NBC’S 'The West Wing' To Expand To Wide-Screen Format
AMYSA
TO WIDE-SCREEN FORMAT
Published: July 19, 2001
BURBANK –- July 19, 2001 -- NBC next season will broadcast its popular,
critically acclaimed and Emmy Award-winning “The West Wing” (Wednesdays,
9-10 p.m. ET) in a special format – “Presented in Wide Screen” – just
as the network has done with television’s top-rated drama, “ER,” last
season.
NBC started employing the innovative process on “ER” (Thursdays, 10-11 p.m.
ET) last fall and will continue with it on that series in the 2001-2002 season.
The audience-friendly process will feature a 1.78:1 aspect ratio (or more
commonly known as “16x9”) as opposed to the basic 1.33:1 (or “4x3”)
ratio that is standard on almost all television programs. Because the more
rectangular picture encompasses a wider swath of action, a narrow black strip
will appear at the top and bottom of the screen that is a form of the letterbox
format often used to present feature films on television.
The end credits will be presented in the standard 4x3 aspect ratio.
“The West Wing” is from John Wells Productions in association with Warner
Bros. Television. Aaron Sorkin is the series creator/executive producer.
Director Thomas Schlamme and John Wells are executive producers.
“ER” is from Constant c Productions and Amblin Television in association
with Warner Bros. Television. Michael Crichton, John Wells and Jack Orman are
the executive producers.
DrJones123
but i think that this sucks, i deplore wide-screen! lol..i mean i love the show
and this will not deter me from taping it, but still, i wish NBC could pull an
HBO and have it so that we could have a choice between pan and scan (my
preference)
or this "new" version, we'll see come season premiere time if my mind will
change any..
regards to all,
Jonesy
Scott Stevenson
Jonsey,
I'm wondering why you don't like the wide-screen format (not trying
to start a flame war, I'm really curious)
If something is shot wide-screen, I prefer it to be shown
wide-screen. If they shoot w/s, and display it pan-and-scan, elements
in the original shot get lost. If it's an important element (say, two
actors talking), you've either got one actor talking to a disembodied
voice, or the pan-and-scan has to cut back and forth between the two
actors, which can really disrupt the flow of a screen. It also
changes the director's concept of what the shot should look like--the
same reason I don't like colorized movies.
That said, I like it better than the technique (that I've forgotten
the name of) where the horizontal aspect of the screen is "squished"
to fit TV's 4:3 ratio. I remember watching a western where John Wayne
looked like Jimmy Stewart, and Jimmy Stewart looked like, well,
Callista Flockhart in a cowboy hat--if she was 20 feet tall.
I think a show like TWW could really benefit from the extra real
estate that wide-screen allows. Two possibilities leap to mind:
The hustle and bustle in the bullpen when something "big" is going
on.
POTUS, in the Oval Office alone, struggling with some major
decision. Shoot the shot across the major axis of the room,
emphasizing that, even though he gets tons of advice on what to do,
ultimately, it's one man, and one man alone, who has to decide.
take care,
Scott
there is probably no truth to the rumor that Ted Turner wanted to
colorize the beginning and end of "The Wizard of Oz"
AMYSA
>I may be the only one to say this,
>but i think that this sucks, i deplore wide-screen!
why? that really baffles me. i mean, you're not the first one to say that, but
with the exception of the argument that it bothers people with very small
televisions, i can't honestly find a rational reason that someone would prefer
to have parts of a scene cut off.
"the west wing" is fine without widescreen, since it's not actually *shot* in
widescreen (or wasn't, prior to this season). but, i think it'll be lovely
during the walk and talks and really fantastic on the location shoots.
>lol..i mean i love the
>show
>and this will not deter me from taping it, but still, i wish NBC could pull
>an
>HBO and have it so that we could have a choice between pan and scan (my
>preference)
why and how can someone prefer pan and scan? it's a hideous format. it's like
watching a home movie where someone is switching the camera back and forth
between two people having a conversation. it's nausea inducing.
whenever anyone mentions that they don't see the difference, i force them to
watch "ghostbusters 2", which i think will go down in history as the absolute
worst example of pan and scan ever released on home video. don't watch it
without taking some dramamine.
amy
"is this cool? i can't tell..."--cartman
SDM
Shouldn't that say "1x3"?
Bonbon
No, you are not the only one, I dislike it intensely. By shortening the height
of the picture, it makes the rest of the image way too small to appreciate.
Nothing is really "close-up." When I see a letter box show on TV, I won't even
watch it because of that.
Bonbon
Lynn
>
> I may be the only one to say this,
> but i think that this sucks, i deplore wide-screen!
My TV is too damned small to enjoy widescreen, so I was not a happy camper
to see that. I guess I oughta watch ER and see how it looks, 'cause it
sounds like TWW may be relegated to RadioTV like most everything else - just
background noise while I'm on the computer. I hate to be gloom and doom,
especially about something I've enjoyed so much, but this does not bode well
for my future.
--
Lynn
http://users.lmi.net/ennui
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself; but talent instantly recognizes
genius... -Arthur Conan Doyle, "The Valley of Fear"
============================================================================
* West Wing: http://users.lmi.net/ennui/westwing001.htm *
* WingNuts: http://users.lmi.net/ennui/WingNuts.html *
**********************************************************
Rob
> why? that really baffles me.
I think people who don't like widescreen believe that <it> cuts off
video material. It took me a long time to convince my wife that
W-I-D-E-S-C-R-E-E-N is the ONLY way to watch a movie.
> whenever anyone mentions that they don't see the difference, i force them to
> watch "ghostbusters 2"
Get them to watch a couple of Stargate SG-1 eps off the DVDs - they
will soon be converted!
Rob
Canada
Rob
> > The end credits will be presented in the standard 4x3 aspect ratio.
>
> Shouldn't that say "1x3"?
Shouldn't that really say "Squished so no one can read them in any
aspect ratio"? (gotta fit in the ads for the upcoming show on the
other 2/3 of the screen!)
Rob
Canada
Stephen Fuld
"Rob" <buz...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6775a232.01072...@posting.google.com...
Yes it should, but it didn't hurt readability too much becasue they flash by
so fast that they were already unreadable. I know it is a big thing for the
people involved, but does the average person really care who the second
asssistant cameraman is? I would be willing to give that up (except for the
supporting actors names who are people we can see) if it meant an extra
minute or so of story.
--
- Stephen Fuld
SDM
> video material. It took me a long time to convince my wife that
> W-I-D-E-S-C-R-E-E-N is the ONLY way to watch a movie.
I love Widescreen on my TV. I just don't like letterboxing that much.
AMYSA
> I know it is a big thing for the
>people involved, but does the average person really care who the second
>asssistant cameraman is? I would be willing to give that up (except for the
>supporting actors names who are people we can see) if it meant an extra
>minute or so of story.
the average person probably doesn't give a damn, but i'm not willing to
sacrifice the credits. many local affiliates already chop off the credits on
their own, which i find completely tacky and completely wrong. enough people
already get no credit for their jobs...these people should. i would be willing
to give up 10 seconds of show just so they would slow the credits down, but
they wouldn't, so it wouldn't matter.
besides, giving up credits isn't going to give us anymore story, it's just
going to give us 20 seconds more of commercials. they'll always find a way to
do that. they're already squeezed to the side for that very purpose and many
sitcoms (particularly on nbc) lose their final credit scene during repeats so
that the network can advertise one of their other shows.
Rob
> "DrJones123" <drjon...@aol.com> wrote...
> >
> > I may be the only one to say this,
> > but i think that this sucks, i deplore wide-screen!
>
> My TV is too damned small to enjoy widescreen, so I was not a happy camper
> to see that. I guess I oughta watch ER and see how it looks, 'cause it
> sounds like TWW may be relegated to RadioTV like most everything else - just
> background noise while I'm on the computer. I hate to be gloom and doom,
> especially about something I've enjoyed so much, but this does not bode well
> for my future.
Get a bigger teevee - I'd hate to see anyone so unhappy about their future :-)
Bonbon
>to see that. I guess I oughta watch ER and see how it looks, 'cause it
>sounds like TWW may be relegated to RadioTV like most everything else - just
>background noise while I'm on the computer. I hate to be gloom and doom,
>especially about something I've enjoyed so much, but this does not bode well
>for my future.
>--
>Lynn
I don't know what this is going to say about me but I've watched ER all season
and never noticed it was in letterbox. What gives?
Bonbon
Bonbon
>Shouldn't that really say "Squished so no one can read them in any
>aspect ratio"? (gotta fit in the ads for the upcoming show on the
>other 2/3 of the screen!)
>
>Rob
>Canada
Gawd, I HATE when they do that. They might as well not show them at all. I'm
also getting might perturbed with the big "bugs" they're using, both the
networks AND the local stations. In Miami, Channel 10 has one so big it
interferes with the questions on Jeopardy.
Bonbon
Bonbon
>so fast that they were already unreadable. I know it is a big thing for the
>people involved, but does the average person really care who the second
>asssistant cameraman is? I would be willing to give that up (except for the
>supporting actors names who are people we can see) if it meant an extra
>minute or so of story.
>
>--
> - Stephen Fuld
Many times I've seen an actor I recognize but can't remember their name only to
have the credits squeezed so badly I stay awake all night trying to think of
who they are.
All together now...Awwwwww!
Bonbon
AMYSA
>I don't know what this is going to say about me but I've watched ER all
>season
>and never noticed it was in letterbox. What gives?
i guess you don't have the problem with it that you thought you did.
AMYSA
>My TV is too damned small to enjoy widescreen
see...that i understand. that i get.
i just don't understand the ideas elsewhere that widescreen somehow means that
it's now going to be shot from a distance or something. it's the same thing as
before, we're just now going to get to see what's going on on the sides and see
what they're walking through when they're having their walk and talks. they're
going to get to do so much more because of it.
> I guess I oughta watch ER and see how it looks
give it a shot because i think "er" did a great job with it this
season...particularly in the scenes of surgery in the "er" and just outside the
"er". they didn't overdo it at all by trying to cram things in there just to
say, "hey, look, you can see in *that* room now!!"
Sandy McDermin
Well ... I guess that's why God (or Al Gore ... whoever <shrug>) created
the internet movie database (IMDB). Too bad, though, for people without
an internet connection.
Sandy
Lynn
> > >
> > > I may be the only one to say this,
> > > but i think that this sucks, i deplore wide-screen!
> > >
> >
> > My TV is too damned small to enjoy widescreen, so I was not a happy
> > camper to see that.
> >
>
> Get a bigger teevee - I'd hate to see anyone so unhappy about their future
:-)
<<heehee>> I was all hot-to-trot to get a Sony flat screen a year ago, but
I got sidetracked; and since I only actually watch two/three programs, it
seems like more trouble than it's worth. I need a new cabinet, have to get
rid of the old stuff, yadda, yadda, yadda (whine,whine), so I just haven't
bothered. Now, I want a new fancy-dancy laptop - wonder if I should just
get TV software, then I can watch it on my lap. That ought to do wonders
for my circulatory system whenever there's a Toby close-up.
Lynn
> >
> >My TV is too damned small to enjoy widescreen
> >
>
> see...that i understand. that i get.
Maybe this will be the push I need to get a new tv. The option of leaving
you to have your way with Toby without worry from other predators - well,
forget it.
Sandy McDermin
I'm with you 100%.
Bugs.
Lottery numbers plastered on the bottom.
Announcements of shows coming up next.
Announcements of what show you're watching at that very moment, as if
we're all suffering from short term memory loss.
Scrolls from local news stations who seem to think we need to know the
news before the news actually comes on.... The police caught a murderer.
Great. Why couldn't I have been informed of that at 10:00 or 11:00. Why
now? Do you think I have barricades up, waiting with bated breath for
this news?
*And*, the piece de resistance ... the weather announcements constantly
popping up.... Either we're having more dangerous weather than ever
before or these people are getting out of hand. Sometimes I think I'm
watching the Weather Channel, interrupted periodically by The West Wing.
Sandy
AMYSA
<snip some things because obviously i agree>
>Announcements of shows coming up next.
announcements of shows coming up next *week* are what kill me. it's completely
unnecessary to remind us of what we're watching, but they can get away with
that in the sense that it would be hard to construct a good argument claiming
that that is advertising. but, when i turn over to "just shoot me" (which is
the only nbc show i actually watched all week, so it's the example) and see
something to the effect of "the downer channel...coming tuesday after spy tv"
that i just insulting. they manage to get *two* ads in there. i can only
imagine how much that appalls the producers of the shows that their plastering
all that nonsense in during.
>Scrolls from local news stations who seem to think we need to know the
>news before the news actually comes on.... The police caught a murderer.
i've been watching "oprah" lately and i've noticed that the local abc affiliate
(wsb-2) has taken to (and evidently has been for quite a long time) pushing
"oprah" up into the top, right corner of the screen and advertising their five
o'clock news. they don't have breaking stories. they don't even have anything
of interest. they're just advertising the top stories and letting us know that,
even though the news has been airing on wsb at five o'clock for the past
billion years, they just want to make sure that we haven't forgotten about it.
>*And*, the piece de resistance ... the weather announcements constantly
>popping up.... Either we're having more dangerous weather than ever
>before or these people are getting out of hand.
this, while annoying, i see no problem with. i hate getting weather reports on
the screen, but the atlanta stations are surprisingly good with it. i've
watched the denver station where they squeeze the show into the corner and been
amazed that they get away with it. atlanta news just puts a map in the bottom
corner or scrolls across the bottom.
the thing about weather alerts, though, is that no amount of bitching will ever
do anything about them. we can complain about the bugs and even though we'll
probably never win, we might have some effect on their size or color. but, tv
is still very much a government "thing" and weather alerts and national
emergencies are something that they have to alert us to. they're providing a
public service to us. they certainly don't have to tell us everytime a single
drop of rain falls somewhere in the 70 mile viewing area, but they have to tell
us about thunderstorms and tornados and snow and threat of, you know, a nuclear
war.
one thing they do not, to my knowledge, have to do, however, is tell us about
the election returns. i wish that one station, just once, would have the balls
to say "fuck it" and run their show without squeezing the picture into the top,
right ninth of the screen just to see if it made a difference in their ratings.
i want to know about the returns, but i can get that *anywhere*. i know there
are people with just antenna televisions, which is cool...the affiliates can
scroll the results on the bottom. however, if they feel they need to take up
8/9 of the screen with the election returns they need to just preempt their
programming for the night and go with a block of news. they should choose one
or the other, but they shouldn't pretend that they're doing both, because they
clearly aren't.
AMYSA
>Maybe this will be the push I need to get a new tv. The option of leaving
>you to have your way with Toby without worry from other predators - well,
>forget it.
damn.
Toniann
"AMYSA" <am...@aol.comasutra> wrote
> give it a shot because i think "er" did a great job with it this
> season...particularly in the scenes of surgery in the "er" and just
outside the
> "er". they didn't overdo it at all by trying to cram things in there just
to
> say, "hey, look, you can see in *that* room now!!"
Though, hey, don't knock that as a reason... there are so many Rooms and
Curtains and Bathrooms and Chairs and Lounges and Closets on ER, where
interesting things are always happening, I'm kind of into being able to get
a tiny bit more of a peek. <g>
--
Toniann
Random Thoughts can be found archived at:
http://www.borghalrantipole.com/thewestwing.html
To reply to sender, please remove "NOSPAM" from address.
AMYSA
>What's with the funky header, by the way? Did I do that?
actually, i was just fixing to ask why the header gets more and more coded
everytime someone replies to it. sheesh...
>Though, hey, don't knock that as a reason... there are so many Rooms and
>Curtains and Bathrooms and Chairs and Lounges and Closets on ER, where
>interesting things are always happening,
well, that's a good point. <g>
Stephen Fuld
news:20010722154220...@ng-mk1.aol.com...
>
> i've been watching "oprah" lately and i've noticed that the local abc
affiliate
> (wsb-2) has taken to (and evidently has been for quite a long time)
pushing
> "oprah" up into the top, right corner of the screen and advertising their
five
> o'clock news. they don't have breaking stories. they don't even have
anything
> of interest. they're just advertising the top stories and letting us know
that,
> even though the news has been airing on wsb at five o'clock for the past
> billion years,
Are you sure it has been that long? Or is it that when you watch it it just
seems that long?
I have totally given up on watching local news for years now. I find I can
survive quite nicely without knowing the color of the car in the latest car
chase, or that some know nothing is complaining about something he knows
nothing about, or that some blow hard local pol showed up at a rally to make
a meaningless speech for some cause that means nothing. And having this all
told to me by people who are clearly chosen for their demographic appeal and
physical attributes instead of any pretense at journalism or even
intelligence is more than I wish to waste my time with.
Can you tell I am a bit frustrated with local news? :-(.
--
- Stephen Fuld
AMYSA
>Are you sure it has been that long? Or is it that when you watch it it just
>seems that long?
no, i'm pretty sure that wsb atlanta predates the cavemen. i'm pretty sure
scientists have found etchings of the wsb logo in caves.
>I have totally given up on watching local news for years now. I find I can
>survive quite nicely without knowing the color of the car in the latest car
>chase
oh, man...you're breaking my heart!!!
i'll admit right now: the only reason i watch so much television is because i'm
afraid that if i turn it off, i'll miss a car chase. i flip between atlanta
television and los angeles television because there's a good chance that i'll
be able to catch at least a half dozen a week. <g>
i'm a local news addict. i can't deny that. more specifically, i'm a WAGA
addict, which would be the atlanta fox affiliate. the downside of my addiction
is that, after being one of the best for several years, it's now just as
watered down as the rest of the locals. they still have three or four very good
reporters (and that's being generous), but they've completely moved to the
cheery, flashy mode of reporting. it's gotten to the point where i wait for the
gold club story of the day just because the reporter (doug richards) has the
greatest "this is so fucking stupid" delivery and seems to throw in randoms
facts just to amuse himself which in turn amuses me. besides...it's fun to see
them do a daily story about such a *non*-story.
we had a great reporter here for many years, tom corvin, who seems to have
disappeared off the face of the earth. i'm out of the loop, so i don't know if
he left news or just left atlanta news, but he had such a "the daily show" type
of delivery that it was just perfect.
> And having this all
>told to me by people who are clearly chosen for their demographic appeal and
>physical attributes instead of any pretense at journalism or even
>intelligence is more than I wish to waste my time with.
that's another thing about atlanta that's usually good, yet recently less than
good. our anchors generally aren't the kip and buffy types, but they've
recently begun *behaving* like the kip and buffy types. it's very depressing to
see a formerly great news reporter like wes sarginson reading a story about
courtney love's missing diamond ring with enthusiasm as if he isn't thinking of
ways to kill himself while reporting about it.
>Can you tell I am a bit frustrated with local news? :-(.
it's understandable. i gave up on atlanta morning news and started watching
ktla's morning show instead. sure, the traffic reports don't help me, but
chances are if there's a stand off at a bank in LA there's probably a stand off
at a bank in atlanta. so, it evens out. <g>
vze2...@mail.verizon.net
> Many times I've seen an actor I recognize but can't remember their name only to
> have the credits squeezed so badly I stay awake all night trying to think of
> who they are.
or even worse, now when they show theatrical movies on TV, instead of showing the
credits from the movie, the networks make up their own credits, push them to the
side, so you can see whats coming up in the news in about 30 seconds.
or when they do have the credits from the movie, they speed it up, so they can get
to the news on time. over here in new york, channels 9 and 11 start their news at
9:58, to get a jump on the competition. horrible, just horrible.
-rod
Pegasus
>
> > why? that really baffles me.
>
> I think people who don't like widescreen believe that <it> cuts off
> video material. It took me a long time to convince my wife that
> W-I-D-E-S-C-R-E-E-N is the ONLY way to watch a movie.
>
Actually , OAR (Original Aspect Ratio) is the only way to watch a movie.
Which may mean, for older films like Gone with the Wind, in 4:3 which was
the original Academy ratio.
Since then most films are shot in 1:85 or 2:35 and that's the way they
should be seen.
Get a widescreen TV and you'll never look back.(I know in US they're
expensive for some weird reason, in Europe you can get one from $400).
I don't mind TV shows in 4:3 if they were shot in that format, but if it's
shot in widescreen, I want to see it that way!
And as TV shows are shot in 1:77, there is not that much reduction of
picture even on a very small TV. Only 2:35 can really be a problem on a
small screen.
Pegasus
Rob
> the average person probably doesn't give a damn, but i'm not willing to
> sacrifice the credits.
I'm with you Amy. I believe that EVERYONE involved in the production
of this and every other series should get proper recognition for their
efforts, not just those in front of the camera.
I happen to know several technical behind-the-scenes type people and
they all agree :-)
Rob
Canada
Toniann
> toniann said:
> >What's with the funky header, by the way? Did I do that?
>
> actually, i was just fixing to ask why the header gets more and more
coded
> everytime someone replies to it. sheesh...
Darn, and I thought you'd know what was up with that.
I long for new shows.
Chris Free
been filmed on "high-def" super 35 film. it's only now that
they've decide not to deform the image composition to 4:3.
what will be available is a more variegated palette
with which sorkin, del ruth, and others, can paint
their dialogues and orchestrations -- without being
forced to finesse lights, framing, and staging.
vincent's coal-sketches are beautiful -- but "Starry Night!"
on our ancient televisions we'll have to be content
viewing "prints"; i've seen the "oil on canvas" that is
pure 1080i hdtv -- calibrated to "museum" standards --
it's rather overwhelming.
does anyone know if they'll be using the full 5.1 sound-field?
James Squire
>
> drjon...@aol.com said:
>
> >I may be the only one to say this,
> >but i think that this sucks, i deplore wide-screen!
>
> with the exception of the argument that it bothers people with very small
> televisions, i can't honestly find a rational reason that someone would prefer
> to have parts of a scene cut off.
Scott Stevenson wrote:
>
> On 22 Jul 2001 02:11:15 GMT, drjon...@aol.com (DrJones123) wrote:
>
> Jonsey,
>
> I'm wondering why you don't like the wide-screen format (not trying
> to start a flame war, I'm really curious)
Let me just chime in here, because I am one of those who also still
doesn't quite get why letterbox is better, though I think I'm beginning
to.
One problem is that blank strip at the top and the bottom of the
screen. Since my TV has not changed size, obviously the picture size
has gotten smaller. Given that, it is hard to get past the notion that
we are seeing less.
The statement that if it was shot in letterbox it should be shown in
letterbox and if shot in the other format it should be shown in that
format makes sense to me.
But it is undeniable that if letterbox actually shows *more* real estate
than the regular format, said real estate must appear to be *smaller*
than in the other format (or further away, if you prefer). However, I
can see where if a show was shot in letterbox but broadcast in the other
format, a certain portion of the sides of a scene have to be truncated.
On the other hand, I can't see how they add to the top and the bottom to
fill those blank strips. It seems like if they just stretched it
vertically I would notice. Then again, I never noticed that ER was
shown in letterbox this year ;-)
I think if you mentioned the trade-off of more real estate versus larger
screen contents, you might get through to more people.
--
Jim Squire: members.aol.com/jamess1889/friends.html
"Chandler & Monica": www.acusd.edu/~dannys/chanmon.html
"atf Off-Beat Posting Guide": members.aol.com/jamess1889/net_guide.html
"Discuss the Gospel": www.crossings.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In Valen's name. It's true isn't it? I can see it in your eyes. You
told
me long ago, that you had seen this moment in our future, but until
now, I
never really believed. John, there's so much ahead of you. So many
changes.
So much pain and grief. I look in your eyes now and I see the
innocence
that went away so many years ago."
-- Delenn (to Sheridan), "War Without End, Part 2"
Stephen Fuld
> stephen said:
>
> >Are you sure it has been that long? Or is it that when you watch it it
just
> >seems that long?
>
> no, i'm pretty sure that wsb atlanta predates the cavemen. i'm pretty sure
> scientists have found etchings of the wsb logo in caves.
>
> >I have totally given up on watching local news for years now. I find I
can
> >survive quite nicely without knowing the color of the car in the latest
car
> >chase
>
> oh, man...you're breaking my heart!!!
>
> i'll admit right now: the only reason i watch so much television is
because i'm
> afraid that if i turn it off, i'll miss a car chase. i flip between
atlanta
> television and los angeles television because there's a good chance that
i'll
> be able to catch at least a half dozen a week. <g>
>
> i'm a local news addict.
My condolences! I think if you up the dosage of the blue pill, that may
help :-)
Perhaps it is because I live in the suburbs and LA is such a big city that
virtually none of the LA news affects me in any way. Thus I just don't waste
my time with it.
And of course I never listen to the weather because, as anyone who has seen
LA Story knows, the weather reports never contain information as the weather
is pretty predictable here. :-)
--
- Stephen Fuld
Stephen Fuld
"Pegasus" <pegase...@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
news:9jfkk1$tl5$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
Two questions.
If you have a wide screen 16:9 TV set and they broadcast a show shot in 4:3,
do you get the equivalent of the letterbox but with the black bands on each
side?
If you have a 16:9 TV and they broadcast a movie that was originally shot in
2:35 do you have have the letterbox at the top and bottom again?
Thanks
--
- Stephen Fuld
Brett A. Pasternack
> Let me just chime in here, because I am one of those who also still
> doesn't quite get why letterbox is better, though I think I'm beginning
> to.
>
> One problem is that blank strip at the top and the bottom of the
> screen. Since my TV has not changed size, obviously the picture size
> has gotten smaller. Given that, it is hard to get past the notion that
> we are seeing less.
Understandable, but the notion is wrong. What you're seeing is SMALLER,
but there is more of it. It's like switching to a smaller font--the
letters are smaller, but you can put more of them on a page.
>
> The statement that if it was shot in letterbox it should be shown in
> letterbox and if shot in the other format it should be shown in that
> format makes sense to me.
Me too. Which does raise the issue of why you would shoot a television
show in widescreen when the vast majority of TVs are in 4:3. I certainly
prefer seeing things in fullscreen when they were created that way, in
any event.
> But it is undeniable that if letterbox actually shows *more* real estate
> than the regular format, said real estate must appear to be *smaller*
> than in the other format (or further away, if you prefer). However, I
> can see where if a show was shot in letterbox but broadcast in the other
> format, a certain portion of the sides of a scene have to be truncated.
> On the other hand, I can't see how they add to the top and the bottom to
> fill those blank strips. It seems like if they just stretched it
> vertically I would notice.
They don't stretch it--they make the whole thing bigger, and that means
they have to cut some of it off. Picture a widescreen image, and imagine
the "camera" zooming in on it. as the center of the screen gets bigger,
the black bars at the top disappear--and so do the sides of the screen.
Actually, some DVD players have a zoom feature, which allows for a
perfect demonstration of this. My father was always put off by
widescreen. I put a DVD in the player, showed him the whole picture, and
then zoomed in--he instantly said that he'd never watch pan n scan when
he had the choice again.
> -- Delenn (to Sheridan), "War Without End, Part 2"
You might be interested to know that the Sci-Fi Channel reruns of B5 are
in widescreen. Apparantly, when they first came on, due to a really
stupid mastering error the versions being shown were the regular 4:3
versions with the tops and bottoms lopped off. JMS spotted the error and
was able to get the correct versions on, so the episodes now airing have
material in every shot that wasn't shown the first time around...
Chris Free
> Two questions.
>
> If you have a wide screen 16:9 TV set and they broadcast a show shot in 4:3,
> do you get the equivalent of the letterbox but with the black bands on each
> side?
it depends what options come with the TV. most TVs i've seen let you
view 4:3 with black-bands on the sides or you can deform the original
ratio across the entire wide-screen; some TVs allow "PIP" via two
side-by-side 4:3 (almost) programs.
> If you have a 16:9 TV and they broadcast a movie that was originally shot in
> 2:35 do you have have the letterbox at the top and bottom again?
yes. but, again, it depends on the TV's options; most sets allow one
to deform the picture by distorting and defacing the artist's original
creation in any number of creative ways; there's always spray paint.
again, "the west wing" was never shot on 4:3 stock -- see my previous post.
Stephen Fuld
news:J1Y67.6980$S4.126...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
Thanks for the answers.
>
> again, "the west wing" was never shot on 4:3 stock -- see my previous
post.
>
>
Yes, I realize that. But much as I hate to admit it, I do occasionally
watch things other than TWW. :-)
--
- Stephen Fuld
DrJones123
black bars, i noticed it all season on ER and it got on my nerves. Someone
really want to sell me on wide-screen? I mean i understand we'll probably see
more, but its just those black lines and i have a small tv so its why i prefer
panscan, still, i'll give it a shot, and probably report on my thoughts come
season premiere time, come on, hurry up already.. = )
jonesy
Chris Crandall
: I may be the only one to say this,
Well, I hope you're the only one--wide screen is fabulous.
: and this will not deter me from taping it, but still, i wish NBC could pull an
: HBO and have it so that we could have a choice between pan and scan (my
Pan and scan is the work of the devil. It ruins movies.
Chris Free
created as an intrinsic ampulla for the written word --
wide-screen and high-definition will better
represent the artist's creation.
but mostly "the west wing" is about the notes,
music, and song that's created via dialogue.
anyone offended by the black-bands can close
their eyes without the adventure being lost.
"Art consists of limitation -- The most beautiful
part of every picture is the frame."
- G. K. Chesterton
James Squire
>
> Understandable, but the notion is wrong. What you're seeing is SMALLER,
> but there is more of it. It's like switching to a smaller font--the
> letters are smaller, but you can put more of them on a page.
I know. It's the only logical conclusion.
> Me too. Which does raise the issue of why you would shoot a television
> show in widescreen when the vast majority of TVs are in 4:3. I certainly
> prefer seeing things in fullscreen when they were created that way, in
> any event.
I can also see where having a widescreen TV would help matters. Good
question.
> > -- Delenn (to Sheridan), "War Without End, Part 2"
>
> You might be interested to know that the Sci-Fi Channel reruns of B5 are
> in widescreen.
Now that I noticed ;-) B5 is my favorite show of all time, not just
favorite science fiction show.
> Apparantly, when they first came on, due to a really
> stupid mastering error the versions being shown were the regular 4:3
> versions with the tops and bottoms lopped off. JMS spotted the error and
> was able to get the correct versions on, so the episodes now airing have
> material in every shot that wasn't shown the first time around...
I've never tried to check (and I could, I have a mostly complete set of
B5 on TNT as well as the first four seasons in first-run mode on PTEN),
but I do recall one episode on SCI-FI where I was struck with the
impression (mistaken I'm sure, but very compelling nonetheless) that the
letterbox version actually was *missing* some content that I could have
sworn I had seen before. Don't remember the episode anymore....
--
Jim Squire: members.aol.com/jamess1889/friends.html
"Chandler & Monica": www.acusd.edu/~dannys/chanmon.html
"atf Off-Beat Posting Guide": members.aol.com/jamess1889/net_guide.html
"Discuss the Gospel": www.crossings.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I want the Vorlon gone."
'Fine. I'll just go up to him and ask him to leave. That'll work.'
-- Sheridan and Garibaldi, "Falling Toward Apothesis"
AMYSA
>My condolences! I think if you up the dosage of the blue pill, that may
>help :-)
we're way beyond pills.
>And of course I never listen to the weather because, as anyone who has seen
>LA Story knows, the weather reports never contain information as the weather
>is pretty predictable here. :-)
except when i'm there. it always does interesting things when i'm there. ditto
for when i'm in florida. i can put and end to droughts and i can stop rain.
it's quite an amazing thing.
AMYSA
>or when they do have the credits from the movie, they speed it up, so they
>can get
>to the news on time. over here in new york, channels 9 and 11 start their
>news at
>9:58, to get a jump on the competition. horrible, just horrible.
who watches channel 9 in the first place, though? that's wwor, right? i turned
it over there a couple of months ago to see if a reporter from atlanta was up
there (as i had heard) and i'm fairly certain that they were just running an
old broadcast from 1982.
AMYSA
>I mean i understand we'll probably see
>more, but its just those black lines and i have a small tv so its why i
>prefer
>panscan
just to clarify something...just because a show isn't letterboxed doesn't mean
that it's pan and scan. pan and scan is what they do when they take a
widescreen film and format it to fit your oddly shaped television.
it's a format that's been known to cause seizures in small children. :-P
Stephen Fuld
Lynn, are you listening???? You may have a harder job with the TLA than you
thought. Perhaps you will need to overcome supernatural powers. :-)
--
- Stephen Fuld
Lynn
> > >
> > >And of course I never listen to the weather because, as anyone who has
> > >seen LA Story knows, the weather reports never contain information as
> > >the weather is pretty predictable here. :-)
> > >
> >
> > except when i'm there. it always does interesting things when i'm there.
> > ditto for when i'm in florida. i can put and end to droughts and i can
> > stop rain. it's quite an amazing thing.
> >
>
> Lynn, are you listening???? You may have a harder job with the TLA than
> you thought. Perhaps you will need to overcome supernatural powers. :-)
Miss Cleo? Merlin?? Anton LeVey???
--
Lynn
http://users.lmi.net/ennui
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself; but talent instantly recognizes
genius... -Arthur Conan Doyle, "The Valley of Fear"
============================================================================
* West Wing: http://users.lmi.net/ennui/westwing001.htm *
* WingNuts: http://users.lmi.net/ennui/WingNuts.html *
**********************************************************
Pegasus
news:AbP67.15746$gj1.1...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Yes. You can set your TV to stretch the picture to fill the screen...but you
really shouldn't do that on a movie/show. It's only valid for sports as the
distortion ensuing is bad with people on screen. If you leave it with the
bars on the side, it just mean you see it the same as with a 4:3 TV (a 28"
widecreen TV gives a 24" 4:3 picture)
> If you have a 16:9 TV and they broadcast a movie that was originally shot
in
> 2:35 do you have have the letterbox at the top and bottom again?
>
Yes again but the size may vary. If the source is anamorphic (best quality
but on DVDs/laserdiscs only AFAIK) or you zoom the picture (slight loss of
quality, as resolution is decreased), the bars will be much smaller than
they would on a normal 4:3 TV.
On 1:85 formatted films, it pretty much is invisible esp. with the overscan
(the tv is "eating" some of the picture. this happen on almost every TV )
Go have a look here: http://gregl.net/videophile/anamorphic.htm or
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/anamorphic/index.html
for a good explanation on widescreen and anamorphic.
Pegasus
Pegasus
> Snip
>
> does anyone know if they'll be using the full 5.1 sound-field?
>
That would only be useful on the DVD. but considering the show is heavily
dialog-based, I don't see much the point.
Not that'll I complain if they do it :-)
Pegasus
AMYSA
>Miss Cleo?
hey, i'm not miss cleo! my accent is consistent.
Hunter Rose
<jasq...@anet-stl.com> wrote:
>I've never tried to check (and I could, I have a mostly complete set
>of B5 on TNT as well as the first four seasons in first-run mode on
>PTEN), but I do recall one episode on SCI-FI where I was struck with
>the impression (mistaken I'm sure, but very compelling nonetheless)
>that the letterbox version actually was *missing* some content that I
>could have sworn I had seen before. Don't remember the episode
>anymore....
You are correct! When WB prepared the first season of B5 for
letterbox format for the Sci-Fi channel, several episodes were
prepared from the wrong masters. There were many complaints about
tops of heads or chins being cropped, as well as some whoppers with
the wrong FX shot inserted or missing. They redid these episodes
before their next rebroadcast in the cycle.
(One of the FX snafus involved a scene with two people meeting
in an hedge maze; a computer generated background was used to extend
the hedge above the actor's heads. The bad master was missing the
background, so an "EXIT" sign from the stage was clearly visible above
one of the regulars. What was particularly maddening about this
mistake is that it had been made before during the intitial syndicated
broadcast - they cut the episode from the wrong master (ignoring the
producer's instructions). Then they did the *same* thing again in
preparing the letterbox version...)
HR
James Squire
>
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 09:14:31 -0500, James Squire
> <jasq...@anet-stl.com> wrote:
>
> >I've never tried to check (and I could, I have a mostly complete set
> >of B5 on TNT as well as the first four seasons in first-run mode on
> >PTEN), but I do recall one episode on SCI-FI where I was struck with
> >the impression (mistaken I'm sure, but very compelling nonetheless)
> >that the letterbox version actually was *missing* some content that I
> >could have sworn I had seen before. Don't remember the episode
> >anymore....
>
> You are correct! When WB prepared the first season of B5 for
> letterbox format for the Sci-Fi channel, several episodes were
> prepared from the wrong masters. There were many complaints about
> tops of heads or chins being cropped, as well as some whoppers with
> the wrong FX shot inserted or missing. They redid these episodes
> before their next rebroadcast in the cycle.
I heard about that, but honestly didn't notice it. I was thinking of a
second or third season episode.
>
> (One of the FX snafus involved a scene with two people meeting
> in an hedge maze; a computer generated background was used to extend
> the hedge above the actor's heads. The bad master was missing the
> background, so an "EXIT" sign from the stage was clearly visible above
> one of the regulars. What was particularly maddening about this
> mistake is that it had been made before during the intitial syndicated
> broadcast - they cut the episode from the wrong master (ignoring the
> producer's instructions). Then they did the *same* thing again in
> preparing the letterbox version...)
You're not kiddin' ;-) I figure my original PTEN tape of that episode
ought to be a collector's item ;-) That along with the original tape of
"The Gathering" with the Stuart Copeland soundtrack.
"They" were in fact the crew that uploads episodes to the satelitte for
feeding around the country, and there was some kind of snafu. The
original reel they received from WB was fine, but something happened to
it and they had to reconstruct it.
JMS ranted all over rastb5m about going Texas Chainsaw Massacre on
whoever was responsible. By the time that same episode (the season 1
finale, "Chrysalis" by the way) was repeated, the error was fixed.
--
Jim Squire: members.aol.com/jamess1889/friends.html
"Chandler & Monica": www.acusd.edu/~dannys/chanmon.html
"atf Off-Beat Posting Guide": members.aol.com/jamess1889/net_guide.html
"Discuss the Gospel": www.crossings.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If I told you my name is Lorien, what good is that? It tells you
nothing,
but leaves me at a disadvantage. Words have meaning and names have
power.
The universe began with a word, you know. But which came first, the
word
or the thought behind the word? You can't create language without a
thought
and you can't conceive a thought without language. So which created
the
other and thus created the universe?"
-- Lorien, "What Happened to Mr. Garibaldi?"
Chris Free
> "Chris Free" <free2...@aol.com> wrote
> > Snip
> > does anyone know if they'll be using the full 5.1 sound-field?
> >
> That would only be useful on the DVD. but considering the show is heavily
> dialog-based, I don't see much the point.
how about... the full strength of bartlet's low-keyed,
perfect-key, "Colonel, this is the President.
I'm ready to go." over the center-channel --
four air-force-one engines spooling from low idle
to high thrust filling the front and rear channels --
its breaks clicking off over the center-channel --
as it finally rumbles away over the sub-channels while the
breathtaking theme crescendos to overtake all 5.1 speakers.
how about... a crowd cheering for bartlet
during a stump speech over the center channels
while a critical side-conversation about his MS
slowly overtakes the rear channels and then
moves on to dominate the front channels.
how about... sheen saying anything over the
center channel as the theme music swells
to engulf the entire 5.1 sound-field.
i'm not saying these are good ideas -- and
i realize it could be overkill in the wrong
hands -- but artists as skilled as sorkin's
team, if they so desired, could use the
available sound-fields to great advantage.
> Not that'll I complain if they do it :-)
sometime between next season and enjoying all
the episodes on HD-DVD i'll finally have the
TV-room THX certified -- then i won't complain ;)
Rob
> Bugs.
>
> Lottery numbers plastered on the bottom.
>
> Announcements of shows coming up next.
>
> Announcements of what show you're watching at that very moment, as if
> we're all suffering from short term memory loss.
>
> Scrolls from local news stations who seem to think we need to know the
> news before the news actually comes on.... The police caught a murderer.
> Great. Why couldn't I have been informed of that at 10:00 or 11:00. Why
> now? Do you think I have barricades up, waiting with bated breath for
> this news?
>
> *And*, the piece de resistance ... the weather announcements constantly
> popping up.... Either we're having more dangerous weather than ever
> before or these people are getting out of hand. Sometimes I think I'm
> watching the Weather Channel, interrupted periodically by The West Wing.
Every time a cloud shows up in the skies over North Dakota or
Minnesota, we get the "Tornado Coming - We're Doomed" junk covering
the screen. It's bad enough to have look at the maps with flashing
Counties, but they also have to sound their "backup alarm" audible
signal before and during the message, and run the ticker tape across
the bottom 1/3 of the screen :-(
Rob
Canada
Hunter Rose
<jasq...@anet-stl.com> wrote:
>I heard about that, but honestly didn't notice it. I was thinking of
>a second or third season episode.
Quite possibly. My memory is unclear, but WB may have gotten
all the way through half(?) of the third season before JMS discovered
they were using the wrong masters for the letterbox release. He
insisted they redo them all before they appeared in the broadcast
cycle again.
>You're not kiddin' ;-) I figure my original PTEN tape of that
>episode ought to be a collector's item ;-) That along with the
>original tape of "The Gathering" with the Stuart Copeland soundtrack.
Yeah, if I'm not mistaken I have a tape of the original
broadcast and the corrected version shown later that week in the
repeat timeslot. And both versions of "The Gathering". I actually
enjoyed Copeland's score, but of course Franke was perfection and a
wise choice to replace Copeland.
Chen's score for "Crusade" was innovative, but I don't think
it was embraced by the audience. I *think* JMS has gone back to
Franke for the "Legend of the Rangers" movie?
HR
Lynn
>
> >Miss Cleo?
> >
"AMYSA" <am...@aol.comasutra> wrote...
>
> hey, i'm not miss cleo! my accent is consistent.
Nah. That's who I called to try to get advice. I told her some evil,
nefarious woman was hogging the good-looking, sexy men from TWW. She
laughed so hard, she fell off her chair. At first, I thought she was
cracking up over the moat, the electric fence and the dogs, but then
realized it was the charge on my Master Card that filled her with glee.
AMYSA
>Nah. That's who I called to try to get advice. I told her some evil,
>nefarious woman was hogging the good-looking, sexy men from TWW. She
>laughed so hard, she fell off her chair. At first, I thought she was
>cracking up over the moat, the electric fence and the dogs, but then
>realized it was the charge on my Master Card that filled her with glee.
you know she's being sued for...something, right? heh. i'm just sayin...
in all seriousness, she (whoever she is) was supposed to be on the radio here
this morning, but i forgot to get up and listen to it.
James Squire
>
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:18:12 -0500, James Squire
> <jasq...@anet-stl.com> wrote:
>
> Quite possibly. My memory is unclear, but WB may have gotten
> all the way through half(?) of the third season before JMS discovered
> they were using the wrong masters for the letterbox release. He
> insisted they redo them all before they appeared in the broadcast
> cycle again.
You could be right. I had this impression that it was fixed during the
run of the first season, but I really didn't pay very much attention to
it.
>
> >You're not kiddin' ;-) I figure my original PTEN tape of that
> >episode ought to be a collector's item ;-) That along with the
> >original tape of "The Gathering" with the Stuart Copeland soundtrack.
>
> Yeah, if I'm not mistaken I have a tape of the original
> broadcast and the corrected version shown later that week in the
> repeat timeslot. And both versions of "The Gathering". I actually
> enjoyed Copeland's score, but of course Franke was perfection and a
> wise choice to replace Copeland.
Oh, I love Franke's music as well, and to be honest, I preferred JMS's
re-cut to the original director's cut in terms of the script.
>
> Chen's score for "Crusade" was innovative, but I don't think
> it was embraced by the audience. I *think* JMS has gone back to
> Franke for the "Legend of the Rangers" movie?
I liked Chen's score. Not sure about LoTR, but it rings a bell. One
peek at the Lurker's Guide should clear it up though.
Zax
(and I am sure you can tape wide screen format in wide screen format.)