3 ms·

Aspect ratio by itself tells you very little about the theatrical viewing experience. What really matters is the "angular image size," i.e. the horizontal and v

Aspect ratio by itself tells you very little about the theatrical viewing experience. What really matters is the "angular image size," i.e. the horizontal and vertical angle that the image fills in your field of view. This is determined by the aspect ratio of the image, but also critically the size of the screen and the distance from the screen to the viewer. 1.43 IMAX screens are really really big and fill more of your field of view than most other cinema screens. You can't just look at the 1.43 aspect ratio and say "it's skinnier than 2.39 scope" or "it's wider than 2.39 anamorphic." It would be more accurate to say "in your field of view, it's both wider and taller than most theater's 2.39 anamorphic projection." This is also why pleas for the 1.43 aspect ratio on home video are slightly misguided. It's not the shape of the 1.43 IMAX image that's so compelling. It's the angular image size! And you probably are not going to view an IMAX film at home with the intended image size. (To be clear, I think it would still be interesting to see that 1.43 image at home, and in VR it's reportedly an excellent experience.)

Marsymars 3mo ago
> This is also why pleas for the 1.43 aspect ratio on home video are slightly misguided. It's not the shape of the 1.43 IMAX image that's so compelling. It's the angular image size! And you probably are not going to view an IMAX film at home with the intended image size. Yes, exactly. If you really care about the theatrical experience, you'll be using a projector at home... and it's really up to your particular space whether you'd be able to fit in a bigger screen at a 1.43 or a 16:9 aspect ratio. For some rough math, I rule-of-thumb 5 feet vertically as a reasonable max size for a home projector - it gives you a couple feet at the bottom for coffee tables, consoles etc. and doesn't reach too high, so you don't need to be looking too far upwards or to invest in stadium seating. 60 inches vertically gives you a 105 inch 1.43:1 screen, or a wider 122 inch 16:9 screen. Assuming you don't have other constraints (brightness, horizontal space, etc.) you may as well get the wider/bigger screen.
drob518 3mo ago
I chuckle at the thought of going back to letterboxing with people arguing that “we need to see the top and bottom of the frame, like the director intended!” What’s old is new again. Are hemlines up or down this year? Skinny jeans or baggy?
- tshaddox 3mo ago
  One important difference is that modern movies that shoot in 1:43 IMAX typically shoot everything with other aspect ratios in mind. So a 16:9 home release of The Odyssey is going to be less creatively compromised than an anamorphic film from the 1980s adapted to a 1.33 pan and scan home video release. We also have two things working in our favor for home video releases on 16:9 displays. First, 16:9 is geometrically well-positioned between 4:3 and 2.39:1, so displaying either of those pillar/letterboxed on a 16:9 screen only leaves 25% of the screen area unused. (We literally chose 16:9 because it's the geometric mean of 4:3 and 2.39:1.) Secondly, a typical home TV now is simply much larger than a typical home TV 30+ years ago, so the reduced size of a pillar/letterboxed image is still just straight up bigger than most home TVs were prior to the flatscreen revolution.
- ClikeX 3mo ago
  Preferably, I'd have a 4:3 OLED TV or laser projector at a decent enough size that it can just comfortably show all kinds of formats. My desktop is 21:9, my Macbook and Steamdeck are 16:10, my TV and Nintendo Switch are 16:9, and my iPhone is some weird aspect ratio. So it's not like I'm not used to varying formats. And I actually like it when movies take liberties with the screen format instead of forcing everything into 16:9 just because it's the common TV format.
  - tshaddox 3mo ago
    Once it’s large enough it doesn’t matter what the aspect ratio is. Just make it the exact size of the wall in your TV room. :)
    - ClikeX 3mo ago
      That’s my point, really. Just a large enough surface that it will show any format the way it was intended.
KaiserPro 3mo ago
> Aspect ratio by itself tells you very little about the theatrical viewing experience. Yes, but also no. to a whole generation of millenials -> boomers 4:3 == analogue and or cheap, "widescreen" is HD and better quality. Thats why a lot of people were really happy to have streched 4:3->16:9 because wide screen == more modern and higher resolution. Unless you acutally care about that sort of thing you're never really twig that its just streched. I mean sure of you ask people about and compare side by side, they'll go "oh yeah" The point now is that 4:3 is a allusion to a specific point in time, in the same way techincolour, or black and white, noir or infomercial are.
keane 3mo ago
Related: Chart Of Common Viewing Angles from Steve Yedlin, ASC https://www.yedlin.net/NerdyFilmTechStuff/#:~:text=Chart https://www.yedlin.net/NerdyFilmTechStuff/#:~:text=Chart
- IndySun 3mo ago
  I love the OLED entry there. Virtually what I do to all my friends' TV's when I visit. Yes, it's an annoying thing to do, and they're all "hey, don't change my settings..." at first, but a few seconds later the TV looks better, clearer, brighter. https://www.yedlin.net/NerdyFilmTechStuff/OLED_Settings https://www.yedlin.net/NerdyFilmTechStuff/OLED_Settings
  - keane 2mo ago
    Guilty as well. Though I will sometimes check the rtings.com /settings tab from a similar model for a reminder of where various proprietary naming toggles are located in the menu (and then run the Apple TV iPhone-powered calibration if they have one). Network programming/soaps and Netflix originals still look terrible afterwards though.

