logo Sign In

Info Wanted: 'The Dark Knight' - and others with shifting IMAX ratio...

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I can’t seem to find a search function so my apoligies if there is a thread already.

I recently bought a 2.35 screen for my CIH set up and it’s awesome with scope movies. I have both Dark knight movies on BD and it’s a bitch watching them this way with the changing aspect ratio. The picture spills on the walls when the IMAX scenes appear

I use the zoom on the projector since I don’t have a video processor/scaler or an anamorphic lens.

Has anybody done a 2.35 crop of these movies?

Author
Time

I don't think so. I've been looking for TDK some time ago and the only cropped version I saw was a bad ~1GB rip.

Fanrestore - Fan Restoration Forum: https://fanrestore.com

Author
Time
 (Edited)

A simple 2.35 "crop" wouldn't look right, as for some shots, important areas would be clipped, and other shots would just look odd. It's quite uncommon for the important picture information to be directly in the middle on the IMAX scenes.

With that being said, itv did air TDK the other day in 2.35:1 throughout, which I recorded in HD. I'm in the process of merging this recording with the BR. I've actually noticed 1 use of an alternate take (possibly shot from a different angle) in place of an imax shot, Alfred burning the letter towards the end of the film. Not sure of any other cases of this as the frame counts don't differ, which makes them hard to find.

If I’m not back in five minutes, just wait longer!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Why not just get the widescreen DVD (which is 2.35:1 all the way through) and crop the Blu-Ray video based on it? That would look much better than a hybrid BR-HDTV version, I'd imagine.

Author
Time

Mass5160 said:

itv did air TDK the other day in 2.35:1 throughout, which I recorded in HD. I'm in the process of merging this recording with the BR. I've actually noticed 1 use of an alternate take (possibly shot from a different angle) in place of an imax shot, Alfred burning the letter towards the end of the film. Not sure of any other cases of this as the frame counts don't differ, which makes them hard to find.

 Interesting.

How did the presentation look overall. did it match the blu in colour ect.

Author
Time

Mass5160 said:

A simple 2.35 "crop" wouldn't look right, as for some shots, important areas would be clipped, and other shots would just look odd. It's quite uncommon for the important picture information to be directly in the middle on the IMAX scenes.

Neither "Dark Knight" film suffers visually when projected "cropped" on a scope screen. During production, the films were purposefully framed in such a way as to protect for either aspect ratio.

Author
Time

I saw TDK theatrically in regular scope 2.35 and thought it was fine. (Image not the film) Far better than the distracting shifts in TDKR 15/70 IMAX with the awful blowups of 35mm material.

The bigger thing is full IMAX 1.43, and new transfers for at least the first two which are extremely poor and inadequate.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I said "a simple crop" -- as in, hacking the top and bottom of the BR scenes without shifting them would look odd, hence why I mentioned the action not always being in the middle. I guess I'll have to be more specific next time.

@CSchmidlapp - It was the same transfer as seen on the BR with the edge enhancement present, the IMAX scenes also have the edge enhancement, and compared to the BR are mostly noticeably duller, colour-wise.

If I’m not back in five minutes, just wait longer!

Author
Time

Mass5160 said:

I said "a simple crop" -- as in, hacking the top and bottom of the BR scenes without shifting them would look odd, hence why I mentioned the action not always being in the middle. I guess I'll have to be more specific next time.

 That's what I understood you to mean. The Blu-ray releases of the "Dark Knight" films play just fine on a scope screen when performing the "simple crop" which you describe. My own home theater is set up for constant image height, for which I utilize my projector's vertical stretch option in combination with an anamorphic lens. The framing of these two films does not suffer by being cropped in this way.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I read my earlier post back and hope I didn't come across as snobbish, I apologise if I did the voice in my head sounded very different at the time.

Anyway, the beginning when the Joker puts that...gas spraying thing in the bank manager's mouth looks odd to me when cropping the BR to 2.35, as do close up shots of Bruce Wayne driving his fancy car (the top of his head is cut off). The alternate shot at the end as well, while very subtle, is still there. There could be more, but I don't really have the patience to check, I only found this one by accident.

If I’m not back in five minutes, just wait longer!

Author
Time

I made a straight 2.35:1 cropped version once.  It was ok, but the IMAX scenes were very tight to too tight.

Personally, I think it'd be fun to do a 2.20:1 version (70mm).  It was never projected theatrically like this, but it's a nice compromise given the source material.

“Alright twinkle-toes, what’s your exit strategy?”

Author
Time

Mass5160 said:

I read my earlier post back and hope I didn't come across as snobbish, I apologise if I did the voice in my head sounded very different at the time.

Anyway, the beginning when the Joker puts that...gas spraying thing in the bank manager's mouth looks odd to me when cropping the BR to 2.35, as do close up shots of Bruce Wayne driving his fancy car (the top of his head is cut off). The alternate shot at the end as well, while very subtle, is still there. There could be more, but I don't really have the patience to check, I only found this one by accident.

