Widescreen vs. Fullscreen demo (Godard's Contempt)

[happyplaneta]

The widescreen format is all a fraud, it is only sales strategy ...

This format appeared in films by the need for film producers to compete with television, it really such a long recording there, it really does is crop the image up and down or using a rectangular template on the lens camera to record the movie. I've seen several films and videos in widescreen and I have always found with many faces and objects cut from above and below.

Search by google: The Widescreen Scam

[griffin324]

@happyplaneta not with anamorphic leneses though.

[TheObfuscatedOne]

Sorry, but it is not a joke! The title should have been "Widescreen vs. Pan-and-Scan".

Pan-and-Scan only has the same height to width ratio as Full Screen; however, it is not Full Screen. The tiny and small Pan-and Scan cropping is then ENLARGED to fit the full screen. If the movie was filmed in full screen it would have the same width but would have a lot more height.

People shopping for TVs/Monitors might research Google's "wide vs full". Google "widescreen scam". for more in depth info.

[TheObfuscatedOne]

This video presents only the half truth and not the whole truth.

The whole truth is that widescreen is actually a smaller portion of a full screen that is not shown here. Widescreen is a misnomer and is actually a short screen. The representation of a full screen within a widescreen is misleading.

A full screen is chopped down to a widescreen size, then, as shown here in this video it is chopped AGAIN to create an even smaller full screen shape out of a widescreen. Chop chop, twice!

[hunterharry2]

@TheObfuscatedOne I hope that was a joke. Contempt was shot in a widescreen ratio. It's original aspect ratio is 2.35 (ie, it is 2.35 times as wide as it is tall), not 1.37 (or Academy ratio). Thus any attempt to chop it to Academy ratio removes information - no information is lost when it is presented in 2.35 as that was the ratio it was shot in.