 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: MGM sued over phoney letterbox issues posted by SmokeTest on December 14, 2002 at 22:30:25:
...that his name isn't Carl Eber. I almost forgot about this Video Asylum classic discourse from a year ago.
Follow Ups:
from dvdfile:From the Whitney Houston "Crack is whack!" news of the weird department, did you ever think you'd see the day when a major studio was sued over a widescreen DVD?
Los Angeles resident Warren Eallonardo, 28, is suing MGM and several local area retailers over what he claims is false advertising. Citing misleading claims made by MGM on the packaging of many of their DVDs, as well as unnamed employees of the accused retailers, that widescreen movies actually show more of the picture than their full frame counterparts, Eallonardo argues that so-called "open matte" films are actually cropped to widescreen dimensions, thereby showing less, not more, of the picture. Eallonardo named such titles as Rain Man and Hoosiers as prime offenders, and his attorney Clifford Pearson told the press that his client, "Felt like he was being ripped off." The suit, which seeks class action status, was filed late Friday in Los Angeles Superior Court.
While it is tempting to dismiss this guy as a Judge Judy also-ran, it is worth noting that many widescreen transfers do indeed show less picture information than their full frame counterparts. Many films today are shot "open matte," then matted to a widescreen aspect ratio for theatrical distribution. Thus, technically, you are getting "less," not "more." Of course, anyone who reads the back of an MGM DVD box carefully will note that the packaging clear states "Theatrical Release Format," not "You're getting more picture!" I don't know what this guy is suing for (mental anguish?), but perhaps he just needs a good little primer on what widescreen really is. IN any case, can't wait to see what the outcome of this one will be! Stay tuned...
As an amaruer artist, I would find it maddening to work in a media (as a director) where your final product is made into wide screen version, not so wide screen version, video verson(s), and television verion. At least. But, it does seem kind of deceptive, hell downright deceptive if they are in truth, giving you less in the widescreen version--but hey. May one day we can get Moble Fidelity or Chesky re-issues to get more!
directors are aware of the different framings and film with that in mind. directors also have a hand in recutting their films for airplanes and tv.during shooting, many playback screens have rectaangular frames showing the picture as both widescreen and fullscreen in playback. often times the fullscreen does give you more on top and bottom (think of the two intersecting rectangles in a cross shape). the actual picture image shot is often bigger than what you see on screen at the theater - it's up to the theater to frame it correctly, else you might see the mike boom at the top of the picture.
"widescreen" that cuts out top and bottom compared to full screen is not deceptive advertising - widescreen a matter of framing the picture to make it look pleasing within that aspect ratio, not giving you more to the sides. often when you add width to the picture, you need to take off the top and bottom to make the image look better within that frame.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
