This is topic Imitation of Life (1959) 1.66 or 1.85 in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=002850
Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 12-03-2001, 03:59 PM:
I'm hoping that someone out there can help me on this one. I am showing a print of Imitation of Life, the 1959 version, this evening. The reels are marked 1.66, but that seems like an odd aspect ratio for an american film. I would tend to think that the film would be 1.85, but maybe there is something in the history of widescreen cinema that I am not aware of. 1.85 was used by this point, but was 1.66 used for some reason? If so, do you know why, or if it was used very widely in the US? Any info would be appreciated. Thanks.
Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 12-03-2001, 10:31 PM:
I'm not sure when flat projection was standardized to 1.85 in the U.S., but 1.66, 1.75 and 1.85 were all used by various studios in the fifties.According to the book Widescreen Cinema by John Colton, "Paramount, Republic and RKO opted for 1.66:1; M-G-M for 1.75:1; Warners, Universal, and Columbia for 1.85:1. In April 1953 Paramount released Shane, suggesting that it be projected at 1.66:1."
Posted by Joe Beres (Member # 678) on 12-03-2001, 11:24 PM:
Paul, that is exactly the kind of info I was looking for. I am going to look for that book. I ended up running the film in 1.66, opting to show more just in case. Most of the film might have looked better in 1.85, but there were shots that looked perfect in 1.66. Thanks again, Paul.
Posted by Jeffry L. Johnson (Member # 453) on 12-04-2001, 09:09 AM:
One thing to be aware of, especially in the early stages of "widescreen" is the original cinematography may not have been composed for widescreen. Even though Paramount recommended projecting SHANE at 1.66:1, it was photographed not with that aspect ratio in mind, but with the traditional 1.37:1. See Early Evolution from Academy to Wide Screen Ratios.Another example is INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, which was photographed at 1.37:1 but converted to Superscope for release.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-05-2001, 05:00 AM:
If anyone is trying to get hold of 'Widescreen Cinema' then (just to be really pedantic and annoy you all) it's by John Belton, not Colton, and was published by Harvard UP in 1992. Dunno if it's still in print. Another useful book for describing changes in shooting and exhibition practices is Barry Salt, 'Film Style and Technology' (London, Starword, 1991).