It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I too am looking forward to watching Skyfall on Blu Ray, as I understand the dialogue is a lot sharper; also there were lots of plotholes when you watched it at the cinema, but these have been filled in on the Blu Ray edition...
Do you watch with the black bars down the side of the screen? That would be offputting for me. Or do you expand the picture so it fills the widescreen, or does that look odd ie stretched?
An alternative would be to position tall black speakers on either side of the TV, to cover the black bars, or rig up a sort of velvet curtain on a pulley to replicate a movie theatre. I just feel those black bars will bug me and make a nonsense of the whole brilliance of watching those old films on Blu Ray.
The black bars (wether to the side on the first 3 plus LALD and TMWTGG or top and bottom with 'widescreen' films) means that you are seeing the film in its proper aspect ratio - as you would have in the cinema - and should not detract from you enjoyment. I would NEVER distort the image to fill the screen! Just concentrate on the film and you'll not notice the bars, trying to 'hide' them will just make them more noticeable.
I don't notice them anyway.
I do not swear by br like some folks. When I watch a film or tv series that is not yet on Netflix, I just get the regular dvd, I don't get all warm and fuzzy inside as far as br goes.
What´s the big thing about those bars anyhow? Doesn´t your tv monitor have a black frame anyhow? So why do you think you´ll notice the black bars so much?
Sometimes old TV shows from the 1970s, sitcoms usually, come up on the box, and they have bars down the side, yes, I find it off-putting (though I never found the letterbox format distracting for movies). On some sets, the LG for instance, the bars are grey, doubly off-putting.
I would have thought what with the insatiable demand for the cinematic experience, there would be a demand for different shaped flat screens, some to accommodate the different ratio of those old-style movies, or alternatively, a way of closing off those black bars with discreet black plastic panels that replicate the look of the TV set.
Get a hold of yourself!!!! :((
LOL
Folk complained about the black bars when watching The Artist at the cinema, and I didn't feel too comfortable about watching the re-released Goldfinger at the big screen. BTW, has anyone picked up on the re-release of GF for one showing in London's Grovesnor Square this summer?
I think he means a screen capable of changing the visible shape of the display area, similar to the way curtains in a theatre used to move farther to the outside for Cinemascope, and closer closer together for regular 35mm prints.
Beautiful quality! And I don't mean his arse!
Yeah, I just snapped it quick with my crappy camera, I was surprised to see it look quite this good myself.
Yes that's right. I mean, I was surprised to find that GF is actually as wide as that, but then again I understand even older films like Casablanca, 39 Steps and Adventures of Robin Hood are even more restricted, 4:3 pretty much. Admittedly, there are not so many of them.
To be fair, that brilliant shot of GF above doesn't really hold up, as I guess it was shot in darkness; in daylight you would obviously see the black bars more.
Here it is again with every light in the room blasting:
AND, zoomed in:
Better?
BTW that pic doesn't have great clarity, is that not Blu Ray or is it the camera that is not too sharp?
I am better informed about all this thanks to this thread, but ultimately none the wiser in term of getting a flatscreen.
I yearn for the days when you would go in, check out the different pictures on a Sony, Mitshibishi or Panasonic, then make your choice, maybe opting for a nice large square CRT 4:3 one. Now you have to choose whether you go for catch-up TV in the form of BBC iPlayer, the ITV and Channel 4 catch-up options, YouTube, Netflix or Lovefilm. Or can you get those with a new Blu Ray player anyway?
Yet even then, back in the day of CRT TVs, oddly department stores never quite got a good picture, due to using a collective aerial I imagine. And so it is even today, frankly I look at the set-up and can't believe the picture is quite how it ought to be. I daresay it would be better set up at home, but who wants to spend over a grand on the basis that the picture might be better when you get the TV installed?
One small branch even suggested that the department store rigs it so the TVs they want to shift exhibit a better picture than the ones they don't.
No surprise that many TVs have pre-recorded discs showing rather than what is on telly, great stuff if all you want to watch are aerial shots of expert skiers heading down a blanket of fresh snow in the Alps, but I'd like to compare it with normal telly like the News, and anyway, if the pic on those pre-recorded items is great, that may be just down to the disc or the Blu Ray player itself...
I understand that Panasonic has a more natural picture than the much-touted Samsung, which is a bit bright and gaudy. But the guy in Richer Sounds said you are still better off judging individual TVs rather than brands, and that the Menu on Panasonic is 'shocking'...
Then you have the Blu Ray player to get, easy enough to check out the Which report, but even then I'd want one that came play multi-region DVDs and Blu Rays and there seems to be only one of those, a Sony one, that exists with only one review on the net; it can only be got via Amazon. Films like Kismet, Vertigo and anything on the Criterion Collection (Four Feathers, 39 Steps) are Region A, ie only in America, so that is a factor for me...
