Post by Matthew VaughanPost by BruiserI'm a little confused with the whole aspect ratio of DVDs vis-a-vis
1:85:1 = 16:9 (the entire screen is used for the image)
This isn't quite correct. 16:9 is 1.78:1, and has no direct
relationship to the common movie formats. It's just much closer than
4:3 is, and happens to be very close to 1.85:1.
Post by Bruiser2:35:1 = anamorphic (there will be black bars on top/bottom)
Yesterday I loaded up a movie which the box stated was "presented in
widescreen, in original 1:85:1 aspect ratio, enhanced for 16:9 televisions"
and it had black bars on top/bottom. I don't understand why it was
shown like that.
And what exactly does "enhanced for 16:9 televisions" mean?
It means that the images are placed on the pixel format of the DVD
in a manner intended for display on a 16:9 monitor instead of 4:3.
In either case, there are 720 columns across in each of 480 lines.
On a standard 4:3 DVD, the pixels are intended to be 12.5% taller
than they are wide (which is how regular TV is set up). On an
"enhanced for 16:9" DVD they are intended to be 18.5% wider than
they are tall. If you watch a 4:3 DVD on a 16:9 TV, set to fill the
whole screen, it will appear to be stretched out horizontally. If
you watch a 16:9 DVD on a 4:3 TV, it will be compressed horizontally.
A 4:3 letterboxed DVD provides approximately the following vertical
1:85:1 letterboxed: 346 lines, with 67-line black bars wasted above below
2.35:1 letterboxed: 272 lines, with 104-line black bars wasted above
and below
An "enhanced for 16:9" DVD provides approximately the following
1:85:1 letterboxed: 460 lines, with 10-line black bars wasted above
and below (but due to overscan, many TVs won't even show the black
bars of the letterbox)
2.35:1 letterboxed: 362 lines, with 59-line black bars wasted above
and below
Both still use 720 pixels across the width of the image.
So the primary benefit of an "enhanced for 16:9" DVD is increased
vertical resolution in the actual image area. It essentially lops
off the top and bottom -- which are wasted in letterboxed movies
anyway -- and stretches the rest vertically to more efficiently
display the available pixels. In theory, DVDs could be made in
actual 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 formats (or any other format desired), so
that they would waste NO pixels (that is, no black bars would ever
be recorded on the DVD and all available pixels on the DVD would be
used for actual image information), with the DVD player or TV doing
the appropriate stretching and scaling to the matching area on the
TV screen (and filling in the rest with black or gray pixels). But
they haven't gone that far yet.
When it says "in original 1.85:1 aspect ratio" it means that it is
letterboxed, rather than pan-and-scanned (or horizontally
compressed, which I haven't heard of being done but might be a
plausible choice for transferring movies from 1.85:1 to 1.78:1).
If the black bars you were seeing were substantially more than 10
pixels, then it's likely your DVD player or TV was set to expect a
4:3 DVD. In that case, the image would also appear stretched out
horizontally (which you might or might not notice if you are already
accusted to watching regular TV stretched).
make a reference copy. Much appreciated! :)
I don't watch anything stretched, as I find it pretty annoying. In the case
says it is 2:35:1, so that pretty much answers that. However, I watched
(confirmed at IMBD), but there were black bars on top/bottom. Both my DVD
player and TV have the display set to 16:9. Would the black bars be