DVDizzy Forum

I was watching Simba's Pride Special Edition and the Original 1998 version on my computer. In the Special Edition 2004 edition, I see black bars on the left and right side. However, In the 1998 version I see the black bars on the top and bottom. Are both versions in a letterbox format? I know that in the Special Edition version, the picture expands to fill the black areas in the left and right side.

Again, I see the black bars when I am watching both movies on a computer. I haven't tried watching them on a widescreen TV or a 4:3 TV set yet.

I took a screenshot from each version. The resoution of the Special Edition version is 853 x 480 while the 1998 version is 720 x 480.

In the Special Editioin version without the black bars on the left and right side is 792 x 480. In the 1998 version, picture is 720 x 448. Of course, the picture in the Special Edition looks bigger. I don';t know if both versions use anamorphic or letterbox transfers.

I know that the screen resolution of most DVDs is 16:9 or around 720 x 480.

I thought that black bars on the top and bottom are common. But it seems that Disney is using black bars on the left and right side now, at least for 1.66:1 transfers.

Edit: I forgot my question. What is are the names of these two video formats? Letterbox and anamorphic 1.66 : 1? Sorry, I forgot.

I think Luke answered my question several months ago, but I can't find his message.

Edit: I fixed the dates. Simba's Pride was not released in 1994.

it depends on the aspect ratio of your tv and the dvd, if your tv is widescreen, but the dvd is fullscreen you will se black bars at the sides, if your tv is fullscreen and the dvd is widescreen, then you will see black bars at the top & bottom of your screen.

The 1999 DVD is non-anamorphic, the 2004 Special Edition DVD is anamorphic. On the 1999 DVD, the black bars at the top and bottom of the frame are encoded onto the DVD; you have a 4x3 image and the film itself is 1.66:1, leaving tiny black bars at the top and bottom. On the 2004 Special Edition DVD, the film is encoded as a 16x9 image. As the film's original aspect ratio is said to be 1.66:1 and 16x9 = 1.78:1, you have tiny black bars on the side to make the difference, while the black bars at the top and bottom are generated by the player (kindly not wasting resolution) and are ever so slightly larger than the old DVD when viewing on a 4x3 screen.

With the overscan phenomenon, you won't really see any black bars on a 16x9 television. And you likely won't see the side ones on most 4x3 sets. By default, computer monitors do not suffer from overscan the way TVs do, and so unless you screw your settings up, watching a DVD on a PC enables you to see the entire width of the image, including those tiny black bars on the side.

But, the short of it is that the 2004 DVD is superior since it wastes far less resolution on its tiny side black bars and presents a much more pleasing image for those with widescreen televisions (and having undergone remastering, those with "standard" TV sets too). I think I've said enough. Now let's hope that no one has said the same thing and posted just before me.

Starion wrote:The resoution of the Special Edition version is 853 x 480

I know that the screen resolution of most DVDs is 16:9 or around 720 x 480

The true resolution of all NTSC DVDs is 480 x 720 non square pixels (if they were measured as square pixels, that would give you an aspect ratio of 1.50) which depending on the coding of the disc ("4:3" or "16:9") are squeezed into a 1.37 wide shape or stretched into a 1.82 wide shape respectively on a NTSC display.

As Luke said the SE edition is coded for Widescreen ("16:9") display and the older disc is coded for Standart ("4:3") display and the movie is pegged as an 1.66 film so it would have pillarboxing on the 16:9 version (black bars at the sides) and letterboxing on the 4:3 version (black bars top and bottom) to fit an aproximately 1.66 film into 1.82 and 1.37 shaped "containers", respectively.

Your first screen capture measured 480 x 853 cus the puter software streched the 480 x 720 16:9 coded Widescreen SE image horizontally trying to fit it into a "16:9" shape, while preserving the 480 height.

On the other hand your puter did the old DVD's screen capture at the raw 480 x 720 data instead of reshaping it into a common "4:3" shape like 480 x 640, or 600 x 800.

