Question about aspect ratio / The Dark Knight

ScarySquirrel · 15 Dec 2008 at 09:22

I watched The Dark Knight on Blu-Ray yesterday and I couldn't help but notice the screen format changing throughout.

Sometimes it was full screen and on other scenes it was letterbox format. I can only assume this is intentional, but it did make me think something. Whenever it went from full screen to letterbox, I thought to myself "Well, that's annoying!" because it cuts off the top and bottom of the image and only when it keeps changing do you realise how much of the image you lose.

Few questions:

1 - What is the point in the letterbox format? I would prefer full screen?
2 - Why does the Dark Knight change throughout the film.

PS. Dark Knight on Blu-Ray = AWESOME

HEADRAT · 15 Dec 2008 at 09:43

1. Most films are 2.35 not 16:9, therefore you get black bars (letterbox) when watching 2.35 material on a 16:9 screen.

2. Dark Knight was filmed for IMAX which using an even wider for of 2.4, so even those watching on a 2.35 screen will get black bars. For Dark Knight the Director chose to include the IMAX sequences in the released BluRay.

HEADRAT

oli collett · 15 Dec 2008 at 10:51

HEADRAT said:
1. Most films are 2.35 not 16:9, therefore you get black bars (letterbox) when watching 2.35 material on a 16:9 screen.

2. Dark Knight was filmed for IMAX which using an even wider for of 2.4, so even those watching on a 2.35 screen will get black bars. For Dark Knight the Director chose to include the IMAX sequences in the released BluRay.

HEADRAT

I could be wrong here, but from what i remember when i saw it on IMAX the aspect ratio was more like 16:9 during IMAX sequences and 2.35:1 for the rest of the film (i.e. the picture was taller). I believe in the DVD/blu-ray it translates to 16:9 for IMAX and 2.35:1 for the majority of the film.

HEADRAT · 15 Dec 2008 at 10:59

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=1488

While speaking with iF Magazine, 'The Dark Knight' director Christopher Nolan mentioned that the inevitable of Blu-ray will feature the IMAX shifted aspect ratio. He commented, "The Blu-ray, in particular, will be able to actually use the shifted aspect ratios as it appears on the IMAX screen because the 16:9 aspect ratio is sufficiently different from the 2:4 that you'll actually see a shift on the Blu-ray."

He continued, "The resolution on the Blu-ray is clear enough that you can actually see difference in grain structure and sharpness. So I think it will be quite spectacular."

The film has still not hit theaters, so the Blu-ray is far off, but its interesting to learn that the high definition format is exciting directors.

ScarySquirrel · 15 Dec 2008 at 11:04

I am sorry I don't quite understand. Why can't they make all Blu-Ray/DVD releases in 16:9? Filling the screen looks much better imo.

Am I being really stupid here?

HEADRAT · 15 Dec 2008 at 11:10

Because it wasn't filmed in 16:9, if they forced it into 16:9 you would lose some of the picture.

whitecrook · 15 Dec 2008 at 11:58

at first I thought the OP had left his TV in auto or something and it was getting confues and adjusting the picture midway through the film...

bam0 · 15 Dec 2008 at 11:59

HEADRAT said:
http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=1488

I'm afraid you've got it back to front, 2.4 is the format of the normal film. IMAX is normally 1.43 but they've cropped those scenes to 1.77 to make a fullscreen 16:9 image in the IMAX sections on the bluray, the only way to see the full image is in an IMAX theatre.

FrankJH · 15 Dec 2008 at 12:35

The way to tell is that the IMAX camera's arent so hot for dialogue for some reason, so they are only used for the action sequences

Film opens with the bank heist - filmed in IMAX (didnt matter as they where always wearing masks) - 35mm or normal cameras where used for most of the talking parts

I thought Nolan and the editors did pretty well, most of the time changing aspect ratio when the sky was dark etc (without meaning to be snobby, the better the screen you have the less noticable the change will be because the black bars will look more natural on a better screen - more like night sky/shadow)

I did notice the change one or twice when it did it a couple of times very quickly when the Joker was apprehended the 1st time, but otherwise I loved the added detail in the IMAX sections and thought it a good risk to take

HEADRAT · 15 Dec 2008 at 12:51

bam0 said:
I'm afraid you've got it back to front, 2.4 is the format of the normal film. IMAX is normally 1.43 but they've cropped those scenes to 1.77 to make a fullscreen 16:9 image in the IMAX sections on the bluray, the only way to see the full image is in an IMAX theatre.

This explains it:-

http://crave.cnet.co.uk/homecinema/0,39029447,49300260,00.htm

For the Blu-ray release, Warner has opted to include the IMAX sequences as 1.78:1, with the rest of the film in the more standard 2.4:1. This means that when you encounter an IMAX scene, the black bars at the top and bottom of the movie disappear, and you see a full-height image.

HEADRAT

bam0 · 15 Dec 2008 at 13:31

HEADRAT said:
This explains it:-

http://crave.cnet.co.uk/homecinema/0,39029447,49300260,00.htm

HEADRAT

That's what I said, which runs counter to what you said in msg #2.

Not really important, but I still recommend seeing it in a proper IMAX theatre if possible to see what the director really shot.

oli collett · 15 Dec 2008 at 13:47

ScarySquirrel said:
I am sorry I don't quite understand. Why can't they make all Blu-Ray/DVD releases in 16:9? Filling the screen looks much better imo.

Am I being really stupid here?

Think it's been covered, but with regards to full screen, 1.78:1/16:9 is the full screen on a widescreen TV. However, if a film has been shot in 2.35:1, surely you would prefer seeing the picture as it is meant to be?

HEADRAT · 15 Dec 2008 at 13:53

bam0 said:
That's what I said, which runs counter to what you said in msg #2.

What do you want a cookie, I'll get a collegue to flog me at the next tea break OK?

E1mo · 15 Dec 2008 at 14:20

Seen the blu-ray of this, the IMAX scenes are eye-poppingly good looking. Far better than standard 35mm film.

Raymond Lin · 15 Dec 2008 at 17:47

E1mo said:
Seen the blu-ray of this, the IMAX scenes are eye-poppingly good looking. Far better than standard 35mm film.

Movies are 70mm film.

But why not film the whole thing in IMAX ?

reflux · 15 Dec 2008 at 17:48

Raymond Lin said:
Movies are 70mm film.

But why not film the whole thing in IMAX ?

Presumably it's too expensive vs. the limited number of IMAX cinemas. But it would be awesome.

james.miller · 15 Dec 2008 at 17:56

Raymond Lin said:
Movies are 70mm film.

But why not film the whole thing in IMAX ?

no, IMAX is 70mm. regular film is 35mm

headrat said:
What do you want a cookie, I'll get a collegue to flog me at the next tea break OK?

why on earth are you getting uptight?

why not film the whole lot in imax? the camera's are huge, they cost an absolute fortune (and they broke one of only 4 special IMAX cameras in the world filming DK), and the film lasts 3 minutes a roll lol.

oli collett · 15 Dec 2008 at 18:00

Raymond Lin said:
Movies are 70mm film.

IMAX is shot in 70mm but nearly all movies for the past few decades have been shot in 35mm

Raymond Lin · 15 Dec 2008 at 18:14

I stand corrected

Secret_Window · 15 Dec 2008 at 18:24

It's a shame really because 70mm is night and day better than 35mm.