~ 1.48 (1.472 / 0.997) based on the numbers provided. FROM: <http://www.widescreen.org/aspect_ratios.shtml> ********************** VistaVision 1.66:1 aspect ratio 1.85:1 aspect ratio 2.0:1 aspect ratio This system was a lot looser than others, allowing for a bit more fudging. But Paramount's specs always referenced a preferred A/R of 1.85:1. All VV prints were hard matted to around 1.66:1 to allow some flexibility in framing. VistaVision movies were filmed with a specially designed camera which was mounted on its side. This special filming method required a special projector, but its image quality was better than standard 35mm. Movies that are shot in VistaVision were photographed on a double width frame of 35mm running right to left horizontally. The films were generally "reduction printed" to 35mm 4-perforated (four sprocket holes per frame) in dye-transfer Techniclor and projected with a 1.85:1 ratio. The image area was extracted optically from the full frame. For some special venues the double-frame 35mm film was cropped to 1.85:1 during projection. VistaVision movies include "Vertigo", "North By Northwest", and "White Christmas". ********************** I don't know anything on this subject other than what I find on-line... (sometimes dubious at best I realize...I find myself often quoted on other subjects...what am I to believe? ) Quoting Mark Schubin <tvmark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > >What makes you think that is the correct aspect ratio? > > > >I didn't say it was correct, just much more pleasing to > >watch on a 40 inch 16:9 TV because it makes full use of the TV > >screen, > > > Well, if that's the criterion, then since the VAST majority of TV sets > in the U.S. are 4:3, a narrower aspect ratio makes full use of many more > > screens. > > > >All this is to say that there is much more that could have been seen of > > >the original film on ABC tonight if they had > >played the DVD I was running and making scene by scene comparisons > with. > >There would have been more of the original frame, and greater detail > >overall by playing the DVD. > > > > > As I pointed out in my correction to my message, the "original frame" of > > a VistaVision movie is much closer to 4:3 than to 16:9. The > specification was 1.472 x 0.997 inches. That's 1.42:1. 4:3 is 1.33:1. > > 16:9 is 1.78:1. The DVD, by truncating the top and bottom, offers much > LESS of the original frame than a 4:3 extraction would by truncating > tiny amounts of the sides. In fact, VistaVision vertical "flat" release > > prints had a full 4:3 aspect ratio. All other aspect ratios truncated > top and bottom. > > Only if ABC somehow started with a widescreen extraction and truncated > the sides would they have offered less of the original frame. Your next > > comment suggests they may have done that. > > >What ABC aired showed about 1/3 less of the frame horizontally than is > >on the DVD, and what is > >on the DVD is certainly not the entire original 8 perf 2:1 VistaVision > > >camera negative frame. > > > > > If so, then I share your condemnation. > > TTFN, > Mark > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: > > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at > FreeLists.org > > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word > unsubscribe in the subject line. > Regards, Mark A. Aitken Director, Advanced Technology *************************** Sinclair Broadcast Group 10706 Beaver Dam Road Hunt Valley, MD 21030 Business TEL: (410) 568-1535 Business MOBILE: (443) 677-4425 Business FAX: (410) 568-1580 maitken@xxxxxxxxxx ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.