• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Broadcasting
Channels Showing Full Widescreen Films
<<
<
17 of 136
>>
>
GarethHarrison
06-01-2011
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“I've never heard it referred to as a 'bug' on UK television, only ever a DOG, although bug has been used abroad.”

I've worked in and around broadcast since 1997, and I've always known it to be called a bug. The first place I saw 'DOG' mentioned was on here, and personally I don't know anyone professionally who uses that term!
grahamcrowden
06-01-2011
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“Back then, thankfully there weren't many of them. Sadly, they've since mostly contracted the disease from the USA.”

There may not have been many channels but there certainly were DOGS like there are today.

When Sky first started its UK service they tried various things like having the DOG appear just for half a minute after each ad break and sometimes all the way through like they do now.
Bravo also tried to run without the DOG but it didn't last long and they had it full time even before they started their satellite broadcasts.

Of course in the analogue days there was no auto banner appearing every time you changed channel so these days there really is no excuse for them to still be here

Originally Posted by GarethHarrison:
“I've worked in and around broadcast since 1997, and I've always known it to be called a bug. The first place I saw 'DOG' mentioned was on here, and personally I don't know anyone professionally who uses that term!”

Bug was the term used by those working in the industry when they first started to appear -thank Sky for that , but since digital tv started DOG seems to have been adopted all round.
Kevin1960
06-01-2011
Please click onto here and fill in appreciative comments concerning OAR transmissions.

https://faq.external.bbc.co.uk/templ...eID=%24contact
DVDfever
07-01-2011
Originally Posted by GarethHarrison:
“I've worked in and around broadcast since 1997, and I've always known it to be called a bug. The first place I saw 'DOG' mentioned was on here, and personally I don't know anyone professionally who uses that term!”

Well, I've mentioned the video before now with "Mr DOG", aka Chris Gottlieb at the BBC (video below, contains strong language - by me, etc) and that was what the BBC called it.

This particular POV episode was filmed in late 2009 so he's probably moved on to be equally useless in another department. Then again, if anyone remembers the times when Helen Kellie appeared on there, embarrassing herself royally. God, that woman needed a reality check.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcc...ut-dogs_webcam
DVDfever
07-01-2011
Originally Posted by grahamcrowden:
“Of course in the analogue days there was no auto banner appearing every time you changed channel so these days there really is no excuse for them to still be here.”

Well, it's just a "Mine's bigger than yours" willy-waving contest now and the channels are run by bean counters rather than people who care about what the viewers want, that much is obvious.

None of them dare remove their logos now because they're so retarded that they think they'll lose ratings as a result, or that they'll get a hard time from their bosses. It's a sorry situation.
DVDfever
07-01-2011
Lassie (2005) showing in 2.35:1 on C4. Well done, C4, showing a kids film after they've gone back(!)
Libretio
07-01-2011
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“Lassie (2005) showing in 2.35:1 on C4. Well done, C4, showing a kids film after they've gone back(!)”

Strictly speaking, it IS a kids film, but it's one of those 'old-school' heartwarmers that can be enjoyed by people of all ages. If it had been something like THE CARE BEARS MOVIE (or similar), that would have been a bit of a head-scratcher...
Smoothy
07-01-2011
Probably mentioned already but anyway...

Was watching Romancing the Stone this past Christmas holidays and I realised that it must be a new "print" that they're using because I seem to remember it being done to death on ITV and it was 1. really poor quality, all fuzzy and dull as ditchwater and 2. 4:3. The version they showed was widescreen (either 16:9 or 2.35:1 - can't remember which) and was really crisp and had vibrant colours. I was actually impressed... even though I've seen it so many times already

Originally Posted by Libretio:
“The big test will be RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK on Wednesday, the first smack-in-the-middle-of-evening-primetime slot for a 2.35:1 film. If it's OAR, then it's likely (but only 'likely') that the Beeb has turned a corner. So far, everything else screened in the correct ratio has been afternoon or early evening, on the outer edges of primetime.

The reason they gave for screening a 4:3 print of ROTLA on BBC 1 the last time was that they were contractually forbidden from showing a 16:9 version of the film. They could either show 4:3 or the full letterboxed 2.35:1 version. At the time, they felt the primetime audience wasn't ready for letterboxing, so they went with the worst possible alternative.

This time around may be different. We live in hope...”

When was the last time they screened it? In my opinion, they should've been contractually forbidden to show 4:3. 2.35:1 would've been preferable and there wouldn't have been ANY action lost.
Libretio
07-01-2011
Here's next week's films on Freeview (8 - 14 January) that were intended for 2.35:1 theatrical exhibition.

