No Blu-Ray and 4:3 Aspect Ratio?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-8 of 8 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 18 Apr 2011 04:07:34 BDT
Last edited by the author on 18 Apr 2011 04:09:11 BDT
Franco says:
I have not yet watched The Wire, not one episode. I am of course interested in watching it as it has widespread acclaim from both critics and viewers.

However, I find it bizarre that such an acclaimed programme has not yet been transferred to Blu-Ray. Worst still, what the hell were the producers thinking when they decided to film it in 4:3? Widescreen television has been around for many years now, and although its popularity has surged within the past few years, how did they not have the foresight to film 16:9? The show is not even that old, beginning in 2002. The Sopranos began 1999 and all filmed in 16:9.

If I am horribly mistaken on the aspect ration then feel free to rebuke my rant. Not that it will deter me from eventually watching The Wire, I am just stunned by the stupidity of the producers!

Posted on 26 Apr 2011 14:40:03 BDT
N. Snel-Hest says:
This will never come to Blu-Ray, as it was shot in SD / 4:3.

The Wire was originally planned to be shot in 16:9, however at the last moment David Simon kicked up a fuss. Essentially, he felt the format suited the subject matter; 16:9, according to him, added a gloss or movie-like element to series, whereas 4:3 was more claustrophobic and taut.

Unfortunately, this turned out to be an idiotic decision considering almost everybody views DVDs from a screen with a 16:9 or 16:10 aspect ratio.

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Apr 2011 17:36:56 BDT
Last edited by the author on 26 Apr 2011 17:39:30 BDT
Franco says:
Thanks for the reply N. Snel-Hest.

Well that certainty clears that up. It seems like David Simon was attempting to be avant-garde and unconventional, but instead, turned out to be completely idiotic, as you rightly say. I mean, why wonder anyone want to limit what can be included in a shot/frame? It could have always been re-edited after filming to see what the shot looked like in 4:3, then a decision could have been made - but for most people (including any director) the decision is a no-brainer from the start.

Despite this I will still watch it, but such a shame nonetheless.

Thanks again.

Posted on 18 May 2011 14:00:40 BDT
J. Carr says:
I've seen the series 3 times. Firstly on a standard DVD player in 4:3, then twice on a blu-ray player which automatically stretched it to 16:9 without losing any of the edges.

MUCH better in 16:9. Simon is a genius, but to film in 4:3 was a baffling decision.

In reply to an earlier post on 18 May 2011 14:43:10 BDT
Franco says:
The problem with stretching is that you gain no more picture, and it alters the dimensions making people look squashed and fat. If something is in 4:3 then it ought really to be watched in 4:3. But this show should have been film 16:9.

Posted on 21 Nov 2011 10:50:15 GMT
Buffdaddy123 says:
Totally true but i just find it so hard to watch a Fullscreen image with the black side bars, i still find myself stretching to the widescreen ratio just to rid from these black bars.

Posted on 11 Dec 2013 13:30:44 GMT
Martel says:
On dvd it's 4:3? We can change fullscreen on PC and TV i believe.. 1:33.1 what is it?

In reply to an earlier post on 14 Dec 2013 08:14:41 GMT
Franco says:
Yeah but if the source is
4:3 then any changes will simply stretch the image.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Participants:  5
Total posts:  8
Initial post:  18 Apr 2011
Latest post:  14 Dec 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions
This discussion is about