Frank Davis writes:
>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?
There's a difference between 1.85 widescreen and anamorphic widescreen.
Anamorphic works as you describe above, but 1.85 is done without anamorphic
lenses. Instead, the film is shot onto regular 35mm film and fills the entire
35mm frame (hence, "full frame"). *When projected* the tops and bottoms of the
full-frame image are masked out--much like in letterboxing--and the
frame-within-the-frame is enlarged to fill the entire screen.
Hence, a widescreen image (1.85) is created using regular 1.33 frames of film.
'Course, directors/cinematographers compose their images with this projection in
mind (and it's also marked in the viewfinder), but the masking does not take
place until the projection process. (Though, in contradiction to this, some
films do have the masking optically added before the release prints are sent
There's a good explanation of it, with illustrations, in David Bordwell and
Kristin Thompson's FILM ART; and my own TELEVISION: CRITICAL METHODS AND
APPLICATIONS (Wadsworth, 1994) explains how it works and how the transfer to
video affects it.
Jeremy Butler [log in to unmask]
SCREEN-L Coordinator [log in to unmask]
Telecommunication & Film Dept. * University of Alabama * Tuscaloosa