VCDQuality Forums (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/index.php)
- Jargon, Encoding/Conversion and Burning (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=9)
-- Aspect Ratio Question (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=51139)

Aspect Ration Question

How come on some releases the video is much thinner than a normal 16:9. I've only noticed this on 2 so far and they are both older. Rounders and Boondock Saints. The video only took up about 1/3 of the screen. It was definetly WS but it was just very thin. I had to use the zoom on my dvd player to get it to look right. I have my dvd player set at 16:9 for my 27in TV. Am I doing something wrong when I burn these specific movies? I used nero to burn them both.

Maybe they were 2.35:1 instead of 16:9?

They use a higher film stock (better movies only) 70mm which has that aspect ratio of 2.35:1 rather than the 35mm aspect ratio of 1.85:1 (close to 16x9). For example the matrix, they had a huge budget, and since they wanted it to look good they used this more expensive method. It is more artistic, and its what the screens in movie theaters are set up for.

Re: Aspect Ration Question

quote:

---

Originally posted by 64bit
I have my dvd player set at 16:9 for my 27in TV.

---

__________________
563-773-1880

<Dwaggy> i caught you a delicious Bass
<The404> This is because you are an idiot

Simple answer:

There's more than one type of "widescreen". You have widescreen and then 'thinner' widescreen.

Take Lord of the Rings for example (Just watched the extended edition, worth every penny). That's "thin" widescreen. It doesn't fill the entire screen even on a widescreen tv.

Depends on the film.

I wondered the same recently and found this