If the animated image measures 792 pixels wide inside the 853 pixels of the streched image on the SE, the aspect ratio of the SE is 1.69 according to strict NTSC standards (1.65 if you let the computer resize the frame into 1.78 )

The 1999 DVD's image being 384 x 720 indicates an aspect ratio of 1.71 acording to strict NTSC standarts (1.67 if you let your computer resize the frame into 1.33 )

Luke wrote:On the 2004 Special Edition DVD... ...the black bars at the top and bottom are generated by the player (kindly not wasting resolution) and are ever so slightly larger than the old DVD when viewing on a 4x3 screen.

As Luke says this (not wasting resolution) happens in this case of computer 4:3 display with enough resolution to show the 16:9 480 x 720 image -> onto 480 x 853 without downrezing

In a normal 4:3 NTSC TV the 16:9 image is decimated (downrezed) from 480 pixels tall to 360 pixels tall (throwing 1 out of every 4 pixels) and then thicker black bars generated to fill the newly emptied vertical space so to make the 16:9 coded image look proper and "1.66" widescreen on the 4:3 TV.

The old disc having transfered (or letterboxed) the whole "1.66" image's width touching the edges of the "4:3" frame, ended being 384 pixels tall and so that's why on a 4:3 display it ends having a slightly bigger image inside the 4:3 "frame" (or conversely the new SE disc image ends smaller there with slightly larger black leterbox bars on top and bottom and the pillarboxed ones at the sides) tho both are about the same ratio. Cus it was designed for optimum display on a 16:9 TV where it would have 480 lines instead of the 4:3 disc's 384.


Recalculating with Starion's new number this was

Thanks Luke! That was the page I was looking for. I'll bookmark this thread and that page now before I forget.. again. lol

Starion wrote:In the Special Editioin version without the black bars on the left and right side is 792 x 480. In the 1999 version, picture is 720 x 448. Of course, the picture in the Special Edition looks bigger. I don';t know if both versions use anamorphic or letterbox transfers.

Where did I get 720 x 448? I mean 720 x 384 pixels. Nevermind.

Edit: fixed dates. Simba's Pride was not released in 1994.

384? oh no!
*goes back to work

I should've looked at the back of the cases. The Special Edition of Simba's Pride says "Enhanced for 16x9 Televisons." The back of the 1999 is in matted-scene or letterbox format.

Thanks for taking the time to write back everyone. The answer was in small print.

My computer's DVD player shows black bars on the top and bottom when I play the Widescren version of Lady and the Tramp. The black bars look bigger than the ones in the widescreen version of Brother Bear. If I don't want to see the black bars I can always play the pan and scan version. lol

Later.

Starion, Lady And The Tramp was shot to be projected in the original Scope print format width, 2.55

Scope's aspect ratio has been modified over the years, after 1957 it was changed to the commonly mentioned 2.35, after 1970 it was changed to 2.40 to hide film splices, after the mid 90's the projector's aperture width was reduced a smidge to 2.39 to prevent the DTS control track from showing in extreme cases, altho film negatives and prints should still have the 2.40 area.

Brother Bear's Bearvision was done for the current Panavision/Arrivision/Super-35 Scope print format and I remember disneyunlimited and I measured the R1 DVD for that movie to be 2.40

Since Lady and the Tramp's 2.55 width is more than 6% wider than Brother Bear's, Lady's image has to be "shrunk" more than Brother Bears's to fit within the screen, hence thicker, or "taller", black bars to fill the empty void



Right now i own 10 movies shot in a wider format than Scope 2.40 (only one of them is not transfered at it's correct super width)

I love them wide movies

deathie mouse wrote:Right now i own 10 movies shot in a wider format than Scope 2.40 (only one of them is not transfered at it's correct super width)

Don't tease! Give us your list! You've got me curious.

Those Star Trek movies look very wide. Are they as wide as L&tT Deathie?
I dont have one to look it up.........yes, please give the list!

I think the Star Trek movies are either 2.35:1 or 2.40:1.

