Author |
Message |
Registered: May 30, 2008 | Posts: 445 |
| Posted: | | | | We often rely on things like what the cover art says ("enhanced for widescreen TVs") or how the movie seems to display on a given DVD player / TV set combination, but I've never been happy with this this. I've always wanted the ability to identify anamorphic discs as trivially as dual layered vs single layered discs. Now I think I've found a freeware tool for this. MediaInvo, by Digi-metrics gives you the most elusive definitive factors all in one place. It identifies the PAR (Pixel Aspect Ratio), which tells you if you're dealing with square (non-anamorphic) pixels, along with the Display Aspect Ratio. If you know the right formulas (I don't) you can use this info to determine effective resolutions for anamorphic PAL and NTSC discs, frame rates, bit rates, and so on. This is very technical info, but it's nice to be able to answer a question about a disc without running around trying to play it on multiple devices. BTW: There are other programs that provide this sort of info, (PAR), but I don't know which ones are free. MediaInfo was my choice since it's a SourceForge hosted project. |
|
Registered: March 20, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 2,851 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting lasitter: Quote: I've always wanted the ability to identify anamorphic discs as trivially as dual layered vs single layered discs. Now I think I've found a freeware tool for this. I was born with such a tool--my eyes. Non-anamorphic widescreen material will have borders on all four sides when viewed in "normal" mode on a widescreen monitor, and an anamorphic title will fill the width of the screen. See examples below: AnamorphicNon-anamorphicThis tool is not only free but very easy to use. --------------- |
|
Registered: March 18, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 2,550 |
| Posted: | | | | Exactly | | | Last edited: by The Movieman |
|
Registered: May 30, 2008 | Posts: 445 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote: I was born with such a tool--my eyes. Non-anamorphic widescreen material will have borders on all four sides when viewed in "normal" mode on a widescreen monitor, and an anamorphic title will fill the width of the screen. See examples below: I'm sorry, but this response is a little bit glib for me. What you see on the screen is dependent upon the settings of the player. "Cinema zoom xx" and "touch frame from inside / outside" or other similar settings change what you see on your screen by having the player expand the picture to eliminate the appearance of letterboxing or windowboxing. Pixel aspect ratio is something that cannot be spoofed / goofed nearly so easily. It's the same no matter what kind of TV you tell the player you're hooked up to. |
|
Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 6,730 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting lasitter: Quote: What you see on the screen is dependent upon the settings of the player. That's why scotthm mentioned the "Normal Mode" (Means: All Zooming-functions disabled). Zoom should be a banned setting anyhow. I often find it quite amusing that people are not buying certain releases for not having the original Aspect Ratio while "enhancing" their viewing experience by zooming a 2.40:1 picture to 1.78:1 just because they have a 16:9 screen and don't like the black bars. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up! But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
|
Registered: May 30, 2008 | Posts: 445 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Lewis_Prothero: Quote: That's why scotthm mentioned the "Normal Mode" (Means: All Zooming-functions disabled).
Zoom should be a banned setting anyhow. I agree completely. Of course how people choose to watch their own movies at home is there business, but messed up equipment setting at home can lead people to report wrong aspect ratios and other aspects of encoding, such as non-anamorphic vs anamorphic. It could all be a moot point at present as the same people that don't understand their player settings wouldn't understand the output of MediaInfo. But it could help some of us be a bit more certain about the accuracy of what we're submitting. |
|
Registered: March 20, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 2,851 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting lasitter: Quote: It could all be a moot point at present as the same people that don't understand their player settings wouldn't understand the output of MediaInfo. People who don't understand the stretch/zoom settings for their television probably shouldn't be contributing technical data in Profiler. --------------- | | | Last edited: by scotthm |
|
Registered: December 27, 2009 | Reputation: | Posts: 5,131 |
| Posted: | | | | Well it's a good thing that those restrictions are not in place, barring people that are possible dumber than the rest of you guys. We may have to rely on you guys to contribute everything for the rest of us.
I found over the years that those who boast about their knowledge, usually are dumba$$es. | | | Last edited: by ateo357 |
|
Registered: May 30, 2008 | Posts: 445 |
| Posted: | | | | ateo357: The tool I mention is not simple enough, but the information it provides could give a one-click answer to the question "Is this Anamorphic?"
Of course, someone has yet to write this one click plugin / application ... |
|
Registered: March 20, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 2,851 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting ateo357: Quote: We may have to rely on you guys to contribute everything for the rest of us. I contribute to my own database (except for the occasional cover contribution) and let the rest of you work the online out for yourselves. --------------- |
|
Registered: May 8, 2007 | Posts: 824 |
| Posted: | | | | "Automatic" software is just reading the IFO file.
I've seen plenty of discs that are incorrect... "Anamorphic" in the IFO file, but are in fact letterboxed, and get stretched all wrong if a DVD player doesn't offer user override control of the scaling (or a separate scaler is used).
So, if you want to be as accurate as possible, you should always check. VLC Player works fine for this. But there's no way to do it accurately without putting eyes on the video itself and checking. | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
|
Registered: May 8, 2007 | Posts: 824 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Lewis_Prothero: Quote: Zoom should be a banned setting anyhow. Some DVD players can stretch letterboxed video to fit a 1.78 HD screen with the correct aspect ratio by using "zoom". | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." | | | Last edited: by Grendell |
|
Registered: May 8, 2007 | Posts: 824 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote: I contribute to my own database (except for the occasional cover contribution) and let the rest of you work the online out for yourselves. That really does suck that the situation has devolved to this. I don't blame you at all though, given the current state of things. | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
|
Registered: March 19, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 6,018 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting lasitter: Quote: We often rely on things like what the cover art says ("enhanced for widescreen TVs") Over the years I've learned NOT to rely on what the cover art says on stuff like video format, audio tracks, region coding, subtitles etc., as all too often it's completely wrong. I ALWAYS verify such types of data using PowerDVD and other software. |
|
Registered: May 30, 2008 | Posts: 445 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Grendell: Quote: "Automatic" software is just reading the IFO file. I think you have to check the .VOB files ... |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 3,197 |
| Posted: | | | | Not that I really need to since I will spot anamorphic a mile away with my eyes but I always verify the proper display aspect ratio with PowerDVD and if needed take screen caps and measure the actual film aspect ratio. I still use old version 7 since I don't need anything more advanced but free versions come with many players.
However, for those who don't care or don't wish to learn, it's really quite simple: 1. For new profiles, use the information from the cover. It's better than nothing and if it's wrong someone will eventually correct it. 2. Look up a review of the same release that lists technical information. Reviewers will often knock off points for non-anamorphic releases. 3. Do nothing and wait until someone else contributes the info. | | | First registered: February 15, 2002 |
|