It is annoying that I recently bought an old CRT Bang&Olufsen and while the picture is not totally clear, it is lovely, a word I could never use about the new flatscreens. Tones are deep and lush and of course the sound is full, no need for a soundbar. The whole thing does put me in mind of the whole digital CD malarky, where they tell you Sgt Pepper is better on digital, but really you're better off in practice with your mono vinyl on a decent turntable.
Sorry to rant on.
If Sgt Pepper sounds better on vinyl, or the final cymbal on the White Album last half a minute longer on vinyl it´s not a sign that digityl is not as good, it´s a sign that they didn´t transfer it properly. Many technicians thought you can put music on CD as you did on vinyl, but they´re two different mediums and have to be handled differently. As I wrote before, Blu Ray offers a wide variety of quality, some miles better than DVD, some clearly not as good as DVD.
At the moment I only have Dalton's films in Blu Ray.
I really think most films are limited by how well the film has been preserved and cleaned if it is an older film, and by the company doing the transferring process. Obviously Lowry is top notch in almost every Bond movie. Minor quality issues for me are only noticeable in the films that they didn't spend the money on the 4k transfers.
The reason the black bars don't show up on his set is simply because it is not as widescreen as other ones, surely? Most new flatscreens are a lot wider, to allow for the full Lawrence of Arabia experience. So, Chrisisall, your set seems to be one with just the right ratio for those older films, but would have quite pronounced letterbox effects for the more modern films... I did raise the question of set ratio at Richer Sounds, but the guy said they were all the same; I really don't think that is true. So you would be better with a set like ChrisIsAll's if you rarely wanted to watch widescreen modern films but like the old ratio and just wanted it for simply TV.
The plot thickens.
That it does my friend tell me have you ever bought a tv before ?
And if you want to, you can always fill the screen (but I never do):
I've never bought a flatscreen TV, no.
Are you saying that all flatscreens are the same ratio? Because I don't think that's true. I think some are wider than others.
Thanks for the screengrabs, chrisisall.
For those of you who do not know, here is a breakdown of new televisions:
MOST new flatscreen televisions are presented in a 16x9 ratio (or 1.78:1). This means the screen is 16 parts wide to 9 parts tall. It is extremely rare to find a television that is wider than that, as these usually are not at consumer level.
Many of you might know this, but most newer feature films are shot in either:
1.85:1
2.35:1 or 2.40:1
There are also many older movies that are shot in 4x3 (actually 1.37:1, but we won't nitpick), and a good deal of older European films preferred the 1.66:1 format (including Dr. No, From Russia with Love and Goldfinger).
You'll notice that NONE of these aspect ratios are your HDTV's 1.78:1. So in theory, any movie you watch will have bars of some sort. The only media shot in 1.78 is high definition television broadcasts.
BUT THE PLOT THICKENS:
Many of these HDTVs have an option called "overscan." With overscan enabled, you are actually slicing off a little bit from all sides of the picture (in other words, you are losing some picture). This might cause you to miss out on those black bars during films in the 1.85:1 format or the 1.66:1 format. But, even with overscan enabled, you will definitely see a 2.35 bar, or a 1.33 pillar box. Without overscan enabled, however, you will notice very small black bars on many of the movies you watch.
The discrepancy then comes down to the first three Bond films which I've seen mentioned on this thread. It is slightly confusing because the Special Edition DVDs released 15 years ago present DN, FRWL and GF in 1.85:1. THIS TRANSFER IS INCORRECT TO THE ORIGINAL SOURCE. Those three movies were actually shot in the narrower 1.66:1 format, and the Ultimate Edition DVDs/Blu-Rays correctly preserve this format. The SE 1.85:1 was achieved by slicing a little bit off the bottom and top of the frame - thus creating a wider image. You are actually losing picture with this method.
I do have a picture example of this:
You'll notice that the Special Edition is actually a wider image than the Ultimate Edition. But I would now like you to focus on Ms. Andress's belly button. You can't see it on the Special Edition can you? That is where the artificial 1.85:1 comes into play on the SE discs. The Ultimate Edition is actually more true to the original print of the film (aspect ratio-wise of course). Take the color differences as you will.
So through all of that: Those little black bars on the sides of your frame in Dr. No, From Russia With Love and Goldfinger are totally normal. It is showing you the correct aspect ratio in the way the film was shot.
I hope this explains it a little better. And I also hope this hasn't been posted a few pages back in the same obnoxious length. ;)
Anyhow, it's not that I object to the picture being shown in its correct ratio, not at all, I was just wondering if there are flatscreen TVs that are better for the old style ratio, and some better for the new ratio.
BTW Chrisisall, were those screengrabs of the Ulitmate or Special Edition?