A few notes before diving in:

Unless they've corrected their print this time round, Film4 will no doubt be screening JASON X at the wrong ratio. Filmed in Super 35 for 1.85:1 exhibition (unlike most Super 35 films, which are 2.35:1), someone at the channel obviously confused the two ratios and decided to prepare a 'scope' version, only to find they cropped away too much visual information in the process. So they opted for something like 2.00:1, which is completely wrong for this particular film.

Same goes for SHOWGIRLS, also showing (again) on Film4 next week. That one WAS intended for 2.35:1, but C4 consistently broadcasts the damn thing at something close to 2.00:1, which is too much of a compromise.

Also, try to avoid ITV 4's version of JACKIE CHAN'S FIRST STRIKE, a horrendously edited / rescored / redubbed version of Stanley Tong's FIRST STRIKE, prepared for what the US rights-holders obviously thought was an audience of thickos and cultural philistines. If it's cropped to hell and back, that'll just add insult to injury.


• 633 SQUADRON (ITV 4)
• 8MM (Five USA)

• ΖON FLUX (E4)
• ALIEN NATION (Film4)
• ANASTASIA (Film4)
• ANGUS, THONGS AND PERFECT SNOGGING (C4)
• ANZIO (Five USA)
• THE APPALOOSA (ITV 4)

• BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS (C4)
• THE BONE COLLECTOR (Channel 5)
• THE BOURNE IDENTITY (ITV 2)
• THE BOURNE SUPREMACY (ITV 2)
• THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM (ITV 2)
• BRANNIGAN (Channel 5)
• THE BRAVADOS (Film4)

• CARS (BBC 3)
• CATWOMAN (ITV 2)
• CHARLIE'S ANGELS (Channel 5)
• COLLATERAL (Film4)
• COMANCHE (More4)
• CONSTANTINE (ITV 1)

• DANTE'S PEAK (ITV 2)
• DAWN OF THE DEAD (Film4)
• D-DAY: THE SIXTH OF JUNE (Film4)
• DIE ANOTHER DAY (ITV 2)
• A DISTANT TRUMPET (BBC 2)
• DR. DOLITTLE 2 (Channel 5)

• EXIT WOUNDS (Five USA)

• FOOL'S GOLD (Film4)
• FORTY GUNS (Film4)
• FREE WILLY (ITV 2)

• GIGI (BBC 2)
• GIRL WITH A PEARL EARRING (BBC 4)
• GREASE (E4)

• HEARTBREAKERS (Fiver)
• HOT FUZZ (ITV 2)
• THE HOT ROCK (Film4)
• THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER (Film4)

• THE INCREDIBLES (BBC 3)
• INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM (BBC 1)
• THE INTERPRETER (ITV 2)
• IRON MAN (C4)

• JACKIE CHAN'S FIRST STRIKE (ITV 4)

• KING SOLOMON'S MINES (More4)
• THE KITE RUNNER (BBC 2)

• THE LAST SAMURAI (ITV 2)
• LONELY ARE THE BRAVE (ITV 4)
• THE LONG KISS GOODNIGHT (Channel 5)
• LOVE IS A MANY-SPLENDORED THING (C4) [2.55:1]

• MARS ATTACKS! (ITV 4)
• THE MEN WHO STARE AT GOATS (BBC 2)
• MY SUPER EX-GIRLFRIEND (Film4)

• NATIONAL TREASURE: BOOK OF SECRETS (BBC 1)
• NEVADA SMITH (ITV 4)
• NEVER BEEN KISSED (E4)
• NINE MONTHS (Film4)

• OUT FOR JUSTICE (ITV 1)

• PAYBACK (Channel 5)
• PLANET OF THE APES (Film4)
• PRICELESS (BBC 4)

• THE ROBE (Film4) [2.55:1]
• RUN FATBOY RUN (C4)

• SHALLOW HAL (Fiver)
• SHOWGIRLS (Film4)
• SILENT HILL (Film4)
• SPEED 2: CRUISE CONTROL (Film4)
• STAR TREK: GENERATIONS (Film4)
• STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY (Film4)
• STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE (ITV 1)
• STUCK ON YOU (Film4)

• THANK YOU FOR SMOKING (Film4)
• THREE COINS IN THE FOUNTAIN (C4) [2.55:1]
• THREE KINGS (ITV 2)
• TIMECOP (BBC 1)

• UNFORGIVEN (ITV 4)
• UNTIL DEATH (Channel 5)

• VAMPIRES: LOS MUERTOS (Channel 5)

• WALL•E (BBC 3)

• YOUNG GUNS II (Five USA)
DVDfever
08-01-2011
Originally Posted by Libretio:
“• CARS (BBC 3)”

This won't be as it's been in 16:9 twice already.
mwardy
08-01-2011
Originally Posted by mwardy:
“if anyone from the BBC happens to be reading, I'd still rather watch the SD version than a DOGged HD version. ”

Originally Posted by grahamcrowden:
“What a strange viewpoint.
I hate DOGS but there would have to be one hell of a large one to make me watch an sd version over an HD version , especially as the HD dog sits on the black border and does not go over the image and secondly because the sd channels we get in the UK are so generally poor quality anyway and nowhere near dvd quality like they could be .”

Well, it's not strange to me! It's just a judgment call. I can't stand the things as they very easily knock me out of being absorbed in the programme, so I usually stick to SD. I'm especially disgusted with the BBC since I'm left paying for something I can't watch.

But I do recognise what you are saying though. Actually now I'm back with my freesat HD setup I saw a bit of Wall E on BBC HD (which looked excellent) and it is true that it's less intrusive on a scope film. I'll probably watch HD in future in those circumstances, possibly with the aid of a DOG remover (a bit of black cloth ).

As for the quality of SD I also agree it's often compressed to death, but perhaps controversially I think some of it is getting better. Some of the HD originated material shown on SD BBC for instance is really pretty good, whether this is because of its inherent superiority or because the BBC have new SD coders or whatever. I was also impressed by True Blood on Channel 4 recently. So sometimes the difference isn't *that* stark. And if I take my glasses off there's no difference at all! As I say, a judgment call.

But it is true that these days I'm watching less broadcast TV than I used to as a result of the BBC DOG policy. Perhaps I should thank them!
tellytart1
08-01-2011
Originally Posted by mwardy:
“As for the quality of SD I also agree it's often compressed to death, but perhaps controversially I think some of it is getting better. Some of the HD originated material shown on SD BBC for instance is really pretty good, whether this is because of its inherent superiority or because the BBC have new SD coders or whatever. I was also impressed by True Blood on Channel 4 recently. So sometimes the difference isn't *that* stark. And if I take my glasses off there's no difference at all! As I say, a judgment call.”

It because pictures originated in HD usually once downconverted to SD are actually easier to encode than native SD. Slightly counter-intuitive, but having built a DVB transmission system for our internal monitoring, I've been able to experiment, and observed these exact results!

It's probably down to the fact that all cameras add noise - and an SD camera the noise will be normal sized pixels. On an HD camera, the noise will again be normal HD sized pixels, but the downconversion to SD will actually remove some of this noise due to the way the system works, so you end up with a picture that appears to have little to no noise compared to a native SD version.
f_196
08-01-2011
Star Wars Episode 1 is cropped to 16:9 as expected.

So later on when Darth Maul opens a door with a piece of shrapnell - we won't see it as it's off screen

The picture on ITV1HD is dire. Is it due to the cropping?
jzee
08-01-2011
Originally Posted by f_196:
“Star Wars Episode 1 is cropped to 16:9 as expected.

So later on when Darth Maul opens a door with a piece of shrapnell - we won't see it as it's off screen

The picture on ITV1HD is dire. Is it due to the cropping?”

All HD transfers of Phantom Menace are known to have terrible quality.
derek500
08-01-2011
Originally Posted by f_196:
“Star Wars Episode 1 is cropped to 16:9 as expected.

So later on when Darth Maul opens a door with a piece of shrapnell - we won't see it as it's off screen ”

Unless it's 'pan and scan'.
grahamcrowden
08-01-2011
Originally Posted by mwardy:
“Well, it's not strange to me! It's just a judgment call. I can't stand the things as they very easily knock me out of being absorbed in the programme, so I usually stick to SD. I'm especially disgusted with the BBC since I'm left paying for something I can't watch.

But I do recognise what you are saying though. Actually now I'm back with my freesat HD setup I saw a bit of Wall E on BBC HD (which looked excellent) and it is true that it's less intrusive on a scope film. I'll probably watch HD in future in those circumstances, possibly with the aid of a DOG remover (a bit of black cloth ).

As for the quality of SD I also agree it's often compressed to death, but perhaps controversially I think some of it is getting better. Some of the HD originated material shown on SD BBC for instance is really pretty good, whether this is because of its inherent superiority or because the BBC have new SD coders or whatever. I was also impressed by True Blood on Channel 4 recently. So sometimes the difference isn't *that* stark. And if I take my glasses off there's no difference at all! As I say, a judgment call.

But it is true that these days I'm watching less broadcast TV than I used to as a result of the BBC DOG policy. Perhaps I should thank them!”

While sd material broadcast on C4HD is light years ahead of the same programme on C4sd I can't say I notice any difference with BBC1.

When an sd programme is showing on BBC1HD there does not seem to be any improvement over what you can see when you switch to 101.
I think whatever causes that is also the explanation as to why BBC1HD is not as good as most other HD channels
grahamcrowden
08-01-2011
Originally Posted by derek500:
“Unless it's 'pan and scan'.”

Rare for pan and scan to be used on movies made within the last 20 years or so.
Important picture info is usually shot within a tv safe area although errors when creating the masters can cause problems like we saw with the dvd release of Back to the Future 2 when the framing was wrong and relevant content was cropped although those discs were recalled and corrected
DVDfever
08-01-2011
A heads-up for a few things:

The Incredibles is on tonight at 8.50pm on BBC3 so that will be in 2.35:1.

Also, presuming the BBC pull their finger out properly, so will The Kite Runner (BBC2, 9.45pm) and National Treasure: Book of Secrets (BBC1, 10.30pm - usually a film that you'd expect for an afternoon screening).

Tomorrow night sees the premiere of The Men Who Stare At Goats on BBC2 at 10pm. It's a BBC film so that explains the relatively quick broadcast, and their film, Is Anybody There? with Michael Caine, was also in 2.35:1, a few months back.

I'd love to know when they're actually showing An Education, though. That was featured in the "BBC Films" trailer back when IAT was premiered.
DVDfever
08-01-2011
Originally Posted by grahamcrowden:
“Rare for pan and scan to be used on movies made within the last 20 years or so.
Important picture info is usually shot within a tv safe area although errors when creating the masters can cause problems like we saw with the dvd release of Back to the Future 2 when the framing was wrong and relevant content was cropped although those discs were recalled and corrected”

I've noticed Super 35 being used far more for films with a 2.35:1 theatrical ratio. I can understand that, with an eye to the TV broadcast, but I still prefer these to be shot with something like Panavision where the image will have a bit of a 'concave' look across the image. Sometimes, 2.35:1 films can look a bit flat when just going the Super 35 route.
mattyb
08-01-2011
Originally Posted by grahamcrowden:
“Rare for pan and scan to be used on movies made within the last 20 years or so.
Important picture info is usually shot within a tv safe area although errors when creating the masters can cause problems like we saw with the dvd release of Back to the Future 2 when the framing was wrong and relevant content was cropped although those discs were recalled and corrected”

Still got mine. Never got around to sending them back, but with the blueray versions out now I'll just buy them instead.
DVDfever
08-01-2011
Originally Posted by mattyb:
“Still got mine. Never got around to sending them back, but with the blueray versions out now I'll just buy them instead.”

Which discs were wrong? I've got the DVD Boxset from when that came out, but can't remember how much of that I've actually watched

BTW, scratch Kite Runner - it's in 16:9.
DVDfever
08-01-2011
National Treasure: Book of Secrets now showing on BBC1 in 2.35:1.
VirginMediaPhil
08-01-2011
Die Another Day was in 16:9 tonight on ITV2. Not my favourite Brosnan era film - seems very tacky and cheesy. And unrealistic... but still an enjoyable experience. Especially the scene with Moneypenny at the end on the VR system; these movies do at least make you laugh, even if you know it would never happen.
grahamcrowden
08-01-2011
Originally Posted by mattyb:
“Still got mine. Never got around to sending them back, but with the blueray versions out now I'll just buy them instead.”

Only £17.99 now at Play and Amazon.

Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“Which discs were wrong? I've got the DVD Boxset from when that came out, but can't remember how much of that I've actually watched

.”

I believe there were errors with Parts 2 and 3 although I think Part 3 was possibly to do with the colour timing rather than the more intrusive problems of Part 2.

To see if your Part 2 is wrong check out the early scene where Marty and the Doc first land in 2015.
Marty gets given a jacket and trainers to wear.

The sleeves on the jacket are too long and when the Doc returns he pushes a button and the sleeves retract to the correct length. On the wrong version you can't see the sleeves retracting at all .

I think there are problems throughout the film but thats the simplest one to go to for immediate confirmation
DVDfever
09-01-2011
Originally Posted by grahamcrowden:
“I believe there were errors with Parts 2 and 3 although I think Part 3 was possibly to do with the colour timing rather than the more intrusive problems of Part 2.

To see if your Part 2 is wrong check out the early scene where Marty and the Doc first land in 2015.
Marty gets given a jacket and trainers to wear.

The sleeves on the jacket are too long and when the Doc returns he pushes a button and the sleeves retract to the correct length. On the wrong version you can't see the sleeves retracting at all .

I think there are problems throughout the film but thats the simplest one to go to for immediate confirmation”

Just checked... it's the duff one

Didn't realise how old the boxset was - 2002, so I've got bugger all chance of getting those changed, but I'll get the Blu-ray version soon.

Saw some good example pics here:
http://www.angelfire.com/film/bttf2/
<<
<
17 of 136
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map