Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I was watching Seinfeld last week on NineHD (might have been on Normal Nine too) and I noticed it was wide screen. What on earth did channel nine do to the show? :huh: :huh: Since when Seinfeld was digital/widescreen. America didn't get digital until 1999/2000, so how it could it be widescreen? Pardon my ignorance, but I don't know much about it, but I thought it was odd. Did Channel Nine just zoom the picture in and upscale it or something?

Edited by dan2007

Posted (edited)

Yes, I watched it for the first time last night.

It looked "strange" (not stretched) as I'm used to it in 4:3 Full Screen.

I noticed the term "Panavision" in the credits, I gather that it refers to the manufacturer of camera used rather than aspect.

Considering they filmed it rather than video taped it, its not surprising to see it released in HD.

The surprising thing is change of aspect and cropping.

Although from my brief viewing last night the cropping has not diminished the quality.

I'm sure if you had never seen the program before, you wouldn't notice it.

The treatment of George's fiancee never really stood comfortable with me

If Seinfeld is released on Blu-ray, I wonder if Sony will release this aspect —cropped version???

and I wonder if Viacom will do the same with Star Trek: Next Generation???.

BTW I have noticed that Fox has kept the original fullscreen 1.33:1 aspect for the upcoming original "Day the Earth Stood Still" HD release.

Edited by Skid_MacMarx
Posted
I noticed the term "Panavision" in the credits, I gather this refers to the manufacturer of camera used rather than aspect.

You gather correctly :)

Most seasons of Seinfeld have the text "FILMED IN PANAVISION" in the end credits. This is probably THE single biggest credits stuff-up in history, since it continued for so many years.

The correct text should have read "Filmed with Panavision cameras and lenses".

I'm surprised they did fix it when re-doing the credits for the HD versions.

Considering they filmed it rather video taped it, its not surprising to see it released in HD.

The surprising thing is change of aspect and cropping.

They did both a straight 4:3 pillarboxed HD transfer and the cropped 16:9 version. The current DVDs are sourced from the 4:3 HD transfer.

Myself, I actually like the 16:9 version a lot, and I think they've done an excellent job with it.

Posted
I actually hate it, they should have left it the way it was. Oh well don't think I'll be watching Seinfeld anymore.

Did the 16:9 cropping affect the jokes somehow? Do you laugh in 16:9 and that hurts more than 4:3 or something?

Posted (edited)
Did the 16:9 cropping affect the jokes somehow? Do you laugh in 16:9 and that hurts more than 4:3 or something?
and

No and No. I just prefer it in the original way it was formatted, that's all. No need to get smart about it. :P Most programs that I watch I prefer to watch in full screen, not widescreen, I find no use for it to be seen in wide screen at all.

Edited by dan2007
Posted
and

No and No. I just prefer it in the original way it was formatted, that's all. No need to get smart about it. :P Most programs that I watch I prefer to watch in full screen, not widescreen, I find no use for it to be seen in wide screen at all.

4:3 is fullscreen? Somebody's still living in the 90's. ;)

Posted
Looks good in widescreen, i'm sure my dvd's of it are widescreen.

Season Six isn't in widescreen. I know that much. Since it's the only one I got :)

Posted

It could be worse.... they could be doing a 'SCI-FI' channel to it.

:huh:

At the moment The X-Files is running on SCI-FI on Foxtel. As you know The X-Files is a 4:3 show. Its copped the 4:3 > 16:9 makeover that seems so popular these days, but then when SCI-FI runs it they simply lop the side off. :o So its 4:3 > zoomed to 16:9, thereby losing parts of the picture and then side lopped back to 4:3 losing even more of the picture! Pathetic, ain't it?

Posted
and

No and No. I just prefer it in the original way it was formatted, that's all. No need to get smart about it. :P Most programs that I watch I prefer to watch in full screen, not widescreen, I find no use for it to be seen in wide screen at all.

This implies you are watching on a 4:3 screen am I right? If so then yes it's going to look like crap. On a 16:9 screen it looks great, framing is quite good and doesnt really look cropped at all .

  • 2 months later...
Posted
If Seinfeld is released on Blu-ray, I wonder if Sony will release this aspect —cropped version???

and I wonder if Viacom will do the same with Star Trek: Next Generation???.

It would be a tough ask to transfer the Star Trek shows to 16:9. From what I have read all the live action was filmed but then transferred to videotape in post production because it was cheaper to do effects shots on video than on film.

So the film prints are there if Paramount wishes to remaster for 16:9 but they'd have to re-do the effects shots.

The reason Seinfeld has been remastered is that it is still very popular in syndication in the US, the HD episodes are being released to local FTA stations this year.

Posted
It would be a tough ask to transfer the Star Trek shows to 16:9. From what I have read all the live action was filmed but then transferred to videotape in post production because it was cheaper to do effects shots on video than on film.

So the film prints are there if Paramount wishes to remaster for 16:9 but they'd have to re-do the effects shots.

Ala Babylon 5.

They zoomed in on the 4:3 CGI, making the image soft and fuzzy, some were even stretched.

  • 1 month later...
Posted

Heh.

I bought seasons 1-2 on DVD the other day. It's all 4:3 transfers. I zoomed in to crop off the top and bottom, and got a few instances of people being scalped, but nothing serious.

So a carefully vertically panned transfer to 16:9 should be OK, and this is born out by the lovely widescreen episodes shown on telly lately.

Posted
So a carefully vertically panned transfer to 16:9 should be OK, and this is born out by the lovely widescreen episodes shown on telly lately.

Don't forget that Seinfeld was shot on 35mm film, so there's a bit more leeway for them to crop than the 4:3 version might suggest.

Posted

I don't know much about film but from reading a few sites re aspect ratios as used in the movies over the decades I gather that it was common to apply a mask or 'matte' along the left and right sides of the film to obtain a 'squarer' aspect ratio print if necessary.

Interesting backgrounder:

http://www.widescreen.org/aspect_ratios.shtml

I wonder what the aspect ratio of Seifeld's 35mm film stock actually was. If they applied 'matting' to the sides of the film to obtain the old 4:3 transfer then maybe there's extra material along the sides of each frame that were there all along but not transferred to the 4:3 TV tapes.

I recently got a few eps of Seinfeld (4:3) through quickflix and when I zoomed them, there was a lot of annoying stuff like Kramer's head off the top of the screen etc, but I don't see this in the WS tv version so there's obviously more going on than just plain cropping.

So either they painstakingly tilt-and-scanned or 'de - matted' the film.

Posted

From what I've seen of the broadcasts of SEINFELD, there does seem to be extra image on the left and right sides.

I also noted that DOC HOLLYWOOD was anamorphic widescreen on TV on Sunday, and looked nice and crisp. The only R4 PAL DVD available (which I own) is only a 4:3 transfer.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top