Another Asinine Aspect Ahead!
Collapse
X
-
-
Well, with PHOENICIAN SCHEME there's also some windowboxed content INSIDE the F-147 Image as seen here:
IMG_20250529_161041.jpg
(Side masking Set to 1.47:1)
Comment
-
boooooooo!well, with phoenician scheme there's also some windowboxed content inside the f-147 image as seen here:
IMG_20250529_161041.jpg
(side masking set to 1.47:1)Comment
-
Whatever aspect ratio Phoenician is in, one reviewer wrote that "it was the worst film he saw
at Cannes" this year. Another wrote: “The Phoenician Scheme,” is bad to the point of parody".
and a couple of stories mentioned that although he got a standing ovation, there was also a
noticeable amount of "boos" after the Cannes screening. I guess ticket sales will be the final
metric of if the movie is "good" or "bad" in the public's eye. I'm basically agnostic about Anderson.
I find his live action films visually unique and interesting, but nothing I'd want to watch twice.His
stop-motion animated "Fantastic Mr Fox" and "Isle Of Dogs" are a couple of my favorite films.Comment
-
Those window boxed scenes would be yet more evidence to avoid keystone cropping at all costs, which might explain a bit of their direction with the projection letter and chart.Comment
-
Hi friends
May I know what is this notification from barco projector ,any one know kindly update
Thanks
Rajendran ParanthamanComment
-
Would you happen to have a high res version of this Framing Chart?Another week, another advance preview, (with another celebrity guest) and yet another
asinine aspect ratio will be heading to your screens soon. Wes Anderson's new flick
"The Phoenician Scheme" opens the first week of June here in the US, but I've got
an advance preview/premiere this week.
And this weeks wacky aspect ratio is. . . . wait for it . . . . . . 1:47 !
Heres the phucking phoenician phocus and phraming chart:
PhoenicianFraming.jpg
The ingest notes say: "The black bars on the left and right of the screen are normal"
NO THEY'RE NOT!!!!!!!
Comment
-
Hi, I don’t know the answer but I suggest you repost your question as a new topic in the digital category, rather than as a reply. More eyes will see it that way.Comment
-
-
Did some rudimentary work with our smaller flat screen to prepare for The Phoenician Scheme now that we've officially booked it. I am not a professional when it comes to using the NEC Digital Cinema Communicator tool to adjust screen shapes, zooms, and positioning, but I think I got about as close as I can with the 20 minutes I was given on shift today to make some adjustments ahead of its run starting Friday. I'm going to try and tighten up the sides after hours as well.
Our installer had to do some really bizarre work to contend with the dimensions of this screen. It's definitely not a perfect 1.85, but flat shows are really solid in this house.
I feel okay with this, while acknowledging that I have work to do long term to be more proficient.You do not have permission to view this gallery.
This gallery has 2 photos.Comment
-
Our flat keystone loses more than that in the bottom corners, and have been told we are still within acceptable standards. I think you are fine. Especially considering this film never intends to use the pillar boxes, except maybe a rating or studio card.Did some rudimentary work with our smaller flat screen to prepare for The Phoenician Scheme now that we've officially booked it. I am not a professional when it comes to using the NEC Digital Cinema Communicator tool to adjust screen shapes, zooms, and positioning, but I think I got about as close as I can with the 20 minutes I was given on shift today to make some adjustments ahead of its run starting Friday. I'm going to try and tighten up the sides after hours as well.
Our installer had to do some really bizarre work to contend with the dimensions of this screen. It's definitely not a perfect 1.85, but flat shows are really solid in this house.
I feel okay with this, while acknowledging that I have work to do long term to be more proficient.
Speaking of oddballs. I showed “The Assassin (2016)” yesterday. I was worried cause the internet led me to believe it was 1.41:1, which was gonna bit a new custom one for us. Not a huge deal cause we have the buffer time for such configurations.
But upon quick bouncing through it, I found the ONE scene presented in 1.85:1. *facepalm* I just showed it in 1.85 keystoned and all, never bothered to compare it to 1.38 or other approximates on hand. Glad I looked first, 1.85 studio card was a good clue to investigate.
The visiting programmer even commented “oh yeah, everyone asks about that choice”. Apparently the director’s response is “because her musical instrument is long”, wanted it all in frame.
if I had motorized sides I would have considered an internal masking set of cues, cause the rest of the film suffered for it.
Comment
-
Now this gave me a real good laugh:
You do not have permission to view this gallery.
This gallery has 1 photos.Comment
Comment