The Bird with the Crystal Plumage – The Archive Conversation

[brain dead]

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs

I'm just wondering how you became such an expert on aspect ratios when the image you have put up to illustrate the difference between 2.35:1 and Storaro's work when the image itself isn't even 2.35:1!

Sorry for being picky 'n all!

When you remove the black lines at the top and bottom you get 2.35:1 (although removing the black line at the left of the frame gives you a 2.34:1 image)

[Der Spieler]

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs

I'm just wondering how you became such an expert on aspect ratios when the image you have put up to illustrate the difference between 2.35:1 and Storaro's work when the image itself isn't even 2.35:1!

Sorry for being picky 'n all!

The clickable thumb on the Beaver review does not show the entire frame.

Here is the enlarged capture:
http://img847.imageshack.us/img847/6...with20the2.jpg

[trench]

The inner crop-marks are 1.85:1 as opposed to 2:1. I get where your coming from though. I wonder if Storaro plans on panning and scanning within his 2:1 frame?

[brain dead]

Originally Posted by trench

The inner crop-marks are 1.85:1 as opposed to 2:1. I get where your coming from though. I wonder if Storaro plans on panning and scanning within his 2:1 frame?

You're talking about the 4 white L marks? THey're part of the image, indicating a camera view finder?

Which would be approximately 2.9:1 btw

Or am I misunderstanding you?

[trench]

Originally Posted by brain dead

You're talking about the 4 white L marks? THey're part of the image, indicating a camera view finder?

Which would be approximately 2.9:1 btw

Or am I misunderstanding you?

Oops! You're quite right. Need more coffee before posting. Ignore me.

[brain dead]

Originally Posted by trench

Oops! You're quite right. Need more coffee before posting. Ignore me.

I was getting a little confused there.

[Djangooo]

Yeah, they're shots from the Camera'persons' point of view at the beginning of the film. That shot probably shows how warped Storaro's modern thinking really is.

[Der Spieler]

Maybe I was misunderstood.

I was merely pointing out a shot that seemed to indicate that 2.35:1 is indeed the OAR.

[tollickd]

hope this will be ok

[L'enfant Errant]

Originally Posted by Nemesis

But if you think DNR is absent from BU - I think you'll be disappointed; it's not that grainy.

BU certainly has less DNR than Arrow's release. The grain structure looks almost identical to that found on the Wild Side transfer, and I doubt both of them managed to fake grain in exactly the same way...

Honestly, I'm curious what print was actually used to make the HD master. Blue Underground says it was a new scan of the negative, but it looks like the same exact HD master that we've seen on various DVD and Blu-ray releases since about 2007. (I'm not saying anything, I'm just... saying. )

To get back to Bird with the Compromised Aspect Ratio, I'll be very curious to see how it looks via screencaps, if nothing else. BU released it on DVD with a very similar looking transfer back in 2005, I think, so I imagine the HD master they used is anything but new. That doesn't mean it's bad, of course, but I'll be curious to see if the "Storaro-ized" transfer has notably different contrast, grain structure or anything along those lines. I'm not happy about the aspect ratio at all, but I am curious about the "look" of the new master, if that makes any sense.

I'm pretty sure what Der Spiler was getting at was, if one were to crop this particular scene, the entire effect of being within a camera's viewfinder would be obscured - or maybe even lost completely. The moment I read about the 2.0:1 ratio, these scenes immediately sprang to mind as a perfect example of why matting a film in retrospect is a VERY bad idea.