Okay Deathie Mouse since you won't give us your list, I'll give you my list of movies I own that are 2.55:1 or greater:

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
Bad Day at Black Rock
Ben-Hur 2.76:1
Brigadoon
Bus Stop
East of Eden
The Greatest Story Ever Told 2.76:1
Guys and Dolls (Letterbox)
The High and the Mighty
How to Marry a Millionaire
Lady and the Tramp
Love is a Many Splendored Thing
Love Me or Leave Me
The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit
My Sister Eileen
Oklahoma! (CinemaScope version)
Rebel Without a Cause
River of No Return
Seven Brides for Seven Brothers
The Seven Year Itch
A Star is Born (1954 version)
There's No Business Like Show Business

DarthPrime wrote:I think the Star Trek movies are either 2.35:1 or 2.40:1.

Yeah, all 10 are 2.35:1, except for Star Trek VI, which is 2.0:1 or 2.20:1 (it's a matted film, so I'm sure it's 2.0:1)

Anyways, here's my list of 2.55:1 or greater in my collection:

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
House of Bamboo
The King and I (letterbox)
Oklahoma! (CinemaScope version)
Rebel Without a Cause
Seven Brides for Seven Brothers
Swiss Family Robinson (I'm pretty sure it's 2.55:1)
The Seven Year Itch

Escapay

Hey! I was working on it

then i got sucked up in surfing the net reading on widescreen processes

ok
Dethie's 11? A Deathie Dozen?

UltraPanavision 2.75 movies* :
1-Ben Hur
2-The Greatest Story Ever Told
3-It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World
4-The Fall Of the Roman Empire

*Some were shot for CINERAMA type screen presentation so around 2.55 is acceptable

CinemaScope 2.55 movies:

5-The Robe
6-The Story Of Demetrius
7-20000 Leagues Beneath The Sea
8-Lady And The Tramp
9-Oklahoma!
10-Daddy Long Legs
11-Forbidden Planet

A couple of these i have on LD (one of them Criterion) as the DVD awaits the ubiquotous resRotation (The one that's cropped down to 2.35 is one of those Laserdiscs awanting.

*Disney or Disney animated movie

Just cus i feel like it besides the other UltraPanavision 2.75 movies (Raintree County, Mutiny on the Bounty, The Hallelujah Trail, The Battle of the Bulge, Khartoum) and the several early CinemaScope 2.55 movies that exist, I'll mention these atypical five: the two CINERAMA movies How The West Was Won and The Wonderful World Of The Brothers Grimm were made in 2.59 and the two CinemaScope55 movies (55mm wide Scope) Carousel and The King And I were made in 2.55 too.

And of course Napoleon from 1926.
The end is in 4.00


GOGOinVegas (and Escapay and DarthPrime), the Star Trek movies (35mm anamorphic print) projection ratios are 2.40 for the original series cast movies (including Star Trek VI) and 2.39 for the Next Generation cast movies.


What happens with Star Trek VI is that it was shot in Super-35 instead of in Panavision, like the others were, so theoretically the live action scenes can be transfered to video in up to 1.33 by "opening" the (non existing) "matte" (as the Super-35 camera is just a Silent Aperture camera) while i supose the SFX were created hard matted in aprox 2.00 (like the T2 SFX) so when it came to make the widescreen video transfer they opted to make a 2.00 open matte version of the 2.40 image, so you should crop it back to 2.40 to make it CinemaScopetacular again

Or you could crop them all to 2.20 to recreate the 70mm blow-up print experience :-p



Anyway, as a rough guide for all those crazy crazee 35mm CinemaScope/Panavision/Arrivision/Techniscope/Super-35 anamorphic movies
just use dethies handy Cinemascope guide:

original magnetic sound Scope = 2.55
optical sound after 1957 = 2.35
optical sound after 1970 = 2.40
digital sound prints after the mid 90's = 2.39

YMMV certain restrictions apply not valid in some countries
the odd superscope movie 2.00
see your doctor for an annual exam
save the whales

Escapay wrote:Swiss Family Robinson (I'm pretty sure it's 2.55:1)

Actually no, it wasn't. Swiss Robinson was filmed in Panavision and in 1960 the correct ratio would be 2.35:1. The reason for the confusion is that the opening titles on the DVD are indeed displayed in a 2.55:1 AR and the rest of the film is 2.35:1. I believe the Laserdisc edition had the whole movie in 2.55:1 however I'm too lazy to go and dig it out of the boxes in my garage to confirm that.

