DVD sales figures: WIDE SCREEN vs FULL

[Mistwell]

Yeah right. What Kai Lord is saying is elementary truth for anyone with the slightest degree of film knowledge. You're the only one who looks foolish, and crying about "flamefests" when people are simply stating the facts only makes you look even sillier.

23 posts. Right. Kai, we know when you use a second handle You might want to, next time, leave more of a gap in time between your double posts with multiple handles. Particularly in a forum that most people don't read.

{edit - oh, and of the 17 threads triumph has posted to, fully 7 of those threads were started by Kai, and most responses to any thread he has made are in support of Kai with things like "coolness" and "greatness"}

 

[Mistwell]

And, btw, Mistwell, abandoning logic is not necessarily a demon, here. The value of the experience of film is not set by logic.

I totally agree. That is why I am saying it is perfectly reasonable to like either kind of copy of the film - widescreen or full screen. What I don't understand is the "The only reasonable opinion is mine, and those who disagree with me must be ignorant." That kind of emotional claim is not valuable. Saying, in an emotional way "this is why I like widescreen" would be fine, however.

 

[Kai Lord]

To do home theatre really correctly takes many thousands of dollars of equipment, and probably calls for you to add another room to your home. Most of us don't have that option. So, we aren't going to get particularly close to the "real" experience anyway. After that, why should we worry quite so much about the specifics of aspect ratio?

There's two parts to experiencing a movie, WHAT you see and hear, and HOW you see and hear it. Movie theatres present every degree of both.

At home, HOW you see the film will indeed be largely removed from the movie theatre, unless, as you say, you have thousands of dollars to invest and the real estate to accomodate it. But WHAT you see can still be fully represented by a display in the proper ratio, just as WHAT you hear can fully be represented by speakers that simply work.

Perhaps being fully aware of everything put on film isn't entirely important to you, or you're perfectly happy just getting the "gist" of the story or images. That's fine, some people are more into movies than others.

The debate on this thread came into effect when one person took the position that fullscreen images don't lose much of the picture compared to widescreen, and that its "nowhere near half" with regard to the widest formats.

 

[Kai Lord]

I totally agree. That is why I am saying it is perfectly reasonable to like either kind of copy of the film - widescreen or full screen. What I don't understand is the "The only reasonable opinion is mine, and those who disagree with me must be ignorant." That kind of emotional claim is not valuable. Saying, in an emotional way "this is why I like widescreen" would be fine, however.

Ah yes, you still contend that the aspect ratio of a film is based on opinion and theory.

snicker

 

[Mistwell]

The debate on this thread came into effect when one person took the position that fullscreen images don't lose much of the picture compared to widescreen, and that its "nowhere near half" with regard to the widest formats.

No. Let's be clear. The debate started when I said I prefer fullscreen, someone else said "why", and gave my reason, and my opinion was disagreed with by quoting back those statistics. The debate became "which is better: Seeing more of the picture area portrayed on the film at the expense of detail loss for having a smaller screen, or seeing more detail of the film at the expense of having less picture area portrayed on the film."

For some reason you became focused on the "nowhere near half" statement, when that was always just a tree in the forest of this discussion, since the loss varies from film to film.

 

[Mistwell]

Ah yes, you still contend that the aspect ratio of a film is based on opinion and theory.

snicker

If I got you a digital picture of the two movies playing side by side for you to measure the aspect ratio yourself, would you be satisfied then?

 

[Kai Lord]

23 posts. Right. Kai, we know when you use a second handle You might want to, next time, leave more of a gap in time between your double posts with multiple handles. Particularly in a forum that most people don't read.

{edit - oh, and of the 17 threads triumph has posted to, fully 7 of those threads were started by Kai, and most responses to any thread he has made are in support of Kai with things like "coolness" and "greatness"}

Okay, so apparently I'm just a part of all kinds of conspiracies. Heh, yesterday I just talked to a dude named "Clifford" in the Art Gallery, he only had like six posts and one was directed at me....muahAHAHAHA, I'm everywhere!

 

[Henry]

Hi, all! How are we doing?

---Just a quick temperature check.

 

[Kai Lord]

No. Let's be clear. The debate started when I said I prefer fullscreen, someone else said "why", and gave my reason, and my opinion was disagreed with by quoting back those statistics.

That's all the issue's ever been about as far as my involvement goes on the thread. I couldn't care less about which format you prefer.

The debate became "which is better: ---

WRONG. Unbelievably wrong. Read my responses. Now. Now read them again. You stated misinformation about the picture loss of a Fullscreen image (with regard to a 2.35:1 ratio) and I corrected you. Your laments over me being aggressive and emotional have come from just as far out of left field as your assertions over picture loss.

For some reason you became focused on the "nowhere near half" statement, when that was always just a tree in the forest of this discussion, since the loss varies from film to film.

Do you understand the concept of isolating and responding to a point in a broader discussion? I didn't take issue with your opinions on which is better because I DON'T CARE WHAT YOUR OPINIONS ARE.

It was in the expressing of your opinions that you stated incorrect information, and I corrected you. There has never been a larger issue to address. Never. I recognize you've been trying to steer the debate into an irrelevant discussion about your opinions since you were first taken to task for your "ignorance" about picture ratios, but it never worked. Sorry.

 

[Kai Lord]

Hi, all! How are we doing?

I'm mad, and aggressive, and rude, and suffer from multiple personality disorder. How are you?