Question:
I own the R2 release of Barry Lyndon, which has the film, transferred in 1.59:1 non-anamorphic. I always assumed that this aspect was how the film was intended to be seen. However I am now watching the film on TV broadcast in 1.66:1 non-anamorphic.
In what aspect was this film intended to bee seen?
:rolleyes:
...the only correct, absolutely and utterly and indisputably faithful-to-the-late-Maestro's-explicitly-expressed-wishes AR for Barry Lyndon is 1.621354:1...
Q.E.D.
. . . :| . . .
I do detect a slight undercurrent of sarcasm in your post....
Sorry I was late in replying but I was busy comparing and measuring My DVD of Barry L with the TV broadcast using a ruler and magnifying glass.
Seriously though, it would simply seem that the 1.59:1 DVD transfer has had the matting slightly lifted letting you see more of the picture. So no cropping has been done to the DVD release! (Breaths sigh of relief)
:clap:
1.59:1 isn't a ratio showable in any cinema that I know of - not even the NFT (which has about 12 ratios available to it).
I suspect the film was matted in camera to 1.59:1 (which makes the DVD effectively open-matte as we're seeing the whole frame), but it was certainly intended for 1.66:1. When we showed <i>Barry Lyndon</i> at Southampton University in 1986, the print came with a very long and detailed note from Kubrick, talking about how bright the projector lamp should be, etc. As for the ratio, the note specified that the film should be shown in 1.66:1, but failing that not wider than 1.75:1.
Originally posted by Gary Couzens
1.59:1 isn't a ratio showable in any cinema that I know of - not even the NFT (which has about 12 ratios available to it).
I suspect the film was matted in camera to 1.59:1 (which makes the DVD effectively open-matte as we're seeing the whole frame), but it was certainly intended for 1.66:1. When we showed <i>Barry Lyndon</i> at Southampton University in 1986, the print came with a very long and detailed note from Kubrick, talking about how bright the projector lamp should be, etc. As for the ratio, the note specified that the film should be shown in 1.66:1, but failing that not wider than 1.75:1.
...Thank you! Thank you!! Thank you!!! ... I remember (but had no way of proving it, so many years after the fact), when the movie was shown in Lucerne, where I was living at the time, this very same "long and detailed note" was displayed - framed - in the lobby of the cinema ... the owner had added a note of her own, explaining that such a message was highly unusual, and assuring her esteemed clients that the film would be projected just the way Mr Kubrick requested... (and a stunningly beautiful film it is, too! - perhaps my favourite SK, with 2002 and The Killing close seconds...)
. . . :D . . .
Originally posted by Hendrik
...with 2002 and The Killing close seconds...)
What's "2002" then? ;)
...:| ...
...:D ...
...oops!... (it's old age creeping up on me and no way to stop it)
. . . :( . . .
In what aspect was this film intended to bee seen?
:rolleyes:
Answers:
...the only correct, absolutely and utterly and indisputably faithful-to-the-late-Maestro's-explicitly-expressed-wishes AR for Barry Lyndon is 1.621354:1...
Q.E.D.
. . . :| . . .
Answers:
I do detect a slight undercurrent of sarcasm in your post....
Sorry I was late in replying but I was busy comparing and measuring My DVD of Barry L with the TV broadcast using a ruler and magnifying glass.
Seriously though, it would simply seem that the 1.59:1 DVD transfer has had the matting slightly lifted letting you see more of the picture. So no cropping has been done to the DVD release! (Breaths sigh of relief)
:clap:
Answers:
1.59:1 isn't a ratio showable in any cinema that I know of - not even the NFT (which has about 12 ratios available to it).
I suspect the film was matted in camera to 1.59:1 (which makes the DVD effectively open-matte as we're seeing the whole frame), but it was certainly intended for 1.66:1. When we showed <i>Barry Lyndon</i> at Southampton University in 1986, the print came with a very long and detailed note from Kubrick, talking about how bright the projector lamp should be, etc. As for the ratio, the note specified that the film should be shown in 1.66:1, but failing that not wider than 1.75:1.
Answers:
Originally posted by Gary Couzens
1.59:1 isn't a ratio showable in any cinema that I know of - not even the NFT (which has about 12 ratios available to it).
I suspect the film was matted in camera to 1.59:1 (which makes the DVD effectively open-matte as we're seeing the whole frame), but it was certainly intended for 1.66:1. When we showed <i>Barry Lyndon</i> at Southampton University in 1986, the print came with a very long and detailed note from Kubrick, talking about how bright the projector lamp should be, etc. As for the ratio, the note specified that the film should be shown in 1.66:1, but failing that not wider than 1.75:1.
...Thank you! Thank you!! Thank you!!! ... I remember (but had no way of proving it, so many years after the fact), when the movie was shown in Lucerne, where I was living at the time, this very same "long and detailed note" was displayed - framed - in the lobby of the cinema ... the owner had added a note of her own, explaining that such a message was highly unusual, and assuring her esteemed clients that the film would be projected just the way Mr Kubrick requested... (and a stunningly beautiful film it is, too! - perhaps my favourite SK, with 2002 and The Killing close seconds...)
. . . :D . . .
Answers:
Originally posted by Hendrik
...with 2002 and The Killing close seconds...)
What's "2002" then? ;)
...:| ...
...:D ...
Answers:
...oops!... (it's old age creeping up on me and no way to stop it)
. . . :( . . .
1 2