rana wrote:
That's a great referrence Ganti. I didn't know that all these terms/ phrases have been summed up some where.
BTW, one yhing you forgot to mention; Indian DVDs are termed Anamorphic as it is a saleable feature. They may or may not be enhanced for Widescreen TVs. Just like they claim DD 5.1 even if same audio panned in all 6 channels.
Regarding your enq about the link about "Anamorphic" for film only: I have read it many a times, don't remember where?? Most likely I read in the WidescreenReview Magazine. I'm sure DragunR2 can clarify this issue. He is expert in Film/ Cinematography.
Rana
I'm sure that most official Indian DVDs advertising "anamorphic" are indeed enhanced for 16:9 TVs.It doesn't mean the quality is any good, as we know too well.
I'm no expert in film or cinematography. I just know some of the basics. Martin Hart, who runs widescreenmuseum.com, is the real expert.
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/squeeze.htm
If the word anamorphic seems like Greek to you then don't feel bad. Anamorphic's roots ARE Greek. According to Athens based Director of Photography Argyris Theos the word is derived thusly...
"ANAMORPHICOS" is a composite adjective that derives from the words "ANA" and "MORPHI".
"ANA" is a preposition that is equal to the English "RE".
"MORPHI" is a noun that means "SHAPE".
"ANAMORPHICOS" in Greek, "ANAMORPHIC" in English is by consequence "HE WHO IS BEING RESHAPED".
In its Anglicized form, it is sometimes defined as "a controlled distortion". A picture, created with a deliberate distortion can be viewed as normal with an appropriate de-anamorphoser. In the case of the motion picture, anamorphic lenses squeeze a wide image onto a narrow film frame. Projection through a similar anamorphic lens displays the image on the screen in its full, undistorted, width.
Anamorphic lenses are referred to by their compression (or expansion, in the case of projection optics) ratio. A 2:1 lens squeezes into the film frame an image 100% wider than a normal lens. A 1.5:1 squeezes in an image that is 50% wider, a 1.33:1 squeezes the image by 33%, etc. Most 35mm anamorphic films are made to be projected with 2:1 lenses. In 70mm, the only squeeze factor used theatrically was a modest 1.25:1 (MGM Camera 65 AKA Ultra Panavision).
So while using "anamorphic" to describe a DVD that is enhanced for 16:9 TVs probably isn't absolutely wrong, using the phrases "enhanced for 16:9 TVs" or "16:9 enhanced" are a little clearer. But I don't think there are too many people reading "1.85:1 anamorphic widescreen" on a DVD and being totally confused.
Login 
Register
FAQ
Search
