Rosemary's Baby ratio: 1:66-to-1 vs. 16x9 ?

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by dgates, Dec 23, 2006.

  1. dgates

    dgates Guest

    I recorded Rosemary's Baby off an HD movie channel the other night.
    Before using this recording to introduce it to my girlfriend, I'm
    wondering about the ratios.

    My first thought, scanning a few scenes was "Hmm, does it look like
    the left and right sides have been slightly lopped off?"

    However, checking IMDB, it says that the ratio is 1.66 to 1 -- which
    would be *narrower* than our 16x9 TV.

    If that's the case, then how is this picture filling our 16x9 screen?
    Is it being stretched? Are the top and bottoms being lopped off? Is
    IMDB just wrong about the ratio?

    Scanning a couple of DVD sites, I see them referring to the film (or
    at least the DVD) as 1.85:1. Not Netflix, which lists it as 1.66:1,
    but a couple other DVD sites.


    Can anyone enlighten me? What will we be losing or gaining if we
    watch this HD recording?


    Thanks.
    dgates, Dec 23, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. dgates

    Joshua Zyber Guest

    "dgates" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I recorded Rosemary's Baby off an HD movie channel the other night.
    > Before using this recording to introduce it to my girlfriend, I'm
    > wondering about the ratios.
    >
    > My first thought, scanning a few scenes was "Hmm, does it look like
    > the left and right sides have been slightly lopped off?"
    >
    > However, checking IMDB, it says that the ratio is 1.66 to 1 -- which
    > would be *narrower* than our 16x9 TV.
    >
    > If that's the case, then how is this picture filling our 16x9 screen?
    > Is it being stretched? Are the top and bottoms being lopped off? Is
    > IMDB just wrong about the ratio?
    >
    > Scanning a couple of DVD sites, I see them referring to the film (or
    > at least the DVD) as 1.85:1. Not Netflix, which lists it as 1.66:1,
    > but a couple other DVD sites.
    >
    > Can anyone enlighten me? What will we be losing or gaining if we
    > watch this HD recording?


    A movie like Rosemary's baby would have been photographed with the
    intention of playing in Europe at 1.66:1 and in America at 1.85:1, and
    should have been protected for both ratios. A 16:9 transfer splits the
    difference. You're not missing anything that was seen in American
    theaters.

    A 1.66:1 movie can be viewed on a 16:9 TV in one of two ways. Either the
    top and bottom of the frame can be minimally cropped, or the picture can
    be pillarboxed with black bars on the left and right sides of the frame.
    The pillarbox bars would be so small that they'd be covered up by
    typical TV overscan anyway.

    I haven't seen the HD broadcast of Rosemary's Baby to know which it was.
    In either scenario, what you're getting is a perfectly valid
    representation of the movie.
    Joshua Zyber, Dec 24, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. dgates

    dgates Guest

    On Sat, 23 Dec 2006 19:08:02 -0500, "Joshua Zyber"
    <> wrote:

    >"dgates" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> I recorded Rosemary's Baby off an HD movie channel the other night.
    >> Before using this recording to introduce it to my girlfriend, I'm
    >> wondering about the ratios.
    >>
    >> My first thought, scanning a few scenes was "Hmm, does it look like
    >> the left and right sides have been slightly lopped off?"
    >>
    >> However, checking IMDB, it says that the ratio is 1.66 to 1 -- which
    >> would be *narrower* than our 16x9 TV.
    >>
    >> If that's the case, then how is this picture filling our 16x9 screen?
    >> Is it being stretched? Are the top and bottoms being lopped off? Is
    >> IMDB just wrong about the ratio?
    >>
    >> Scanning a couple of DVD sites, I see them referring to the film (or
    >> at least the DVD) as 1.85:1. Not Netflix, which lists it as 1.66:1,
    >> but a couple other DVD sites.
    >>
    >> Can anyone enlighten me? What will we be losing or gaining if we
    >> watch this HD recording?

    >
    >A movie like Rosemary's baby would have been photographed with the
    >intention of playing in Europe at 1.66:1 and in America at 1.85:1, and
    >should have been protected for both ratios. A 16:9 transfer splits the
    >difference. You're not missing anything that was seen in American
    >theaters.
    >
    >A 1.66:1 movie can be viewed on a 16:9 TV in one of two ways. Either the
    >top and bottom of the frame can be minimally cropped, or the picture can
    >be pillarboxed with black bars on the left and right sides of the frame.
    >The pillarbox bars would be so small that they'd be covered up by
    >typical TV overscan anyway.
    >
    >I haven't seen the HD broadcast of Rosemary's Baby to know which it was.
    >In either scenario, what you're getting is a perfectly valid
    >representation of the movie.



    Excellent! Thank you very much for the reply!

    (Now, if I can just convince her that the film's cleverness outweighs
    its scariness! :)
    dgates, Dec 24, 2006
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. PNeski

    Thin Red Line 16X9???

    PNeski, Nov 24, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    401
    Ted Miller
    Nov 25, 2003
  2. BNE
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    476
    Ed Kim
    Oct 29, 2004
  3. BCyphers348934

    Secret Window -- Rosemary's Baby Homage

    BCyphers348934, Dec 13, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    472
    BCyphers348934
    Dec 13, 2004
  4. No One Realy
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    649
    No One Realy
    Sep 19, 2005
  5. Norac05
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    383
    Brian The Demolition Man Little
    Nov 14, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page