.

Hopefully ebeaman doesn't read that.

mutinyco

Can't you just picture cute Amelie getting ass raped by a French De Niro look-alike?
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe