BluRay - How much picture am I missing?

Associate
Joined
9 Jun 2005
Posts
2,207
Location
A Beer Garden in the Toon
I was watching WALL-E last night on my tv (Full 1080p) and was looking at the black bars at the top and the bottom of the screen.

Now, a FullHD image is 1920x1080(?) pixels, but are the black bars included in that 1080 number or is my player 'shrinking' the image in order to fit the 1:2.35 ratio image onto a 16:9 tv?

For some reason I feel slightly ripped off :rolleyes:
 
your player shouldnt be shrinking anything, itll be the aspect ratio that it was recorded in and the aspect ratio of your tv that will effect things..
 
You're not missing any picture at all.

This is how it was originally produced for cinematic performance. Same as 98% of all blockbusters.
 
Your not missing anything!... most Cinemas are still 2.35:1 (ish)...

Heres a list of all the Ratios:

1.19:1 "Movietone" - early 35 mm sound film ratio used in the late 1920s and early 1930s, especially in Europe. The optical soundtrack was placed on the side of the 1.33 frame, thus reducing the width of the frame. The Academy Aperture frame (1.37) fixed this by making the frame lines thicker. The best examples of this ratio are Fritz Lang's first sound films: M and The Testament of Dr. Mabuse. This is also roughly identical to the ratio of the physical frame used for anamorphic photography today.

1.25:1 The British 405 line TV system used this aspect ratio from its beginning in the 1930s until 1950 when it changed to the more common 1.33 format.

1.33:1 35 mm original silent film ratio, commonly known in TV and video as 4:3. Also standard ratio for MPEG-2 video compression.

1.37:1 35 mm full-screen sound film image, nearly universal in movies between 1932 and 1953. Officially adopted as the Academy ratio in 1932 by AMPAS. Still occasionally used. Also standard 16 mm.

1.43:1 IMAX format.

1.5:1 The aspect ratio of 35 mm film used for still photography.

1.56:1 Widescreen aspect ratio 14:9. Often used in shooting commercials etc. as a compromise format between 4:3 (12:9) and 16:9, especially when the output will be used in both standard TV and widescreen. When converted to a 16:9 frame, there is slight pillarboxing, while conversion to 4:3 creates slight letterboxing.

1.66:1 35 mm European widescreen standard; native Super 16 mm frame ratio. (5:3, sometimes expressed more accurately as "1.67".)

1.75:1 Early 35 mm widescreen ratio, primarily used by MGM, and since abandoned.

1.78:1 Video widescreen standard (16:9), used in high-definition television, One of three ratios specified for MPEG-2 video compression.

Anything filmed in an aspect ratio below will result in bars top and bottom of a 16:9 TV.

1.85:1 35 mm US and UK widescreen standard for theatrical film. Uses approximately 3 perforations ("perfs") of image space per 4 perf frame; films can be shot in 3-perf to save cost of film stock.

2:1 Original SuperScope ratio, also used in Univisium.

2.2:1 70 mm standard. Originally developed for Todd-AO in the 1950s. 2.21:1 is specified for MPEG-2 but not used.

2.35:1 35 mm anamorphic prior to 1970, used by CinemaScope ("'Scope") and early Panavision. The anamorphic standard has subtly changed so that modern anamorphic productions are actually 2.39,[1] but often referred to as 2.35 anyway, due to old convention. (Note that anamorphic refers to the compression of the image on film to maximize a standard 4 perf academy area but presents the widest of aspect ratios.)

2.39:1 35 mm anamorphic from 1970 onwards. Sometimes rounded up to 2.40.[1] Often commercially branded as Panavision format or 'Scope.

2.55:1 Original aspect ratio of CinemaScope before optical sound was added to the film. This was also the aspect ratio of CinemaScope 55.

2.59:1 Cinerama at full height (three specially captured 35 mm images projected side-by-side into one composite widescreen image).

2.76:1 MGM Camera 65 (65 mm with 1.25x anamorphic squeeze). Used only on a handful of films between 1956 and 1964, such as Ben-Hur (1959).

4:1 Polyvision, three 35 mm 1.33 images projected side by side. Used only on Abel Gance's Napoléon (1927).
 
