Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
Since A.I. is a widescreen film, when encoded to a widescreen-format DVD the studio would almost certainly use the anamorphic encoding process. A.I. was filmed in 1.85:1 ratio without using an anamorphic lens on the camera, and similarly was shown in theaters without the need for the decompression lens. However, since it is also a widescreen film, when encoded to a widescreen-format DVD the studio would probably use the anamorphic encoding process. The point is that it doesn't matter whether the filming was done using the analog anamorphic lens technique; as long as the source footage is intended to be widescreen, the digital anamorphic encoding procedure is appropriate for the DVD release.
Hence 1:85 .. This is really a no brainer here..

I really don't care if someone counted the pixels or not.., Was it verfied??
I suppose If I contributed that I used a special letterbox 'decoder' programmed up to my PC and using software visuals such as Powerdvd6  you would then all agree the world is indeed round.. ??

So let me see if I understand what you are saying here.  You don't care that gadgeteer actually measured the aspect ratio for this release.  You want to replace that data because the studio would 'almost certainly' do this, or 'would probably' do that?

Call me crazy, but I am going to trust the person who actually verified the aspect ratio. 

so please tell me,, how do you or the others count these pixels again?/  what is the exact on screen procedure used for verifying this.. rather than just his word alone.
You capture the image.. and then, what do you do again.. ?
Do I need a #2 pencil to count the pixels across and down and then what is the mathematical equation used..?

Did ask in another part of the forums, apparently you take a screen capture (I used VLC Media Player) then open the image in a photo editing programme, here i used Microsoft Paint it will then tell you the pixel width and height you then divide the two numbers which gives you 1.7770833 which rounding up gives you 1.78:1
at least thats how i think it's done not 100% sure  which is why i voted neutral on you submission in case i got it wrong.

bump..

Quoting ninehours:

Quote:
Did ask in another part of the forums, apparently you take a screen capture (I used VLC Media Player) then open the image in a photo editing programme, here i used Microsoft Paint it will then tell you the pixel width and height you then divide the two numbers which gives you 1.7770833 which rounding up gives you 1.78:1
at least thats how i think it's done not 100% sure  which is why i voted neutral on you submission in case i got it wrong.

You have it exactly correct.  This is how it is done.

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting ninehours:

Quote:
Did ask in another part of the forums, apparently you take a screen capture (I used VLC Media Player) then open the image in a photo editing programme, here i used Microsoft Paint it will then tell you the pixel width and height you then divide the two numbers which gives you 1.7770833 which rounding up gives you 1.78:1
at least thats how i think it's done not 100% sure  which is why i voted neutral on you submission in case i got it wrong.

You have it exactly correct.  This is how it is done.

You do have to crop out the black bars though otherwise every film will report as 1.78:1

Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
Quoting dee1959jay:

Quote:
Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
Quoting dee1959jay:

Quote:
I can think of very few instances where you would actually need to use your home theatre to verify DVDP data. The distinction between DD Stereo and DD Surround comes to mind.

You can't  tell surround from stereo with your ears??

Back on topic: what aspect ratio the film was filmed in is irrelevant. Thus far, we don't track the original aspect ratio of movies, but the aspect ratio as encoded on disc. And since the info on DVD covers with regard to aspect ratio is notoriously unreliable, checking it by measuring a screen cap is perfect.

so in effect then the titles that are now true to 1:78 are actually P/S from the original ..  or.. slightly cropped ..

I think that's the real point here.  And this is one of the reasons why I think it would be interesting if we could capture the aspect ratio of the original release, so we can see if the film has been cropped or otherwise altered from the original.

As we are supposed to profile what is on the DVD, we need tools that will allow us to gather that information.  One of the most obvious tools when looking for the aspect ratio would be the television screen.  Generally, if it's a widescreen set and there are no bars, it would be 1.78...

But not all televisions are created equal.  Some sets have a different aspect ratio and are not exactly 16:9.  Apparently overscanning can obscure the true ratio too.  So, using the television to capture this information can be inaccurate.  If this is the only method available, I would stick with what is on the case, however inaccurate we may think it is.

It does sound like there are some reasonable options for using software based DVD players to capture the full frame that is presented from the DVD.  And if we are to dispute the aspect ratio on the case, this seems like the only realistic and accurate method of getting the data.

To deal with nonanamorphic widescreen issues, I've used the Pixelruler utility, which gives a precise enough answer for our purposes.