No worries -- it's hard to convey tone through text in forum posts between perfect strangers.

I'll have to go back and check out those scenes. From past viewings I really don't remember anything seeming unbalanced, and from what I've read they took great care to preserve the framing.

Author
Time

Mass5160 said:

@CSchmidlapp - It was the same transfer as seen on the BR with the edge enhancement present, the IMAX scenes also have the edge enhancement, and compared to the BR are mostly noticeably duller, colour-wise.

 Cheers.

Maybe it is from the same master that was used for the DVD?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I have to admit that I hate how this practice has been implemented. It wouldn't be so bad if once the decision was made to make part of a sequence in IMAX, then the entire sequence should be, and not be made up of shots filmed in both formats.

The IMAX version of Interstellar is a perfect example. Don't get me wrong, what shots they chose to present in IMAX were certainly breathtaking, but parts feel a bit more fragmented than they should because of the shift from 35 millimeter to IMAX, which effects not just the aspect ratio, but the resolution, brightness and saturation of the image. It was very distracting to myself, and several people I saw the film with, some of whom were not cinéasts.

“That’s impossible, even for a computer!”

“You don't do ‘Star Wars’ in Dobly.”

Author
Time

@Starthoughts

Always bugged me also.

With the Blu Releases they could have given us a choice via seamless branching or something to that effect. The IMAX sequences are cropped anyway to fit the screen, so it does not fully represent the IMAX photography.

Author
Time

budwhite said:

I recently bought a 2.35 screen for my CIH set up and it's awesome with scope movies. I have both Dark knight movies on BD and it's a bitch watching them this way with the changing aspect ratio. The picture spills on the walls when the IMAX scenes appear

 I didn't know they made wide screens for projectors. My friend had an old-school portable screen, and once we got the DVD player's aspect ratio set up correctly, switching between widesreen movies and fullscreen ones (or TV shows) was always effortless.

We even tried projecting a few VHSes, it wasn't as bad as you'd expect.

This signature uses Markdown syntax, which makes it easy to add formatting like italics, bold, and lists:

Author
Time

StarThoughts said:

I have to admit that I hate how this practice has been implemented. It wouldn't be so bad if once the decision was made to make part of a sequence in IMAX, then the entire sequence should be, and not be made up of shots filmed in both formats.

The IMAX version of Interstellar is a perfect example. Don't get me wrong, what shots they chose to present in IMAX were certainly breathtaking, but parts feel a bit more fragmented than they should because of the shift from 35 millimeter to IMAX, which effects not just the aspect ratio, but the resolution, brightness and saturation of the image. It was very distracting to myself, and several people I saw the film with, some of whom were not cinéasts.

 Agree with your opinion there

It's annoying where an entire sequence is not formatted for IMAX and instead it's just select shots that last only a few seconds

Tron Legacy and Hunger Games were good examples of the shifting ratio technique IMHO as they had entire seqences displayed

Join the dark side… and get a free cookie!

Author
Time

What do we got more?

Transformers?

Star Trek?

I saw Guardians of the galaxy on BD and the 3D have shifting ratio, I would guess that maybe 60% was in 1.78. The regular version is 2.35

Author
Time

Asaki said:

budwhite said:

I recently bought a 2.35 screen for my CIH set up and it's awesome with scope movies. I have both Dark knight movies on BD and it's a bitch watching them this way with the changing aspect ratio. The picture spills on the walls when the IMAX scenes appear

 I didn't know they made wide screens for projectors. My friend had an old-school portable screen, and once we got the DVD player's aspect ratio set up correctly, switching between widesreen movies and fullscreen ones (or TV shows) was always effortless.

We even tried projecting a few VHSes, it wasn't as bad as you'd expect.

 Sure do. And with just a few  seconds on the remote and the projector is switching to 1.78 or vice versa. No manual zoom here :D

Author
Time

budwhite said:

And with just a few  seconds on the remote and the projector is switching to 1.78 or vice versa. No manual zoom here :D

 We kept it set to fullscreen, so movies always filled up the entire width of the screen. No buttons to press at all, not even for non-anamorphic movies or 1.66:1 like Nightmare Before Christmas.

This signature uses Markdown syntax, which makes it easy to add formatting like italics, bold, and lists:

Author
Time

digitalfreaknyc said:

Vudu has constant aspect ratios, if you're interested.

 Is this also the case with The Dark Knight Rises?

Author
Time

CSchmidlapp said:



digitalfreaknyc said:

Vudu has constant aspect ratios, if you're interested.


 Is this also the case with The Dark Knight Rises?


Yes.

Author
Time

I noticed Amazon Instant Video does too, but there's no way of downloading it unfortunately.