Thanks... been collecting DVDs since Day One (March 24, 1997)... my first DVD purchases were Goldeneye, Eraser, Blade Runner, and Species... I had to get a friend in Seattle to go to Tower Records and FedEx the discs to me so I'd have something to play in my Pioneer LD/DVD combo player.noelister said:Very nice collection ClayJ !
Yeah, I always go for the Superbit version if I can... of course, only Sony movies even have that option. I'd rather have maximum picture and sound quality than a bunch of features I'm only going to watch once (if I watch them at all).xPismo said:nice list. its all about s u p e r b i t. mmmmmm good. I'll post my collection once they are out of the packing boxes. I think I have a few of you beat, although I'm a bit embarrased at what movies I have bought over the years...
Sorry, I didn't feel like spending $1,300 CAN on [/b]Blur[/b]-ray...literally LOL just look at their titles...The Fifth Element is a joke...failure to use VC1/Dobly TrueHD...resulting in Extras/Features being cut...!!!Revlefty said:Aww you bought an HD-DVD I'm sorry to here that.
Clay: I'd be very surprised if those 16:9 aspect ratios that you have listed are correct. Some of the DVDs may be 16:9 enhanced, but most of those films will (hopefully) be presented in their original aspect ratio (OAR), which is highly unlikely to be 16:9, television productions not withstanding.clayj said:
Pretty sure Clay knows all this. I think the reason he prefers 16:9 (as do I) is that that is also the aspect ratio of wide screen TV's. Hence it is the aspect ratio he prefers, not necessarily the ones that directors prefer. I know that if I'm "on the fence" about buying a movie, usually having a 16:9 aspect ratio (1.85:1 or 1.78:1 are both close enough in my opinion whereas 2.35:1 and greater usually have "the black bars") usually pushes me to buy it, especially if it has DTS. It doesn't matter... it's just preferred.Brize said:Clay: I'd be very surprised if those 16:9 aspect ratios that you have listed are correct. Some of the DVDs may be 16:9 enhanced, but most of those films will (hopefully) be presented in their original aspect ratio (OAR), which is highly unlikely to be 16:9, television productions not withstanding.
Suggesting that 16:9 is the 'preferred aspect ratio' for films infers that it's a stylistic choice on the part of the DVD production company. On the contrary, any deviation from the OAR will result in frame cropping, and is therefore avoided by those companies looking to produce a DVD consistent with the original film.
And of course, the reason most television shows (and a lot of older films) aren't available in 16:9 is because they were originally shot in a non-widescreen format, usually 1.33:1 or 1.37:1. Accordingly, presenting the material in a widescreen aspect ratio would necessitate vertical cropping.
I understand that at 2.35:1 I am not missing out on any picture. I also understand that for Television and the occasional movie (Blair Witch Project for example) that is in 4:3 I am not missing out on anything either. The black bars don't annoy me at all. Some of my friends zoom/stretch pictures to make them fill their whole screen which I can't stand.Brize said:I'm struggling to understand how anyone can have a 'preferred aspect ratio', such that it has a bearing on which films you're likely to watch.
It's unfathomable to me that you'd choose one film over another on the basis of aspect ratio. Do you find the black bars annoying, or is it just that you want the image to be as big as possible?