A look at what is lost when a film is shown in full screen instead of wide screen

With actual examples of what footage gets cut when a movie is edited to full-screen, several filmmakers discuss the problems inherent to the practice of “pan and scan”…

(via Reddit)

Read more: http://twentytwowords.com/a-look-at-what-is-lost-when-a-film-is-shown-in-full-screen-instead-of-wide-screen/

3 responses to “A look at what is lost when a film is shown in full screen instead of wide screen”

  1. JFC says:

    The problem is that any version of a film you get that isn’t actually being viewed in a theater is going to have to be cut down in some way. That’s the entire point. The only distinction is how much of the film you’re willing to cut out, and if you watch in Fullscreen, it is a fact that you are losing a significant portion of the scene, regardless of how you fee about this subject. As the article states, this will become less and less of an issue as television sets reach higher and higher resolutions.(Also, the borders hardly make a movie “unviewable,” unless your TV has a miniscule screen or your vision is absolutely terrible. Don’t be dramatic.)

  2. Kay A. Ess says:

    While I agree with everything the directors are saying, pan and scan is the lesser of two evils. It would not be better to not show these classics on television. Where else would most people see them? If the directors are truly that concerned about a ‘technician’ redirecting their movie, then the director should create a pan and scan version to be used for television.Then again, this is becoming less of a problem as more and more people purchase wide screen televisions.

  3. Paula says:

    My last boyfriend insisted that full screen had more of the picture because they PUT IN the top and bottom! Stupid, haha. I don’t think I ever argued enough for him to believe me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.