SCREEN-L Archives

December 1994, Week 2


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Jeremy Butler <[log in to unmask]>
Wed, 14 Dec 1994 09:36:14 CST
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (22 lines)
Author:  [log in to unmask] ( Frank Davis )
Date:    12/14/94 2:45 PM
[Editor's note:  This message was submitted to SCREEN-L by the "Author" noted
above, and not by Jeremy Butler ([log in to unmask]).]
Hello Greg,
Thanks for a very interesting post on aspect ratio and letterboxing. I, for one,
would very much like to learn more about this topic, so please do send info on
how to get the publications you mentioned(they are journals, I assume?).
I also have a question, I'm quoting from your post:
"Someone mentioned microphones coming into shots on films that were shot full
frame for 1.85 projection."
What is the meaning of "full frame" in this context? My understanding is that
films shot for widescreen are filmed with anamorphic lenses which squeeze the
image onto 35mm film and that, during projection, the image is unsqueezed,
but that you still get what was seen by the camera. Am I wrong here? Is there
some masking of the image before it is printed?
Frank Davis
[log in to unmask]
PS. I couldn`t understand your e-mail address, or I'd have replied personally.