DVDizzy Forum

Using that example in the link above, 1.78:1 actually gains a tiny bit on the top and bottom while nothing is affected on the left and right. The difference is minuscule, but isn't it nice to gain a little bit extra in the uncropped version even if it's not technically the original theatrical ratio. I think so. In a small degree, it's like The Aristocats and Robin Hood which I prefer watching in their uncropped 1.33:1 version because there is more picture to enjoy than the original theatrical ratio. This is not the same as the dreaded pan and scan treatment of widescreen movies.

gardener14 wrote:Using that example in the link above, 1.78:1 actually gains a tiny bit on the top and bottom while nothing is affected on the left and right. The difference is minuscule, but isn't it nice to gain a little bit extra in the uncropped version even if it's not technically the original theatrical ratio. I think so. In a small degree, it's like The Aristocats and Robin Hood which I prefer watching in their uncropped 1.33:1 version because there is more picture to enjoy than the original theatrical ratio. This is not the same as the dreaded pan and scan treatment of widescreen movies.

Haha. I have a feeling this isn't going to go over too well with a lot of people.

Although I think I agree. I'm not a very big stickler on aspect ratios though. Just give me some good ole Disney Magic. I'm not going to complain about what the screen looks like.

BK wrote:

AlwaysOAR wrote: I believe the original version shown in theatres is the one that should be presented on DVD/Blu. My opinion, as well as others. If you don't agree, then fine. Again, grow up kid.

It's not like it's OAR was 2:35:1.

There's barely a difference between 1:78:1 and 1:85:1.
Your memory also isn't good enough to discern what you did or didn't see.

Sure, we all want the OAR present in theatres but we don't really need it, not in this case. It's not that big a difference to make such a brouhaha about, is it?

Had you read my initial post on this, you would have seen that I was pointing out in the review it claimed that 1.78 was the original ratio, which it isn't. I was simply pointing out that fact.

BK wrote: There also has to be a good reason since they've done it with Up and Finding Nemo both in different years. Show me what either movie is missing by cropping to 1:78:1 and maybe you'd have a stronger argument. As it stands, though it is incorrect, it's not much of an issue.

Oh, I'm well aware about Finding Nemo, The Little Mermaid, etc. The only point I'm debating is that Disney, unlike the other studios mostly, has this problem of not being able to release their titles in the correct theatrical ratio. Whether the difference is by a little or alot, is besides the point. It can be argued the other way that if the difference is minor, there shouldn't be a reason for not releasing their titles in the right ratio.

BK wrote: Lastly, I'm not sure what effect you're trying to achieve by calling me a kid. It sure doesn't make you any more mature or adult unless you were going for condescension which would be ironic.

If you look at your intial posts to mine, out of the blue you're cursing and insulting for no obvious reason other than you disagree with my view. I've seen other posts by you in other threads, and no I don't remember which ones nor am I going to try to locate, in which you show the same childish behavior when you disagree with someone. You come across as some punk kid who needs to grow up. Though at least with this post you do show some sort of intelligence.

gardener14 wrote:Using that example in the link above, 1.78:1 actually gains a tiny bit on the top and bottom while nothing is affected on the left and right. The difference is minuscule, but isn't it nice to gain a little bit extra in the uncropped version even if it's not technically the original theatrical ratio. I think so. In a small degree, it's like The Aristocats and Robin Hood which I prefer watching in their uncropped 1.33:1 version because there is more picture to enjoy than the original theatrical ratio. This is not the same as the dreaded pan and scan treatment of widescreen movies.

Actually, I love open matte, as it gives you a choice. You can watch it with the extra footage on the top and bottom (which is really nice to see in animation, especially when they animated with television in mind) or you can zoom in on your own and watch it in the widescreen seen in theaters by the movie going audiences (while filling up your widescreen TV). At least its a choice, with no loss in picture.

DarthPrime wrote:

BK wrote:Actually, please provide a comparison screenshot between ANY movie for 1:78:1 and 1:85:1 aspect ratios.

I was trying to find some but I obviously don't know what I'm looking for and since you seem to know so much I'd like to see the difference.

Thanks.

A Google search turned up this example on another forum. Scroll down to see the difference between 1.85:1 and 1.78:1. Its a minor difference and I'm sure 99.9% of people wouldn't notice at all.

Its nice to preserve OAR, but this in my opinion, isn't a big deal at all.

http://forums.highdefdigest.com/blu-ray ... can-2.html

While I respect your opinion, and I know I'm in the minority on this, and being that it is a minor difference, why not release it in it's correct ratio. As I pointed out in the above post, the other studios seem to have no problem mostly in releasing there titles correctly. Disney just always seems to have this problem. My opinion, we will just have to disagree.

SWillie! wrote:

DarthPrime wrote: A Google search turned up this example on another forum. Scroll down to see the difference between 1.85:1 and 1.78:1. Its a minor difference and I'm sure 99.9% of people wouldn't notice at all.

Its nice to preserve OAR, but this in my opinion, isn't a big deal at all.

http://forums.highdefdigest.com/blu-ray ... can-2.html

HAH! I mean, to each his own... but I find it laughable that anyone would have an issue with the amount of difference that makes. Okay, it's not actually what the OAR is... but... ... ... who cares?

