|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
151.204.158.83
In Reply to: "Ben Hur" posted by rico on August 22, 2005 at 13:30:26:
Re: Aspect ratio.
Standard Cinemascope is 2:35/1,
Panavision (virtually the same as HDTV) is 1.85/1.
Ben Hur was over 3/1 and was correct on my Laserdisc. It was a bit like watching an image through a knight's visor.
The figure of 1.76/1 is a mystery to me.Re: Stunt men
Rumours were rife diring the filming that another stunt man was actually killed (he died later in hospital). No one wanted to do a retake on the race.I actually saw the original theatrical release in 70 MM at the Warner Theatre in DC. Huge screen and surround sound (the horses in the race circled 'round behind the audience). How many theatres were equiped to reproduce this effect I dunno.
Follow Ups:
Panavison is not 1.85/1. That aspect ratio is called "Academy Flat".
Panavision has an aspect ratio of 2.39/1, rounded by most people to 2.4/1.
but is Ultra PanaVision70 which is 2.76 to 1 (flying fingers got you Rico? I assume this was a typo) and even that is too narrow. My source is yours, the Widescreen Museum.
In fact, I had a special edition LaserDisk that claimed the actual ratio was more than 3 to 1. It certainly seemed it but I didn't pull out my yardstick.As for PanaVision and 1.85 to 1, you are technically correct. However PanaVision has become very closely associated in these latter days with 1.85 to 1, perhaps because of their support of matting (1.85:1) and their lenses for use in HDTV programming. I find the term PanaVision used increasingly to indicate 1.85 to 1, though it was not originally that ratio. PanaVision currently supports many formats as may be seen on their website.
Yes, that was a typo. There is a difference bewteen "Panavision" and "Filmed with Panavison equipment (or lenses)". Panavison is 2.4/1 and "Filmed in...) is usually Academy Flat, or 1.85/1.
MGM Camera 65 (their name for Ultra Panavision) did have a 1.76/1 aspect ratio and the DVD was using that to approximate the film. But as Widescreen Museum shows, it is not accurate.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: