my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Correct aspect ratio for "Baby Doll" (1956)?

Author Topic: Correct aspect ratio for "Baby Doll" (1956)? Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 08-24-2014 07:31 PM                        I'm showing a 35mm print of this in just over two hours' time, and am stumped as to the ratio. As it's Hollywood, not 'scope or VV and post-1954, I'm guessing that it should be 1.85. The footage all has a 1.37 matte. I've just played the opening reel and 1.85 looks good for most of the shot compositions, but two of the title cards are just slightly cropped and the others look tight. I suppose the crop could be because our aperture plate is a little bit overcut (it is - you can see it with an RP40). The position of the changeover cues suggests 1.85 to me, too. I'm guessing that this is shoot-to-protect and that I could use either, or 1.66. Needless to say, the leaders of the print have both 1.37 and 1.85 marked in different handwriting, so two projectionists who've shown this print before me have come to different conclusions about it. If anyone has the definitive answer, it would be greatly appreciated.  |  IP: Logged Jim Cassedy Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1661 From: San Francisco, CA Registered: Dec 2006 posted 08-24-2014 07:52 PM                     Hi Leo- I ran a 35 print of this 2 or 3 years ago, and had the same issue. I screened a reel at both 1:66 & 1:85 and both looked workable, although I had a slight preference for the way it looked in 1:85. (and that's how I ran it) A bit of research going through old issues of the "BOX OFFICE BOOKING GUIDE" confirms that it was originally released in 1:85. (Box Office Booking Guide, Dec 8th 1956) I hope this helps. Good luck with your screening!  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 08-24-2014 07:58 PM                        Thanks so much - F-T to the rescue once again! This is a print from Warners on 1969 stock, with quite a bit of wear on it (including some strained perfs in reel 3) but amazingly, no splices on the heads and tails. How it survived 45 years on the rep circuit without being plattered is somewhat of a miracle. Anyway, this makes for an easy night - the other show in the double bill is The Misfits, also 1.85, and so no new ratio lineup needed during the intermission.  |  IP: Logged Jim Cassedy Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1661 From: San Francisco, CA Registered: Dec 2006 posted 08-24-2014 08:21 PM                     quote: Leo Enticknap the leaders of the print have both 1.37 and 1.85 LoL! The leaders on the print I had were marked "1:66" & "1:85" That's why I originally tried running a reel at each AR before I researched it.  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 08-24-2014 09:27 PM                        I get the impression that a lot of "flat" shows made around the time widescreen came in were "shot to protect", so that they could if necessary be shown in anything from 1.37 to 1.85 without a disaster on the screen, because there would have been theaters that didn't have plates and lenses for the ideal, intended ratio, or the stage/screen areas hadn't been remodeled, and/or the filmmakers knew that it would be shown on TV full frame anyway, and so framed the shots so that they could be shown that way without boom mikes and other things you don't want being visible. Nevertheless, I do like to show the actual, correct ratio if I can, so many thanks again.  |  IP: Logged Jim Cassedy Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1661 From: San Francisco, CA Registered: Dec 2006 posted 08-24-2014 10:18 PM                     quote: I get the impression that a lot of "flat" shows made around the time widescreen came in were "shot to protect", If you look through old issues of American Cinematographer and SMPTE journals from that period, there are a number of technical articles on this topic and I seem to recall one (or both) of them even publishing the specifications for marking the ground-glass in the camera viewfinder to accommodate a 'safe area' for "everything". (Or at least all the "Flat" ratios)  |  IP: Logged Robert Furmanek Expert Film Handler Posts: 113 From: Clifton, NJ, USA Registered: Jun 2012 posted 08-25-2014 12:41 PM                     After May/June 1953, all Hollywood product was composed for widescreen. You might find these articles of interest: http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/home/widescreen-documentation http://www.3dfilmarchive.com/the-first-year-of-widescreen  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.