5 ms·

What a misleading title! It's really not Netflix's doing, and it's definitely not some kind of evil conspiracy. The studio isn't going to pay for a new transfe

by wilg 13y ago

What a misleading title! It's really not Netflix's doing, and it's definitely not some kind of evil conspiracy. The studio isn't going to pay for a new transfer just for Netflix, or maybe they have a better one but are only realizing it on Blu-Ray. Netflix just gets whatever version of the movie the studio happens to already have on hand, which is likely the HDTV version, which is sometimes pan-and-scan. But that doesn't make a very sensational headline.

smacktoward 13y ago
Every transfer for home video I've ever seen has been anamorphic widescreen since the earliest days of the DVD. There were a few releases among the very earliest DVDs that were pan-and-scan, because the studios were afraid people would freak out if they saw black bars on their TV. They didn't, so pan-and-scan vanished. And that was back when 4:3 SDTVs were the norm, now almost everyone has 16:9 sets, so widescreen transfers if anything would be more easily welcomed now. Considering how much of their libraries they have now mastered for DVD, it would seem like it would take more work to go back and do a pan-and-scan transfer than it would to just reuse the one they made for widescreen DVD.
- toast0 13y ago
  I only have about 10 dvds, and I've got one that they encoded the black bars on instead of doing anamorphic (first region 1 release of Dune), and at least one 4:3 that was released in 2004 (Grind... I only have this as a result of a disturbing practice of giving horrible birthday gifts in my circle of friends)
- josteink 13y ago
  > Every transfer for home video I've ever seen has been anamorphic widescreen since the earliest days of the DVD. That's interesting because one of the things which disappointed me most with DVDs was how immensely hard it was to get DVDs with actual anamorphic widescreen. Most movies was actually fullscreen or letterboxed, and for 2.35:1 films that meant effectively 200 lines for film content. This was after DVDs had been on the market for 5+ years mind you. TLDR: An anecdote does not make facts nor data.
- wilg 13y ago
  As dumb as it sounds, these masters that were made for DVD are oftentimes standard definition.
- smackfu 13y ago
  A lot of early DVDs were 4:3 letterboxed. On a 4:3 SDTV, they look the same as anamorphic widescreen. Sometimes better, on some of the old DVD players that did a bad job of downsizing.
laurent123456 13y ago
+1, the title makes the problem sound way bigger than what it really is.
parasubvert 13y ago
You're wrong. This is not a 4:3 pan & scan, it's a 16:9 crop (or custom pan & scan), which is something quite rare - anamorphic widescreen is the norm.
- wilg 13y ago
  I am not wrong. You are obviously right that it is not a 4:3 pan & scan: it is a 16:9 pan & scan. Which is not rare. These are commonly generated for airing on HDTV channels, and are likely one of the few HD versions of the movie that the studio has lying around already.

by wilg 13y ago

smacktoward 13y ago

Every transfer for home video I've ever seen has been anamorphic widescreen since the earliest days of the DVD. There were a few releases among the very earliest DVDs that were pan-and-scan, because the studios were afraid people would freak out if they saw black bars on their TV. They didn't, so pan-and-scan vanished. And that was back when 4:3 SDTVs were the norm, now almost everyone has 16:9 sets, so widescreen transfers if anything would be more easily welcomed now. Considering how much of their libraries they have now mastered for DVD, it would seem like it would take more work to go back and do a pan-and-scan transfer than it would to just reuse the one they made for widescreen DVD.

toast0 13y ago
I only have about 10 dvds, and I've got one that they encoded the black bars on instead of doing anamorphic (first region 1 release of Dune), and at least one 4:3 that was released in 2004 (Grind... I only have this as a result of a disturbing practice of giving horrible birthday gifts in my circle of friends)
josteink 13y ago
> Every transfer for home video I've ever seen has been anamorphic widescreen since the earliest days of the DVD. That's interesting because one of the things which disappointed me most with DVDs was how immensely hard it was to get DVDs with actual anamorphic widescreen. Most movies was actually fullscreen or letterboxed, and for 2.35:1 films that meant effectively 200 lines for film content. This was after DVDs had been on the market for 5+ years mind you. TLDR: An anecdote does not make facts nor data.
wilg 13y ago
As dumb as it sounds, these masters that were made for DVD are oftentimes standard definition.
smackfu 13y ago
A lot of early DVDs were 4:3 letterboxed. On a 4:3 SDTV, they look the same as anamorphic widescreen. Sometimes better, on some of the old DVD players that did a bad job of downsizing.

laurent123456 13y ago

+1, the title makes the problem sound way bigger than what it really is.

parasubvert 13y ago

You're wrong. This is not a 4:3 pan & scan, it's a 16:9 crop (or custom pan & scan), which is something quite rare - anamorphic widescreen is the norm.

wilg 13y ago
I am not wrong. You are obviously right that it is not a 4:3 pan & scan: it is a 16:9 pan & scan. Which is not rare. These are commonly generated for airing on HDTV channels, and are likely one of the few HD versions of the movie that the studio has lying around already.