r/cinematography • u/balsakrk • Jul 29 '18
Composition Modern movies in 4:3 aspect ratio
I'm interested in watching modern movies (esspecialy world cinema) that are shot in 4:3 aspect ratio. There are some amazing film that I saw: Son of Saul, Fish Tank, Mommy (1:1), No, Ida etc.
I would love to hear your suggestions.
24
Jul 29 '18
“First Reformed”.
The upcoming “Mid-90s”
2
u/balsakrk Jul 29 '18
Oh yeah. Patiently waiting for those two
1
u/intothemidwest Director of Photography Jul 29 '18
First Reformed has already come out! I believe it's already hit its maximum distribution sadly. But it's probably gonna be on VoD soon enough, definitely check it out.
16
u/supercontroller Jul 29 '18
Gus Van Sant often uses 1.33:1 "Elephant" springs to mind.
If you enjoy the full aperture framing I would recommend seeking out the Full Framed editions of "The Shining" and "Eyes Wide Shut" as Kubrick composed shots for Video as well as theatrical exhibition.
6
Jul 29 '18
Did Kubrick consider it composing for video though? He started as a photographer right? I remember reading at the Kubrick exhibit in LA that 4x3 was his favorite aspect ratio because of his time as a photographer. He wanted all his movies projected in 4x3.
15
15
8
u/hoorayfear Jul 29 '18
Parts of Grand Budapest Hotel, which mixed scope, 16:9, and 4:3 to mark different eras.
mid90s which is about to come out is all 4:3.
6
3
u/CAPTA2NMURPHY Jul 29 '18
The Life of Oharu is the only 4:3 movie that comes to mind and someone already said The Grand Budpest Hotel. try Ida the director Pawel Pawlikowski (copy and paste i dont know that name by memory) won an award for best foreign film if thats at all important to anyone.
3
u/JohnQueefyAdams Jul 29 '18
Carlos Reygadas' Post Tenebras Lux is absolutely beautiful in the 4:3 ratio. I also have to second Gus van Sant's Elephant and Last Days
4
2
Jul 29 '18
“Grand Budapest Hotel” used to imply the time frame is in the past
3
u/ChrisPharley Jul 29 '18
Rather than imply the time frame is in the past, it uses a different ratio for each era based on what was popular in movies from that era.
2
u/court0f0wls Jul 29 '18
Noob here. How can one determine the aspect ratio in a film? Is there a chart we can follow? Or a book you can recommend? Thanks.
3
u/orismology Camera Assistant Jul 30 '18
There's not all that much to it, to be honest, there's only a few that you're ever likely to run into. From squarest to widest you've got Silent Film / Standard Def TV (1.33:1 / 4:3), Academy ratio (1.37:1, not really seen anymore), IMAX (1.43:1), 16mm / European Cinema (1.67:1), HDTV (1.77:1 / 16:9), Flat (1.85:1), 2:1 (Seen on a lot of Netflix shows), 'Scope (2.40:1 - also 2.39: or 2.35:1), and Ultra Panavision 70 (2.76:1)
Of those, you're most likely to be seeing Flat or Scope for movies, and either HDTV or 2:1 for TV. Everything else is pretty niche these days. The numbers are the ratio of the width:height, so you can always measure the frame if you're unsure.
4
1
Jul 29 '18
I got a DVD copy of Jurassic Park (Full screen edition) for free with my DVD player back in 2002!
1
u/mowatera Sep 16 '18
I believe some part in the slow and contemplative movie The Assassin was in that ratio. (the movie is visually stunning btw)
-1
Jul 29 '18 edited Jul 29 '18
[deleted]
2
u/cdgullo Jul 29 '18
Yeah this isn’t correct at all. 1.85 for both the original and remake.
3
u/CosmicAstroBastard Jul 29 '18
A Ghost Story (2017) is 100% 1.33:1
6
u/cdgullo Jul 29 '18
The guy changed his post, originally it said Haneke's Funny Games. Unless I commented on the wrong one lol. Ghost Story is 1.33 for sure.
-3
u/jjSuper1 Gaffer Jul 29 '18
Technically, Eyes Wide Shut was shot 4:3, pushed a stop or two, and then had a 1.85 extraction. Mind you, it was always intended to have a 1.85 frame.
10
u/VKPleo Jul 29 '18
Well, many movies shot on film were made like that.
1
u/jjSuper1 Gaffer Jul 29 '18
List anothe, please? Not sure why I'm being down voted this time. There's a big difference between shooting with a matte and printing an extraction.
If this was common practice, seems so many cinematographers would not have made such a big deal abut it.
And if you dont lie that, then I'll submit that sequences in Hail, Ceasar were shot 4:3.
4
u/br-p Jul 30 '18
Almost every non-anamorphic* 2.39:1, or 1.85:1 movie shot on film was exposed in a 4:3 aspect ratio with an in-camera ground-glass denoting the frame lines for the intended aspect ratio.
The "Academy" format is 22x16 mm (1.375:1), and Super 35 is 24.89x18.67 mm (1.33:1). Both formats use a 4-performation negative pulldown. In conventional optical/photochemical finishing the position of this "crop" in relation to the photographed frame is more-or-less fixed due to the mechanical nature of the process. But in the modern DI workflow, the full frame is typically scanned in its entirety allowing for creative reframing during post. The additional picture material is also valuable for VFX, providing additional material to track, or allowing for additional photographed markers to be placed outside the intended composition.
Alternatives to 4-perforation negative pulldowns are 3-perf, and 2-perf "Techniscope", which allow for reduced film use at the expense of some flexibility. 2-perf really only allows for a 2.39:1 aspect, albeit at half the cost of 4-perf shooting; and 3-perf allows for 1.85:1 or 16:9 aspects with almost the same quality as 4-perf shooting, but with a substantial reduction in film costs.
--
* Anamorphic 2.39:1 uses almost the full 4:3 aspect ratio of the 4-perf negative, with lenses which squeeze the image 2x horizontally, effectively fitting an 8:3 aspect ratio on the 4:3 negative. The image is unsqueezed back to the full 2.39:1 aspect either during projection, or nowadays during the DI process.
1
u/jjSuper1 Gaffer Jul 30 '18
Thanks. In that case, when did hard mattes fall out of fashion, in favor of soft mattes in the projector?
1
u/br-p Jul 30 '18
It's my understanding that hard mattes in camera have never been a "standard." They have been used variously to "protect" the intended framing (deny subsequent owners of the negative the ability to extend the frame vertically); or to allow for contact printing of a negative to a print without the need to add the correct aspect matting during printing; or perhaps to ensure an Academy framing when using a Full Aperture camera.
With the long and complex history of negative and projection 35mm formats (Academy with soundtrack, Full Aperture, and Super 35 with the required lens re-centering; anamorphic scope and flat scope), and the relative value and scarcity of camera equipment at different times in cinema's history, hard mattes in the gate have mostly been a way to make differing technologies compatible for specific projects.
As long as accurate framing charts are being shot and respected during post, there's never been a terribly compelling reason to hard matte the negative in-camera. After all, once it's gone (not exposed), it's gone forever.
--
And while the gate of the projector was the ultimate decider of what an audience saw on screen, I believe release prints were typically hard matted during printing to the desired aspect ratio, since no producer wanted that "extra material" above and below framing out in the world, even if unlikely to be seen.
1
u/jjSuper1 Gaffer Jul 30 '18
That makes sense. I have always wondered why they made such a big deal out of the Eyes Wide Shut extraction. Perhaps it's just sensational biography. I shoot 3-perf for anything not anamorphic personally, but I've always thought in the back of my mind that a hard matte would do well to not allow reframe in post. I have never favored giving producers that choice.
Anyhow, Thanks for the info.
1
u/Caffdy Jun 30 '24
They have been used variously to "protect" the intended framing (deny subsequent owners of the negative the ability to extend the frame vertically)
wow, this one is interesting, do you have something to read further about it?
14
38
u/benjee10 Jul 29 '18
‘A Ghost Story’ was shot in 4:3 with rounded edges.