If anything its the TV thats the wrong size but 16:9 is a compromise that works fairly well by allowing a TV to show most common aspect ratios.
 
I don't understand why no one ever complained about this on DVD, but everyone whines with blurays doing the same thing.

I figure its because, going by every widescreen CRT i've owned, that they are set to 'adaptive' aspect ratio by default. Because of this CRTs would cut off part of the picture in order to get rid of the black bars and not many people even realized. I've never come across a HDTV that has adaptive aspect ratios enabled by default so the black bars stay there, people then automatically assume it's a fault, not actually a more accurate picture.

Obviously this is only based on the handful of televisions i've owned/friends + family have owned.
 
I don't understand why no one ever complained about this on DVD, but everyone whines with blurays doing the same thing.

I think its because people are buying big new HD televisions and are feeling (rightly) peeved that the screen STILL isnt being filled :rolleyes:

Why this still persists is beyond me and its really annoying
 
I think its because people are buying big new HD televisions and are feeling peeved that the screen STILL isnt being filled :rolleyes:

Why this still persists is beyond me and its really annoying

Do you mean that you are peeved with those who want to watch a distorted or incomplete picture; or peeved with HDTVs not having an automatic 'stretch anything so it looks stupid' mode?
 
Do you mean that you are peeved with those who want to watch a distorted or incomplete picture; or peeved with HDTVs not having an automatic 'stretch anything so it looks stupid' mode?

I assume he means films being shot/distributed in resolutions and ratios that aren't commonly used.


Could always buy the Philips 21:9 :p
 
I figure its because, going by every widescreen CRT i've owned, that they are set to 'adaptive' aspect ratio by default. Because of this CRTs would cut off part of the picture in order to get rid of the black bars and not many people even realized. I've never come across a HDTV that has adaptive aspect ratios enabled by default so the black bars stay there, people then automatically assume it's a fault, not actually a more accurate picture.

Obviously this is only based on the handful of televisions i've owned/friends + family have owned.

Most DVD players and BluRay players send a 16:9 signal down either the scart cable or embedded into the HDMI feed that disables adaptive mode for movies. At least on every Sony or Panasonic TV I've ever seen. Auto jumps to 16:9 when playing a 16:9 or wider movie, and you get the black bars.

In my experience adaptive only really kicks in on 4:3 "non widescreen" where it stretches the image to remove sidebars.

Never seen a TV that automatically tries to compensate for widescreen letterboxing though.
 
Sorry, I think my original post is somewhat confusing.

Just to clarify, I meant to ask if the black bars are encoded onto the disc? i.e, Am I being sold an image that is 1080 pixels high, but almost 20% blackness?

To touch on the original question, the black bars are indeed included in the 1080 pixel count.

Thanks Hudzy. Do you mean the pixel count of the screen, or of the encoded image?

I find it funny that in 2009 people still don't understand picture ratios and yet will happily pay thousands of pounds for technology they don't understand.

I fully understand the ratio's and the technology I've bought.

Could always buy the Philips 21:9 :p
This TV is pretty much the entire reason for this thread.

When I was looking at the black bars I was thinking 'There'll be no more of those when I get my cinemascope TV', and then I realised that if my BluRay picture is 1080 pixels high, then I'm not getting a true HD image on my current TV as it is essentially being scaled down to fit lengthways.
Or, if the black bars are included in the pixel count (as in the disc image is encoded with the bars on it) then when I get my 21:9 TV its going to have to stretch the 800 odd pixels of actual image to fit.

I hope this is clearer than my original post.
 
Do you mean that you are peeved with those who want to watch a distorted or incomplete picture; or peeved with HDTVs not having an automatic 'stretch anything so it looks stupid' mode?

No, I'm annoyed that films are shot in a format that doesnt work on anybody's televisions :rolleyes:
 
No, I'm annoyed that films are shot in a format that doesnt work on anybody's televisions :rolleyes:

I get a picture on my set fine, maybe you have a problem with your tv if you arn't getting a picture :p

Stop whining about it, only buy 1:85:1 ratio films, or save up and get a projecter, anamorphic lens, and screen ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom