Borders- Bluray. How can I make it full screen (shops can!)

[jimismint07]

Hi, when i watch a blu ray film, there are borders on the top and bottom, is there any way of getting rid of this and keeping the same detail and clarity to fit the whole screen? Im asking this because in shops like dixons, when they have a blu ray player on show, its always full screen with films like spiderman 3, casino royale etc showing it off and i cant seem to get this and i don't want to just 'zoom' on my tv as it goes blurry. Why is this? how come I/we can't get the fill on full screen and they can? or can we?
im using a ps3 by the way as my blu ray player, cheers, jim.

[NicolasB]

Some films are shot with an aspect ratio of ~1.85:1 and therefore fit quite nicely on 16:9 screen. Other films are shot with a 2.35:1 ratio - in other words, each frame of the film is wider in comparison to its height. If a film is shot in 2.35:1 then there are two ways of viewing it: either you cut the sides of the picture, but fill up the screen with what is left; or your shrink the picture until you can get all of it onto a 16:9 screen, leaving black bars top and bottom. The latter is, to my mind, the better option, and I think most other people would agree: if you cut the sides off, you're not seeing the film in the way that the director intended you to.

[dan1979]

Surely you must have experienced this before when watching regular DVD's?

[Rob100]

Make it stop, not again

[jimismint07]

yeh i hav on regular dvds, but how come in the shop its full screen and full of detail and my casino royale disc isnt? i dont mind borders but if i had a choice i'd prefer not to hav them.

[Rob100]

I haven't seen what you're talking about, but presumably it's a demo disc?

BTW Spiderman (the 1st one) was shot in at 1.85:1 aspect ratio which will (good as) fill a 1.78:1 (16:9) screen.

For Casino Royal to be shown full screen it must be cropped.

[choddo2006]

Originally Posted by jimismint07

yeh i hav on regular dvds, but how come in the shop its full screen and full of detail and my casino royale disc isnt? i dont mind borders but if i had a choice i'd prefer not to hav them.

I don't see how it's possible. You can't run a 2.35:1 film in full screen and not lose something.

[roman-r]

Originally Posted by jimismint07

yeh i hav on regular dvds, but how come in the shop its full screen and full of detail and my casino royale disc isnt? i dont mind borders but if i had a choice i'd prefer not to hav them.

If you buy a scaler you can zoom into the picture which is my prefered route.

For SD DVDs that can be relatively affordable (£200ish Iscan HD) but for HD material you'll need to fork out £800+

Maybe the TV in the shop has a zoom function but if it does it will distort the image (every will be tall) where as a scaler can zoom in cutting sides off and keeping image proprtionally correct.

[roman-r]

Originally Posted by NicolasB

if you cut the sides off, you're not seeing the film in the way that the director intended you to.

Note, the director intended 2.35 to provide a wider than 1.78 picture.

Not a shorter image that in effect makes the picture smaller - The Director intended you to feel the impact of greater size.

Personally I believe zooming in can often gets you closer to the image the director intended. That is if you are finding 1.78 images a better size than 2.35 which it usually is in most standard home setups.

[Randell]

Originally Posted by roman-r

Personally I believe zooming in can often gets you closer to the image the director intended. That is if you are finding 1.78 images a better size than 2.35 which it usually is in most standard home setups.

No. because you are losing some of the image, and the framing, as the director wants it, is lost. If you find the picture too small, get a bigger screen.

[TylerDurden]

This thread has good stuff regarding full screen and zooming in.

[roman-r]

Originally Posted by Randell

No. because you are losing some of the image, and the framing, as the director wants it, is lost. If you find the picture too small, get a bigger screen.

Of course a bigger screen can provide the correct 2.35 solution.

However it will then mean any 1.78 or 1.85 material will be too big

Yes that is right. The Director of a 2.35 movie expected you to watch it on a display so the height would be the same as 1.78 but you get more left and right.

As soon as it adds bars top and botton you can't get both 1.78/1.85 AND 2.35 to be as the Directors intended. It's not possible.

All I can say is I never feel short changed with any aspect ratio as I always get the same height.

Lastly, movies for years have been made with 1.78 in mind so 99.9% of the time nothing is lost.

Keep an eye out on 2.35 edges it's pretty quite out there

My ED Plasma is 37" and I sit 6.5feet way - IMHO it's a great balance.

[roman-r]

Originally Posted by TylerDurden

This thread has good stuff regarding full screen and zooming in.

Totally disagree with them and to back me up the post with the pictures chooses to compare 2.35 with 1..33 - just shows he didn't feel comfortable actually showing against 1.78

You don't even have to go to 1.78 as adding a little extra hight is totally unoticeable so you can see 2.35 at about 1.9 using full screen and never have to acustom your sight between little guys in 2.35 and big guys in 1.77 as they will all be the same size roughly by zooming into your 2.35 movie.

Dramatic effect of a wide 2.35 picture is lost unless you get a huge telly. If you do get a huge telly 1.78 will seem either too big or eventually you will get used to 1.78 movies and will feel again that your 2.35 is too small - another bigger telly upgrade then required.

Freeview will also look too big in 1.78 if you get a telly to suit what you decide at the time as the right height for 2.35.

I say, get a scaler, zoom into your 2.35 and let your troubles to gone

37" at 6.5 feet sorts me out lovely - zoomed in on 2.35 to fill screen of course.

Yes I do feel strongly on the subject

[choddo2006]

Originally Posted by roman-r

Note, the director intended 2.35 to provide a wider than 1.78 picture.

Not a shorter image that in effect makes the picture smaller - The Director intended you to feel the impact of greater size.

Personally I believe zooming in can often gets you closer to the image the director intended. That is if you are finding 1.78 images a better size than 2.35 which it usually is in most standard home setups.

Sit closer You've "only" got a 37" screen too which doesn't help. I'd take black borders every single time. Human eyes are designed to work with a wide view and it's far more effective plus of course you get the full image the director framed as others have said.

[NicolasB]

Originally Posted by roman-r

Yes that is right. The Director of a 2.35 movie expected you to watch it on a display so the height would be the same as 1.78 but you get more left and right.

One can do this with some front-projection systems if one feels sufficiently strongly about it.