Other than Lagan, MK and Mission Kashmir we can safely conclude all DEI and DEI/EROS DVD's can be added to the top spot except a few. And we can also add some EVP titles.

Why don't we list out the few that doesn't make up the list? Like Desh Premi?



Edited By ganti on 1029789274

I don't consider DEI-EROS titles as perfect as they all are 1.85:1 and hence either cropped from the sides or from the top and bottom. Therefore I prefer OAR 4:3 titles. After these top DVDs, DEI anamorphic and DEI-EROS titles will be next in my list.

Rana



Edited By rana on 1029846936

Rana,
My setup doesn't provide me the flexibility of enjoying the 4:3 movies properly as my screen is fixed with 16:9 aspect ratio. I rarely watch 4:3 materials. I prefer these cropped movies than 4:3, just like HBO HD movies.




Edited By ganti on 1029790621

What's the difference between watching EROS-DEI's 1.85:1 DVDs as opposed to DEI's 4:3 DVDs on your Wide-screen TV??


Rana

re-submitted in the next post.

Rana



Edited By rana on 1029864720

I could guess that. But, then, how do you watch 1.85:1 (DEI-EROS) letterboxed DVDs. The way you describe it, you will get black bars on all 4 sides of your screen??

Rana

Rana,
1.85:1 material fills the entire screen. I don't need to mask any part of the screen.



Edited By ganti on 1029865374

But you have to zoom into a 4:3 image. How much does the quality degrade?

Ganti, I expected this. Then, why don't you let 4:3 picture fill up the whole screen. The difference is that instead of cropping just the top and bottom black bars, you actually crop the top and bottom portion of the actual picture. This may be a sin, but you will discover that in most of the 4:3 frames, the top and bottom portions of the picture are redundant. This is what DragunR2 mentioned in one of his posts on Aspect Ratios.

Also note that this is what many of the DEI-EROS's 1.85:1 DVDs are. That is how 4:3 films were changed to 1.85:1 DVDs i.e. by chopping top and bottom of the film picture. Example: Mr Natwar Lal, Zanjeer,etc.

Rana

P.S.
I noticed DragunR2's post later.



Edited By rana on 1029866391

I was questioning whether 1.33:1 films of the late 60s and 70s weren't meant to be matted to 1.66:1 or 1.85:1. Many times the frame has some headroom at the top, which looks kind of awkward in a 1.33:1 film. If anyone here knows a someone who would know for sure (projectionist, distributor, etc.) please ask them.

This is what I do with my 1.78:1 widescreen TV's picture format setting: -
* When I watch a movie with its original 2.35:1 ratio, I only stretch the top and bottom to do away with the black bars and the images appear tall.

* When I watch a 4:3 (1.33:1) movie, I pillar box my tv to avoid quality degradation and to prevent everyone from look fat.

* Also, when I watch a widescreen movie which is masked to 1.85:1, I pillar box it to avoid quality degradation and to prevent everyone from look fat.

* And when I watch a normal 1.78:1 widescreen movies, I do nothing to watch it as it is.

Some of us are not fortunate to have the newer tvs which let you watch a movie how it is intended to be seen. My older movies will be from top to bottom with side bars and the newer movies will be from side to side with the bars top and bottom. I recently watched the Eros=DEI version of Hum Aap Hain kaun and Chachi 420