But again, to each his own I guess

It really isn't about the amount, large or small, of difference between the ratios, but about preserving the theatrical version. Whether it's the aspect ratio, or a film being edited, or even a director going back to tinker with the original version, ala Lucas. I just prefer to see a movie the way it was initially shown. Remember, Han shot first. Though this difference in ratios doesn't fall under that extreme, it's the principle for me that matters. Who cares? Well I do, as well as others I know. Granted, I'm in the minority, but that's my opinion, which is what this forum is for.

the aspect ratio isnt even the biggest change. they went in and rendered the whole movie with newer shaders, so the colors are subtlety different. Personally I think its actually an improvement, since they pop more now. but if your going to complain about changes, the minor aspect ratio change seems pretty petty.

They've also fixed minor animation problems here and there. Like in one shot where Woody intersects the bed spread.

Wierdly enough they didnt correct the huge intersection issue with Andy's hands and Buzz in at the last shot of the climax chase sequence.

I dont recall the whole movie being given new shaders.

Many actually still look low-res.

and what intersection?


And AlwaysOAR, you've made your point. there is no reason for them NOT to release the original ratio, just as there's no reason to really fret too much about it.

And I didnt check, but if they were touching things up.............

Did they fix the shot with Hamm and Woody when Woody urges everyone back to their places after the army men scene?

I'd hoped to pick my sets up today but bleh . . . I'll have to wait until tomorrow. Oh well. I might run myself a mini-marathon of Pixar material when I get back home.

AlwaysOAR wrote:

DarthPrime wrote: A Google search turned up this example on another forum. Scroll down to see the difference between 1.85:1 and 1.78:1. Its a minor difference and I'm sure 99.9% of people wouldn't notice at all.

Its nice to preserve OAR, but this in my opinion, isn't a big deal at all.

http://forums.highdefdigest.com/blu-ray ... can-2.html

While I respect your opinion, and I know I'm in the minority on this, and being that it is a minor difference, why not release it in it's correct ratio. As I pointed out in the above post, the other studios seem to have no problem mostly in releasing there titles correctly. Disney just always seems to have this problem. My opinion, we will just have to disagree.

I understand what your saying, but Disney isn't the only one doing this... Other studios are releasing 1.85:1 films as 1.78:1 too.

I think one reason is over scan on TVs. The difference between 1.85:1 and 1.78:1 is usually covered up by over scan on a TV set. Of course if you have your TV calibrated and adjusted to get rid of over scan you will be able to see the difference.

ajmrowland wrote:I dont recall the whole movie being given new shaders.

Many actually still look low-res.

and what intersection?

And I didnt check, but if they were touching things up.............

Did they fix the shot with Hamm and Woody when Woody urges everyone back to their places after the army men scene?

Yeah, it was revealed this in an interview a while back when promoting the double feature.
http://www.collider.com/entertainment/n ... 315/tcid/1
This is the same master, minus the 3d.

as for some other chages, Lee vaguely mentions some other things in another interview, I just cant remember where to find it.

The Toy Story movies were actually made in 1.78:1, so this is the OAR.

Hey I was going through reviews of the Toy Story Blu-Ray and came across a discrepancy in the bonus features between the US release and UK release, so if anyone could help, thanks in advance.

In the UK version;

For both Toy Story's are there the sections 3D Visualisation and Color under Design?

Also under Toy Story 2's Music & Sound how many featurettes are there? If there are only 3, which of these is not here: Designing Sound, Making Songs, Woody's Roundup, Jessie's Song.

Thanks again!

KubrickFan wrote:The Toy Story movies were actually made in 1.78:1, so this is the OAR.

Do you know what the rest of the Pixar films were made at?

KubrickFan wrote:The Toy Story movies were actually made in 1.78:1, so this is the OAR.

Thanks for clearing this up. I think we all feel much better now.

BK wrote:

KubrickFan wrote:The Toy Story movies were actually made in 1.78:1, so this is the OAR.

Do you know what the rest of the Pixar films were made at?

The rest of them have their correct ratio.

And Iceflash, I don't know if you're mocking me (Buzz mode off ) but there was apparently confusion about which was the correct AR, so that's why I gave a response. If you weren't, then consider this bit redundant.

KubrickFan wrote:

BK wrote: Do you know what the rest of the Pixar films were made at?

The rest of them have their correct ratio.

And Iceflash, I don't know if you're mocking me (Buzz mode off ) but there was apparently confusion about which was the correct AR, so that's why I gave a response. If you weren't, then consider this bit redundant.

No I'm not mocking you. I'm glad you cleared that confusion up.

KubrickFan wrote:

BK wrote: Do you know what the rest of the Pixar films were made at?

The rest of them have their correct ratio.

And Iceflash, I don't know if you're mocking me (Buzz mode off ) but there was apparently confusion about which was the correct AR, so that's why I gave a response. If you weren't, then consider this bit redundant.

So Nemo, Up and Monsters Inc were all animated at 1:78:1 ?

KubrickFan wrote:The Toy Story movies were actually made in 1.78:1, so this is the OAR.

That may be the way they were animated/computer generated, though that's doubtful as that ratio from what I understand wasn't invented till widescreen tvs came about. Just like alot of the animated classics were animated academy ratio, but matted for a particular ratio for their theatrical release. However the theatrical ratio for Toy Story was 1.85:1.

BK wrote:

KubrickFan wrote: The rest of them have their correct ratio.

And Iceflash, I don't know if you're mocking me (Buzz mode off ) but there was apparently confusion about which was the correct AR, so that's why I gave a response. If you weren't, then consider this bit redundant.

So Nemo, Up and Monsters Inc were all animated at 1:78:1 ?

I believe it means the DVDs are at 1.85:1.


Anyway, Ratios dont have to be "invented" as movies with digital source files usually have an easily adjustable AR.