Marsymars 3mo ago

> This is also why pleas for the 1.43 aspect ratio on home video are slightly misguided. It's not the shape of the 1.43 IMAX image that's so compelling. It's the angular image size! And you probably are not going to view an IMAX film at home with the intended image size. Yes, exactly. If you really care about the theatrical experience, you'll be using a projector at home... and it's really up to your particular space whether you'd be able to fit in a bigger screen at a 1.43 or a 16:9 aspect ratio. For some rough math, I rule-of-thumb 5 feet vertically as a reasonable max size for a home projector - it gives you a couple feet at the bottom for coffee tables, consoles etc. and doesn't reach too high, so you don't need to be looking too far upwards or to invest in stadium seating. 60 inches vertically gives you a 105 inch 1.43:1 screen, or a wider 122 inch 16:9 screen. Assuming you don't have other constraints (brightness, horizontal space, etc.) you may as well get the wider/bigger screen.

drob518 3mo ago

I chuckle at the thought of going back to letterboxing with people arguing that “we need to see the top and bottom of the frame, like the director intended!” What’s old is new again. Are hemlines up or down this year? Skinny jeans or baggy?

tshaddox 3mo ago
One important difference is that modern movies that shoot in 1:43 IMAX typically shoot everything with other aspect ratios in mind. So a 16:9 home release of The Odyssey is going to be less creatively compromised than an anamorphic film from the 1980s adapted to a 1.33 pan and scan home video release. We also have two things working in our favor for home video releases on 16:9 displays. First, 16:9 is geometrically well-positioned between 4:3 and 2.39:1, so displaying either of those pillar/letterboxed on a 16:9 screen only leaves 25% of the screen area unused. (We literally chose 16:9 because it's the geometric mean of 4:3 and 2.39:1.) Secondly, a typical home TV now is simply much larger than a typical home TV 30+ years ago, so the reduced size of a pillar/letterboxed image is still just straight up bigger than most home TVs were prior to the flatscreen revolution.
ClikeX 3mo ago
Preferably, I'd have a 4:3 OLED TV or laser projector at a decent enough size that it can just comfortably show all kinds of formats. My desktop is 21:9, my Macbook and Steamdeck are 16:10, my TV and Nintendo Switch are 16:9, and my iPhone is some weird aspect ratio. So it's not like I'm not used to varying formats. And I actually like it when movies take liberties with the screen format instead of forcing everything into 16:9 just because it's the common TV format.
- tshaddox 3mo ago
  Once it’s large enough it doesn’t matter what the aspect ratio is. Just make it the exact size of the wall in your TV room. :)
  - ClikeX 3mo ago
    That’s my point, really. Just a large enough surface that it will show any format the way it was intended.

KaiserPro 3mo ago

> Aspect ratio by itself tells you very little about the theatrical viewing experience. Yes, but also no. to a whole generation of millenials -> boomers 4:3 == analogue and or cheap, "widescreen" is HD and better quality. Thats why a lot of people were really happy to have streched 4:3->16:9 because wide screen == more modern and higher resolution. Unless you acutally care about that sort of thing you're never really twig that its just streched. I mean sure of you ask people about and compare side by side, they'll go "oh yeah" The point now is that 4:3 is a allusion to a specific point in time, in the same way techincolour, or black and white, noir or infomercial are.

keane 3mo ago

Related: Chart Of Common Viewing Angles from Steve Yedlin, ASC https://www.yedlin.net/NerdyFilmTechStuff/#:~:text=Chart https://www.yedlin.net/NerdyFilmTechStuff/#:~:text=Chart

IndySun 3mo ago
I love the OLED entry there. Virtually what I do to all my friends' TV's when I visit. Yes, it's an annoying thing to do, and they're all "hey, don't change my settings..." at first, but a few seconds later the TV looks better, clearer, brighter. https://www.yedlin.net/NerdyFilmTechStuff/OLED_Settings https://www.yedlin.net/NerdyFilmTechStuff/OLED_Settings
- keane 2mo ago
  Guilty as well. Though I will sometimes check the rtings.com /settings tab from a similar model for a reminder of where various proprietary naming toggles are located in the menu (and then run the Apple TV iPhone-powered calibration if they have one). Network programming/soaps and Netflix originals still look terrible afterwards though.