|
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Netflix fooling with run speeds and pissing filmmakers off
|
Harold Hallikainen
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 906
From: Denver, CO, USA
Registered: Aug 2009
|
posted 11-01-2019 01:02 PM
Back when I worked in radio stations, the DJ's had fun editing songs with a splicing block and razor blade. An example is at 59:10 at http://kcpralumni.org//wiki/uploads/GregGolden/KCPR_Anderson_and_Cuddeback_6_Dec_1970.mp3 .
Stations would also put tape around the capstan on the turntables to speed them up so other stations sounded like they dragged in comparison.
Later, 25/7 introduced the Audio Time Manager ( https://www.telosalliance.com/25-Seven/25-Seven-Systems-Legacy-Products ) that reduced the run time of programs mostly by reducing the space between words. From the brochure: "Imagine a longer hour. You could run more local news, promos, ad-libs, whatever you need! …a 10% speed-up with no pitch change,
glitches or artifacts, so smooth that listeners won’t even know it’s in use, even on stereo music. Audio Time Manager’s proprietary algorithms are designed for today’s radio needs. Depending on program material, you will be able to add several minutes an hour with complete intelligibility."
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur Allen
Film Handler
Posts: 99
From: Renton, WA, USA
Registered: Aug 2001
|
posted 11-25-2019 11:00 PM
quote: Jesse Skeen
Even worse is how the interface breaks into the end credits to promote something else- it's done by a program that actually senses credits too, not even by an actual human. This is what they did to Schindler's List, you wouldn't even bring the lights up this early:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiiC-2gwuyo
I shot that and uploaded it before cancelling. I loved Netflix when they started even though their quality wasn't the greatest, they were a great value but this is entirely unacceptable. They refuse to even respond to complaints about it. The "Skip Intro" display that appears during intros is unacceptable also- they could make that skippable without showing any crap on the screen for those who actually want to see it.
Today I noticed a change. Previously the credits shrank, but the music kept going. As of this morning, it stops dead and you can arrow over to press a button to continue watching the credits. At least you won't miss a credit while you're fumbling for the remote, so that's an improvement, I guess. This is with my preferences in my profile on the website set to keep AutoPlay off. In the week or two before this, it was confusing because the Disney+ little box is on the right of the screen, and Netflix's is to the left. I just figured it out and they change again.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 11-26-2019 12:14 AM
quote: Justin Hamaker
Don't a lot of film makers today shoot with a 16:9 frame regardless of the intended theatrical aspect ratio?
Most professional D-cinema cameras have image capture chips with a roughly 16:9 aspect ratio (either exactly 16:9 or a little off of that). Many movies are shot using the full area of the camera's imaging chips. Then they crop into the image, re-compose shots and do all sorts of other crap that reminds me of panning and scanning.
The Arri Alexa65 is an exception to the norm. It has an image sensor roughly the same size and aspect ratio of a 5/65mm film frame. That would seem to be a better choice for shooting 'scope ratio movies. But, like most d-cinema camera systems, the "filmmakers" end up bastardizing the output anyway. The anamorphic look is all the rage. And they even use anamorphic lenses on the Alexa65 cameras when they don't really need to do that. To make the absurd joke even worse the fuckers will stick "Filmed in Ultra Panavision 70" on the Goddamned end credits. Assholes.
Some cameras have image sensors the same size as a VistaVision film frame. I think Red has at least one or more camera models in that category (even with 8K capture). I guess we should be looking forward to blurbs like "Filmed in Super Technirama 70" pretty soon for movies using these cameras.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Just about all Hollywood movies are CROPPED to 'scope ratio. None of these "digitally filmed" movies are shot the way a real 35mm film shot in 'scope is photographed. Given how ubiquitous the 'scope format is with movies why doesn't any cinema camera companies (like Panavision, Arri, etc) create a proper d-cinema camera to shoot movies in 'scope with the anamorphic look? All they need to do is develop an imaging chip the same size as a 4-perf 35mm film frame. It would probably deliver far better image quality than those tiny "Super35" image sensors yet cost less to produce than a VistaVision sized sensor. They might achieve a more faithful 'scope look combining that square-ish shaped sensor with anamorphic lenses meant to expose the same shape of frame on film.
I don't know. It just seems obvious to me. The approach might be better than this dopey Digital TechniScope bullshit that's all the tyranny now. A 3K tall by 4K wide resolution image sensor might work really well.
quote: Martin Brooks
If a film was intended for 2.4:1 theatrically that's how I want to see it on a TV. And in the cases I've seen, it's not that the 16:9 version opens up the top and bottom - it's that the sides are cropped off. As far as I'm concerned, the theatrical version is canon.
It goes both ways. They'll crop inward into the intended 2.4:1 theatrical image. They'll also open the matte and incorporate imagery cropped out of the theatrical version. This practice has been going on for well over 30 years. It goes all the way back to when the Super35 format became popular during the initial home video business boom with VHS tapes. Today we all have rectangular shaped TV screens and computer monitors. But still the practice persists. The differences are only a little more subtle today.
quote: Martin Brooks
Somewhat strangely, I have seen shows that were always intended for TV presented in 1.85, not 1.78. The most recent season of Stranger Things comes to mind and there have been others.
There are TV series now being presented in 'scope aspect ratio. Netflix has plenty of movies that never played in theaters cropped down to 'scope.
To repeat what I've said before, I think one valid reason why the 'scope aspect ratio is so popular is cost cutting. Fewer pixels to render. D-cinema 'scope has fewer pixels than the flat format. Scope is the lowest resolution format. Hence the Digital TechniScope insults to digital 'scope movies.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic