Massacre Survivor - aspect ratio

[falkor]

Which one looks best?

TBH - i'm happy with just about anything close to the average 2.35:1 ratio as I've got so many rubbish stretched films that I always use my tv to stretch or compress the image to what I feel is the best ration in my own opinion.

I've just put the first screen into 2.35:1, 2.40:1 and 2.45:1 and they all look ok to me. I'd probably go for the 2.45:1 of the pics that i've captured, but then that's just me doing a crude photoshop adjustment.

It'll be pretty tricky to get everyone to agree on the exact ratio adjustment needed.

As long as it doesn't look like a 4:3 movie stretched into fullscreen on a widescreen telly or vice versa, then i'm cool!

2.35:1

2.40:1

2.45:1

[chen lung]

I kept changing my mind LOL!

I couldn't vote, because between 2:35:1-2:40:1 is my opinion. Anything bigger than that seems a bit fat.

[Guest Markgway]

They all look acceptable so I went for balance or "the one in the middle".

[Killer Meteor]

Yes, the one in the middle.

Bear in mind, a lot of Cinemascope HK films tends to have a bit of distortion anyway, because of the lenses

[falkor]

6 voters want 2.45 so far, but 6 voters think <2.45 looks better, so maybe Toby will do the final print at 2.40 to keep everyone happy? Whatever the final ratio I doubt it will affect our viewing experience.

[Guest Markgway]

I suspect the original ratio was probably between 2.35-2.40. 2.45 seems unlikely for basic widescreen.

[HAZ]

Is it possible to see it in 2.39:1?

[falkor]

I suspect the original ratio was probably between 2.35-2.40. 2.45 seems unlikely for basic widescreen.

But you have to take into account what I spannick was saying; there has been no matting on this. Toby has captured the full frame. In the cinema it might have been presented 2.35, ie. cropped, but not for this DVD release! We need to think outside the box...

[wigsplitta]

Is it possible to see it in 2.39:1?

[Killer Meteor]

But you have to take into account what I spannick was saying; there has been no matting on this. Toby has captured the full frame. In the cinema it might have been presented 2.35, ie. cropped, but not for this DVD release! We need to think outside the box...

I think matting to remove the splices should be done, its how its done in cinemas and should be how it done here.

[Chia Ling AKA Judy Lee]

If you look at the beads 2.45 seems more distorted than the others.

[tdb]

2.35 still seems a bit stretched and I agree about the distortion on 2.45. I went with 2.40

[Gaijin84]

2.35 still seems a bit stretched and I agree about the distortion on 2.45. I went with 2.40

me too - 2.40:1 looked best

[shapes]

The best would be to find a shot a cirlce and use that, the screen in b/g looks best in 2:35 IMO

[Omni Dragon]

2.35:1 based on the bottom right corner.

[kungfusamurai]

The best would be to find a shot a cirlce and use that, the screen in b/g looks best in 2:35 IMO

If you guys look at the clip in the other thread for Massacre Survivor that falkor linked from youtube, you can see a good aspect ratio. There is a scene with rings, and it looks fine. Go with that, otherwise it's going to look really bad if it's too wide.

KFS

[Kwok Choi]

I suspect the original ratio was probably between 2.35-2.40. 2.45 seems unlikely for basic widescreen.

2.35.1 is the original aspect ratio which is the one I would go for but it all depends on the type of tvs or video projection system people have in this digital age.2.35 leaves extra space (5) to make room for the use of an analogue mono/stereo sound track on the film print during projection in theatres.In relation to anamorphic (16.9) 2.35 widescreen video (not 2.35 letterbox);this means you get larger noticeable black bars at the top and bottom of your widescreen telly.2.39 / 2.40 is for digital theatrical projection which makes use of the (5) - 2.40 - for more picture information (not a very significant amount) hence not so noticable black bars on the widescreen telly.This is good for movies released digitally in cinemas and all contemporal " cinemascope " features post blu-ray.2.45 "technically" should fill the whole screen up nicely for those who have 50 inches plus systems with hardly any noticeable bars but with a minuscule image crop to the height and width.

[Kwok Choi]

(The above quote is in response to HAZ''s question about seeing the movie in 2.39.1 instead)

This ( 2.39.1) is how you see most " cinemascope " digital screenings in theatres.

When film prints (celluloid) are projected on screen the analogue sound track is printed (married) side by side with the image using up the ( 5 ) area of the picture.The reason you don't see the sound track on screen but only the picture is that projectionists skillfully mask off this area by cutting an aperture plate to expose only the image.If the projectionist takes the aperture plate off when the film is running you'll see very large vertical stripes running parallel on the left ie the soundtrack.(if you notice any blue/magenta/black and sometimes a bit of white line on the left hand side of a screen in a movie theatre showing a print,that means the aperture plate is slightly over-cut exposing a bit of the analogue sound track area)

Digital prints however do not need to run the sound track side by side with the picture because the sound is converted into bits in a server with an added delay so it can be in sync with the picture hence it image can be wider 2.39.1.

2,40 is also in use for blu-ray but for dvds most of the 2.40 ratios are sourced from 70mm films prints as 70mm is wider than 35mm at twice the resolution.I think this throws some light on the subject preventing the topic from getting too technical.

[Guest Markgway]

You've gone over my head. lol

[prinnysquad]

This is way too techy for me. As long as people's faces aren't stretched out sideways then that's fine by me. The middle one, at a guess.

[kungfusamurai]

I think I understand what's being said. The old film prints have enough room to expand a cinemascope picture to 2.40. But because they needed to also include an audio track, they chopped off about 0.05, reducing the amount of film for video image available to 2.35. But digital versions can use up the entire 2.40 spectrum for video imaging.

In other words that limitation starts with the way the movies were FILMED, not the post-production chopping off the ends so they can squeeze on the audio track.

So for Massacre Survivor, unless it was filmed digitally recently, the correct aspect ratio is 2.35:1.

KFS

[Kwok Choi]

I think I understand what's being said. The old film prints have enough room to expand a cinemascope picture to 2.40. But because they needed to also include an audio track, they chopped off about 0.05, reducing the amount of film for video image available to 2.35. But digital versions can use up the entire 2.40 spectrum for video imaging.

In other words that limitation starts with the way the movies were FILMED, not the post-production chopping off the ends so they can squeeze on the audio track.

So for Massacre Survivor, unless it was filmed digitally recently, the correct aspect ratio is 2.35:1.

KFS

Spot on Kung Fu Samurai.During filming the 0.05 area of the film is reserved for the audio analogue sound track.

[falkor]

Here's the progress of the colour correction and video clean up...

Apparently, a spatio-temporal smoother and sharpener have been used, but not for the above tester.

Most subs cannot be read on the original and only after treatment:

I think Toby is considering making the movie look more colourful and vivid after all the problems with the red and overbrightness, but maybe this stage is best left, so that you guys can adjust this with your TV color controls? I have advised against it based some clips he sent me.

[HAZ]

I would say to leave the colors & processing alone. If it's red, it's red. Maybe create a subtitle file for hard to read subs.

[falkor]

I would say to leave the colors & processing alone. If it's red, it's red. Maybe create a subtitle file for hard to read subs.

Toby said he will give me a copy of the original transfer as well as the cleaned version. For those contributing, if you want to watch it red with problems reading most subs (even though it's action-packed) or do your own processing, let me know, and I'll send you that print. Toby hasn't got time to remaster the subs, and neither will I in the few days between exchanging cash for goods and sending them out.