He is correct, though. I've got no problems with 1.85:1, Cinemascope or Ultra PanaVision 70 in the theater. But that stuff has no place at home. The same goes for the audio mixes of movie theaters. It's nice when you have a dynamic range that can do everything between toned-down dialog and explosions, loudness-wise. For a BluRay version, I expect the sound to be radically compressed. People have neighbors and some people have TV screens without an acre of screen real estate.
This is not an opinion, it's not up for debate either. This is a fact. If you disagree, you lack understanding and technical knowledge. It's that simple.
>He is not correct, though. I've got problems with 1.85:1, Cinemascope or Ultra PanaVision 70 in the theater. But that stuff has place at home. The same goes for the audio mixes of movie theaters. It's nice when you have a dynamic range that can do everything between toned-down dialog and explosions, loudness-wise. For a BluRay version, I expect the sound to be radically compressed. People have neighbors and some people have TV screens without an acre of screen real estate. >This is an opinion, it's up for debate either. This is not a fact. If you disagree, you don't lack understanding and technical knowledge. It's that simple
shut the frick up
the frick? shut up
He is correct, though. I've got no problems with 1.85:1, Cinemascope or Ultra PanaVision 70 in the theater. But that stuff has no place at home. The same goes for the audio mixes of movie theaters. It's nice when you have a dynamic range that can do everything between toned-down dialog and explosions, loudness-wise. For a BluRay version, I expect the sound to be radically compressed. People have neighbors and some people have TV screens without an acre of screen real estate.
This is not an opinion, it's not up for debate either. This is a fact. If you disagree, you lack understanding and technical knowledge. It's that simple.
>He is not correct, though. I've got problems with 1.85:1, Cinemascope or Ultra PanaVision 70 in the theater. But that stuff has place at home. The same goes for the audio mixes of movie theaters. It's nice when you have a dynamic range that can do everything between toned-down dialog and explosions, loudness-wise. For a BluRay version, I expect the sound to be radically compressed. People have neighbors and some people have TV screens without an acre of screen real estate.
>This is an opinion, it's up for debate either. This is not a fact. If you disagree, you don't lack understanding and technical knowledge. It's that simple
gb2 gaia
Get your mommy on the keyboard for me, will you? I'd like to have a word with her.
>Dont Get your mommy on the keyboard for me, will you? I'd like to not have a word with her.
>But that stuff has no place at home.
QFT.
frick the shut up
sneed the chuck up
you can make this thread as many times as you like, but it'll never happen
New Wes Anderson movie was mostly square. I enjoyed it.
Why would anyone enjoy the films of wes anderson
Why not just use the full image?
Watch your shitty soap operas and sitcoms on your square box sure. Don't try to make us watch it.
wheres the one for phones
sneed
Directors are free to use 4:3 , the Blonde movie just did. Its just that npc idiots can handle black bars on the side.
NPCs don't even fricking notice when Nolan switches around in the cinema or on Bluray.
Nolan is for NPCs
For me its 2.35:1
Widescreen unironically gives you anxiety and rewires your brain into being a prey animal.
yes, we know you're a predator, anon.
but widescreen still fits in the FOV of predator eyes
Not quite. Hunters focus on a relatively squarish point in front of them. Not constantly scanning periphery for threats.
No 8:5
3:2 should be the standard for both Photography and Cinematography
yuck
NO
WE NEED TO GO
W I D E R