What do you mean? I was unhappy with my Dumbo DVD and went to see the screening to check how the theatrical print looks. Especially I was curious to see the pink elephants scene. It is unforgettable.BK wrote:I mean, you only know there are bubbles because of that one theatre experience. It just seems kind of inconsequential?
I don't own Fantasia on DVD at the moment. I was unhappy with the framing. Here, too, one needs to compare the video transfer with a film print to say anything for sure.Do you have a screencap of what was cropped from Fantasia too?
It may or may not be possible, but rounding would not cause so intense a cropping; besides, that would have been very probably taken into account already during the animation process. (And surely it was never thought that Dumbo could be projected with an alternative 1.85:1 aspect ratio.)2099net wrote:Is it possible Dumbo had such "rounded" corners, and the cropping is to remove them?
Why would the animators make an effort and draw the feet of the elephants entirely, and also animate a big bubble along the frame edges, if they were not meant to be seen? That would be a true "outside" joke.The fact that the full extent of the frame was animated isn't proof it was always intended to be seen, as the Disney AOR thread shows.
You are confusing things. Pan&scan is used when widescreen films are "adjusted" for standard televisions (4:3), sometimes also CinemaScope movies for widescreen TVs (16:9).miniroll32 wrote: Pan&Scan is far, far worse and thats been done to hundreds of films, just to make them fit widescreen TV's.
Dumbo has never been released on video in any other aspect ratio than 4:3 (as far as I know).Now that these classics are back in their 4:3 ratio, it makes the old Pan&Scan methods look horrible, so I really couldn't moan at a slight clipping...
I have seen print of How to play football (Goofy short from 1944) and it had such round corners. With that said it doesn't meen that the movie goers shaw them.marlan wrote:It may or may not be possible, but rounding would not cause so intense a cropping; besides, that would have been very probably taken into account already during the animation process. (And surely it was never thought that Dumbo could be projected with an alternative 1.85:1 aspect ratio.)2099net wrote:Is it possible Dumbo had such "rounded" corners, and the cropping is to remove them?
And, hypothetically, if the movie was meant to be shown with rounded corners, why shouldn't we see it so?
Why would the animators make an effort and draw the feet of the elephants entirely, and also animate a big bubble along the frame edges, if they were not meant to be seen? That would be a true "outside" joke.The fact that the full extent of the frame was animated isn't proof it was always intended to be seen, as the Disney AOR thread shows.
It is more plausible that the edges of the bubble were meant to be seen by the audience as a sort of a metafictional joke.
I'd just like to say not all film stock does have rounded corners at the edge of each frame. In fact, when I was looking for visual examples, I found many more with straight, right-angled corners than rounded - including some films from the 1940s or earlier. I just put it forward as a possibility. I don't think "we" should second-guess decisions of restoration choices when we don't have all the facts.KubrickFan wrote:Movies were always made to make sure the edges weren't really necessary. Furthermore, many (actually, I think probably all of them) dvds and Blu-rays don't show the outer edges of a film frame, simply because the outer edges aren't really meant to be seen (the outer edges being round are a good reason why).
I didn't mean that the rounded corners were there all the time. It's just one reason why the outer edges weren't seen often. Rounded corners or not, most of the time the outer edges weren't seen.2099net wrote:I'd just like to say not all film stock does have rounded corners at the edge of each frame. In fact, when I was looking for visual examples, I found many more with straight, right-angled corners than rounded - including some films from the 1940s or earlier. I just put it forward as a possibility. I don't think "we" should second-guess decisions of restoration choices when we don't have all the facts.KubrickFan wrote:Movies were always made to make sure the edges weren't really necessary. Furthermore, many (actually, I think probably all of them) dvds and Blu-rays don't show the outer edges of a film frame, simply because the outer edges aren't really meant to be seen (the outer edges being round are a good reason why).
I picked mine up this morning too. I notice they have now decided to number the Blu Rays. How annoying is that?!!! Why didn't they start doing that with Sleeping Beauty?2099net wrote:Just got my UK Dumbo now and all I can say is:
What a terrible menu system!
It's slow, unclear, counter intuitive to navigate. Do disc producers actually run tests to see how annoying and crappy they can make some of these Blu-ray menus?
I don't know why they can't just stick to the 3 column layout used by the majority of Disney Blu-rays. It clear, simple and consistant, unlike this mess.
