How far can a feature film not shot in widescreen go? at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > Open DV Discussion

Open DV Discussion
For topics which don't fit into any of the other categories.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old April 19th, 2007, 08:21 AM   #1
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 47
How far can a feature film not shot in widescreen go?

Can it win at a film festival? Can it get nationwide theatre release?
Anthony Vincent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2007, 09:13 AM   #2
Major Player
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Tallinn, Estonia
Posts: 300
if your film is worth winning, then it will. Shouldn't matter that much wether your film was shot in 16:9 or not

Everyday I see more and more 4:3 footage broadcasted....
Andzei Matsukevits is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 19th, 2007, 10:23 AM   #3
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Plainfield, New Jersey
Posts: 927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Vincent View Post
Can it win at a film festival? Can it get nationwide theatre release?
I could be wrong about this, but I believe THE SHINING wasn't shot in wide screen.

Anyway, aspect ratio has nothing to do with it. If you're shooting a tiny production, than it all boils down to how much hype your content generates. Maximum hype = Maximum Distribution chances for tiny unknown productions.
Glenn Gipson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2007, 12:15 PM   #4
Trustee
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 1,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn Gipson View Post
I could be wrong about this, but I believe THE SHINING wasn't shot in wide screen.
Aspect ratio
1.66 : 1 (theatrical ratio, Europe)
1.85 : 1 (theatrical ratio, USA)

Kubrick shoot a non cinema wide movie? I don't think so. Maybe it was Lawrence of Arabia you were thinking of?
__________________
Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.
Ken Hodson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2007, 12:57 PM   #5
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: 32 44' N 117 10' W
Posts: 820
Blair Witch was Full Screen
John Hudson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2007, 01:55 PM   #6
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Plainfield, New Jersey
Posts: 927
What about 28 days later? That had to be shot in 4:3 because the XL1 doesn't have a true 16:9, right? I really shouldn't post things if I'm not sure, but I'm kind of doing it to find out the answers myself.

As for The Shining, there is no Wide Screen version available, that's for sure.
Glenn Gipson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2007, 02:17 PM   #7
Major Player
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 204
About the Shining, they released it in theatres in widescreen, but for the TV/VHS-version Kubrick wanted to use the whole screen. So that was one of the few times (the first?) people saw 'more' of the film then in the theatres. Film is in 4:3 most of the times anyway, but they cut of top and bottom before release. Then, for TV-release, they cut of the sides again. Kubrick thought this was a waste and wanted the whole screen. That's why you see an accidental helicopter shadow in the opening credits at the bottom of the screen, it wasn't there in the movie theater!
Gotta love imdb :)
Steven Fokkinga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2007, 02:19 PM   #8
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Plainfield, New Jersey
Posts: 927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Fokkinga View Post
About the Shining, they released it in theatres in widescreen, but for the TV/VHS-version Kubrick wanted to use the whole screen. So that was one of the few times (the first?) people saw 'more' of the film then in the theatres. Film is in 4:3 most of the times anyway, but they cut of top and bottom before release. Then, for TV-release, they cut of the sides again. Kubrick thought this was a waste and wanted the whole screen. That's why you see an accidental helicopter shadow in the opening credits at the bottom of the screen, it wasn't there in the movie theater!
Gotta love imdb :)
Interesting...I've always wondered about that damn helicopter shadow lol. Good info.
Glenn Gipson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2007, 08:41 PM   #9
Trustee
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 1,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn Gipson View Post
What about 28 days later? That had to be shot in 4:3 because the XL1 doesn't have a true 16:9, right? I really shouldn't post things if I'm not sure, but I'm kind of doing it to find out the answers myself.

As for The Shining, there is no Wide Screen version available, that's for sure.
Because a feature was shot on a camera that has native 4:3 chips does not mean the feature was released as such. 28 days later was edited and released wide screen.
As far as the Shinning goes the Ariflex cameras used, to my understanding don't shoot in a 4:3 ratio, unless it is being suggested that the letterboxed the sides the letterboxed again to get the 1.85:1 ratio. I really doubt this. My guess is that the "bigger screen" version is the European 1.66:1 version (the original shot) and was cropped further for 1:85:1 which is only logical.
__________________
Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.
Ken Hodson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2007, 01:23 AM   #10
Trustee
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 1,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Hudson View Post
Blair Witch was Full Screen
No it was 16mm wide screen mixed with with 4:3 video portions, which were meant to look that way so they stayed their native 4:3 (what the hell was 16:9 video in 1997 anyways?). As well this was one of the first true block-busters that had video footage, and gave many of us hope in a future of video film making.
__________________
Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.
Ken Hodson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2007, 04:00 AM   #11
Major Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Central, OH
Posts: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Hodson View Post
Kubrick shoot a non cinema wide movie? I don't think so.
Kubrick was into full aperture 1.33 (or 1.37) filmmaking. I don't know about The Shining in particular, but it would not be unheard of for Kubrick (or any filmmaker, for that matter) to choose to shoot full screen; he liked full screen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Hodson View Post
As far as the Shinning goes the Ariflex cameras used, to my understanding don't shoot in a 4:3 ratio
That's simply not true.


.

Last edited by David Garvin; April 21st, 2007 at 05:27 AM. Reason: Fix quote attribution/links to original posts
David Garvin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2007, 04:28 AM   #12
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Vancouver, B.C. Canada
Posts: 81
Here's an interesting perspective on the 4:3 format versus widescreen:

THE DISASTER IN MODERN FILM, TV AND VIDEO OR

OUR UNNATURAL WIDE-SCREEN FORMAT by Mark Anstendig

http://www.anstendig.org/film_tv_disaster.htm
James R. Leong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2007, 05:19 AM   #13
Major Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Central, OH
Posts: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by James R. Leong View Post
Here's an interesting perspective on the 4:3 format versus widescreen:
THE DISASTER IN MODERN FILM, TV AND VIDEO OR
OUR UNNATURAL WIDE-SCREEN FORMAT by Mark Anstendig
http://www.anstendig.org/film_tv_disaster.htm
No offense, but I can't even take that article seriously.



But there is some info from the Kubrick FAQ that I googled up, including stuff on the helicopter shot. Here's a comment about Kubrick's relationship with aspect ratio:
http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/faq/#n1s1

"It seems to have been Kubrick's preference for his films to be shown in the 4:3 or "full frame" aspect ratio, because, according to his long-standing personal assistant Leon Vitali, that was the way he composed them through the camera viewfinder and if it were technically still possible to do so, he would have liked them to be shown full frame in cinemas as well."
David Garvin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2007, 08:40 AM   #14
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Mays Landing, NJ
Posts: 11,542
I have several Kubrick DVD's and on the cover a couple of them say they're presented in full screen format because that's what the director wanted.

I know that 2001 is an exception however. Those shots are definitely composed for a wide screen.
Boyd Ostroff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2007, 02:38 PM   #15
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wurzburg, Germany
Posts: 316
"Because a feature was shot on a camera that has native 4:3 chips does not mean the feature was released as such. 28 days later was edited and released wide screen"

I guess they used a 16:9 anamorphic lens adadpter and took advantage of the full chip size.

btw. can somebody tell me where the square brackets are on a Mac with a European FCP Pro keyboard? I can't use the quote script without these... :(
Heiko Saele is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > Open DV Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:26 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network