Ocasionally DVDs have presented movies in a ratio wider than is correct. I don't know how this happens. Maybe Deathie might have a clue? Another example was the MGM laserdisc edition of "The Great Escape" that had an AR of 2.66:1!!!

It's one of two things: Either it has been over-matted --- or --- maybe the original camera negative was sans soundtrack and the entire silent aperature captued picture information and the transfer artist mistakenly thought the whole area was meant to be seen. By the way I'm referring to 'Scope pictures only.

P.S. Since this thread is about black bars and not about Disney, should it be moved into the Off-Topic section?

Poppins#1 wrote:

Escapay wrote:Swiss Family Robinson (I'm pretty sure it's 2.55:1)

Actually no, it wasn't. Swiss Robinson was filmed in Panavision and in 1960 the correct ratio would be 2.35:1. The reason for the confusion is that the opening titles on the DVD are indeed displayed in a 2.55:1 AR and the rest of the film is 2.35:1. I believe the Laserdisc edition had the whole movie in 2.55:1 however I'm too lazy to go and dig it out of the boxes in my garage to confirm that.

Ahh, okay.

Escapay

Swiss Family Robinson ratio. mmm....

ok

The composed for image is the Projector Aperture, that's where (supposedly) the lines marking the intended image in the grounglass would be and the cameraman uses to frame his movie knowing that the projectionist uses the same area to project the film.

The camera always records a little more (the Camera Aperture) to allow for mechanical variations (film travels through the projector at 90 feet per minute) or other errors somewhere along the line. (Just check an (analog film) 35mm camera, what you see in the viewfinder is about 95% of what's recorded in the 24 x 36mm negative to allow for slide mounts or enlarger aperture plate, etc.)

Now if you take the original optical sound Scope Projector Aperture area of 2.35 and crop it vertically to the current anamorphic 0.690" height standard you get 2.40
If then you add in the transfer the sides of the safety extra image recorded by the camera width (the Camera Aperture) you get 2.51

Now if you crop an extra 1.4% of the 0.690" vertical image you get 2.55.
In this hypotethical case you'd end up cutting up a total of 3.5% of the original 2.35's vertical image which is more or less under SMPTE allowed practice, to achieve 2.55 from a 2.35 image. (equivalent to a 4:3 TV's 3.5% overscan of an Academy picture or TV program.)

Another thing that could have happened in the Swiss Laserdisc transfer would be if they slightly windowboxed the LD transfer to offset the TV's ovescan. Then the resulting vertical image would be less tall and you'd think the transfer was wider than other not-underscaned/non-windowbozed transfers. This happened for example with the LD transfer of Mad Max 2 (and i think Blade Runner too) I remember watching first the Mad Max 2 LD on a friend's TV and thinking wow! super wide! Then being dissapointed it was windowboxed when i watched the LD on my no overscan display, so tho on a regular TV it gave the impresion it was wider, there wasn't any more width

Now to your second possibility: That it was shot on a "Silent/Full Aperture type" original Cinemascope camera and the neg's image is 2.67, and the movie protected for 2.35, or recentered/cropped for 2.35, well we've seen they recentered Lady prints (cus on the 2.35 DVD you can see they were cropped on the right, not the left), maybe they could have done it for Swiss prints?
The camera used for the later film could be the same used for the original magnetic sound CinemaScopes just with the new groundglass 2.35 markings?

Maybe we'd need image analisis like we did for Lady (laserdisc/VHS full 486 x 720 captures of pan scan and letterbox vs 480 x 720 captures of the DVD) or to hold the negative and intermediates (not the optical sound print ) on your hand.
mvealf where are you?

anyway the Swiss Family Robinson captures in the <a href="http://www.ultimatedisney.com/swissfami ... n.html">UD review</a> come out as 2.37 on a NTSC display.

The current Anamorphic format aspect ratio is 2.39
mmm the average of 2.35 and 2.39 is 2.37



About The Great Escape Douglas Pratt says the LD was about 2.5.