Page 1 of The thinnest aspect ratio DVD film ?

Just got my usual Total DVD magazine from the shops and its got a free movie DVD.

Its called STRANDED, a film based on astronauts stranded on Mars.

What is unusual about the film is that the screen size is three times longer than it is in height. Yet the actors faces are not distorted in any way. So it looks correct.

So is that an aspect ratio of 3:1 ?, making it the thinnest film I have ever seen, leaving masses amount of black area top and bottom on the TV.

Can this be normal as I thought an Aspect ratio should never be `thinner` than 16:9

Quote:
Can this be normal as I thought an Aspect ratio should never be `thinner` than 16:9

16:9 is 1.78:1. There are loads that are more than that - 2.35:1

--
www.soundalikes.com

MGM experimented with aspect ratios in the 50s and 60s. They shot films that were super-wide.

As you have noticed, the problem these days is that even playing back on a widescreen TV gives you ridiculous image size.

Stranded is in its original 2:35:1 format un-enhanced etc (as is Scream, South Pacific, Krakatoa East of Java and the like). To be quite honest the film is a total pile of doo doo and the best place for it is underneath a glass of beer. Keep the case though! ;)

If the above post is correct and the dvd is the standard 2.35:1,then that makes it quite tame compared to many of the 50`s and 60`s classics.I believe Ben Hur is about 2.66:1,and there are many that are 2.55:1.

Sounds like your TV is set for an anamorphic disc, but the disc is non-anamorphic 2.35:1.

This would give you a ridiculously wide image like you described, but it`s not the way it`s meant to look, you need to set your TV to 16:9 zoom to see the film in it`s correct ratio.

************************************************************
My DVD`s

Or 4:3, but then that`s assuming he has a widescreen set. If there`s no distortion it would seem to suggest that he`s just watching a film with a wider aspect ratio than he`s used to.

To the original poster, it`s more correct to say the image is wider than thinner because of the way aspect ratios are traditionally written (i.e. a width to hight ratio).

Typical ratios you might encounter are 1.33:1/1.37:1 (often caled 4:3), 1.66:1, 1.78:1 (16:9, the ratio of widescreen sets), 1.85:1, and 2.35:1 (which is actually 2.40:1, but everyone still calls it 2.35:1). As others have pointed out, there are differing ratios, some of which are exceptionally wide. I have a number of 1.75:1, 2:1, and 2.20:1 films in my collection.

For more info on aspect ratios, look here:

www.dvdanswers.com/index.php?r=0&s=8&p=info&c=9
www.dvdanswers.com/index.php?r=0&s=8&c=27
www.dvdanswers.com/index.php?s=8&c=22

Apparently the 70mm prints of Ben Hurr were 2.76:1.

This item was edited on Saturday, 29th January 2005, 02:08

In the 70s you could buy a really good `what was then called `Widescreen` lens` to fix (with special brackets) to your 8/16 mm camera. I had a Kowa 8z. This was in 2.66-1. You needed a screen the length of the room to watch it properly & this was with the picture at around 5` high. These paultry TVs & high def have nothing on what was around then. Yes true Cinemascope with Stereo sound.

When I were a lad..... ;)

Nick

Quote:
Yes true Cinemascope with Stereo sound

And of course not forgetting....`Vibrasound` ala Earthquake! :o