Jump to content



Photo

Why are 90% of Netflix series framed at 2:1 aspect ratio?


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Daniel Miler

Daniel Miler
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tel Aviv, Israel

Posted 21 April 2018 - 11:19 AM

Is this the new scope? 


  • 0

#2 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3433 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 21 April 2018 - 11:28 AM

It's just a compromise between filmmakers desire for a wider frame than 16:9, and many viewers dislike of 2.39:1 on a TV.


  • 0

#3 Daniel Miler

Daniel Miler
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tel Aviv, Israel

Posted 21 April 2018 - 12:22 PM

so no specific limitation by the networks? 

I could imagine netflix as with their 4K fixation objecting to accept wider aspects. 


  • 0

#4 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3433 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 21 April 2018 - 12:31 PM

I could imagine netflix as with their 4K fixation objecting to accept wider aspects. 

The 4k specification refers to picture width. As far as I am aware, the aspect ratio is a matter of creative choice.


  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20351 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 21 April 2018 - 01:48 PM

Aspect ratio and horizontal resolution are two separate issues.  You could have a 7:1 strip of an image that was technically 4K...


  • 0

#6 Daniel Klockenkemper

Daniel Klockenkemper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 21 April 2018 - 02:47 PM

From the Camera and Image Capture section of Netflix's Production and Post-Production Requirements:

 

 

Aspect ratios greater than 2.00:1 must be evaluated and discussed with Netflix for approval.

 

As Stuart says, it's a compromise between Netflix not wanting overly-large black bars that annoy viewers, and the widespread belief that wide aspect ratios are a shortcut to giving television shows a cinematic look. 


  • 0

#7 Daniel Miler

Daniel Miler
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tel Aviv, Israel

Posted 22 April 2018 - 01:26 AM

Thanks all
I think I was a bit unclear before, of course the resolution and aspect are two separate matters, I just meant Netflix's strictness about the first might imply their approach for the other...
In any case as Daniel said I imagined it would be their regulation.
  • 0

#8 Robin R Probyn

Robin R Probyn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2467 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tokyo

Posted 22 April 2018 - 01:59 AM

Why do camera,s.. mine included have a 2.40-1 marker and a 2.35-1 marker.. isnt the correct aspect ratio 2.40-1 (3.9?).. when is the 2.35-1 used then.. or its it  a "TV 2.4-1..".. less black..?


  • 0

#9 Daniel Klockenkemper

Daniel Klockenkemper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 22 April 2018 - 02:21 AM

Why do camera,s.. mine included have a 2.40-1 marker and a 2.35-1 marker.. isnt the correct aspect ratio 2.40-1 (3.9?).. when is the 2.35-1 used then.. or its it  a "TV 2.4-1..".. less black..?

 

Wikipedia has a decent summary of the history behind the slight changes to the anamorphic projection aspect ratio:  https://en.wikipedia...,_2.39_or_2.40?


Edited by Daniel Klockenkemper, 22 April 2018 - 02:21 AM.

  • 0

#10 Robin R Probyn

Robin R Probyn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2467 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tokyo

Posted 22 April 2018 - 04:03 AM

Yes thanks.. but also I read the 2.35-1 is an old aspect ration not used much since the early 70,s.. why do some many camera,s have it in VF markings.. ?


  • 0

#11 aapo lettinen

aapo lettinen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1176 posts
  • Other
  • Finland

Posted 22 April 2018 - 06:40 AM

Why do camera,s.. mine included have a 2.40-1 marker and a 2.35-1 marker.. isnt the correct aspect ratio 2.40-1 (3.9?).. when is the 2.35-1 used then.. or its it  a "TV 2.4-1..".. less black..?

 

almost all "scope" shows are 2.39 just because that is the DCI "scope" native. 

2.35 is talked about every now and then in preprod but all the people end up using the 2.39 anyway when the show goes to post, no one would like to leave black bars on the sides of the frame or export their show to 2k flat just because wanting that very small aspect ratio difference... 

 

technically one could letterbox the 2.35 to the dci 2048x1080 frame but I have never seen anyone use that format in real life, it may be that the post people just want to make projectionist's life easier by not adding third dcp format to the list of choices to complicate things (how did they manage in the film era or were the projectionists just more experienced back then, having to change gates and anything... compared to the current lazy iPad remote controlled work  :rolleyes: )


  • 0

#12 Robin R Probyn

Robin R Probyn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2467 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Tokyo

Posted 22 April 2018 - 06:49 AM

So why have 2.35 -1 markers in just about every camera.. if no one uses this old aspect ratio.. thats my question.. ?.. is it a TV aspect ration with less black bars.. ?  Ive only shot a cropped version of 16-9 ..with a" common head room".. andI I guess they just played around with the crop in post shot by shot..  but still I wonder.. why the prevalence of 2.35-1 markers in all modern camera,s EVF..?


  • 0

#13 Wilfried E. Keil

Wilfried E. Keil
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Germany

Posted 22 April 2018 - 08:40 PM

A new scope?

 

It is older then netflix!!!

 

It is invented by DP Vittorio Storaro (Apocalypse Now and many others) in 1998. It was first used for the photography of the movie "Tango" by Carlos Saura.

 

It is called Univisium. Storaro invented the aspect ratio 1:2.00 (18:9) as a compromise. For him it was clear that the TV aspect ratio 16:9 will have sucess and that in the future many will film digital or 65mm film stock. And the aspect ratio for 65mm is 1:2,2. So he choosed as an average 1:2.00.

Mostly he shot himself in Super 35mm in 3perf. Technovision and Clairmont modified some Arriflex 435 and 535 for Univisium.

 

Also movies with a theatrical realease are shot in our days in this format like "Jurassic World".

 

So it is not a netflix thing or idea, but they thought that the idea of Storaro was good and decided to use this compromise aspect ratio. Not a bad idea...

 

...but I prefer other aspect ratios...

 

And what I really do not like is that Storaro also reframed his old work in this aspect ratio for new realeases. Why do not use the original aspect ratio? It is not only a decision of the cinematographer to choose a aspect ratio. And if it is choosen then also other departments are working for this aspect ratio! I do not like later reframing...

...but this is another discussion...


  • 1

#14 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20351 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 22 April 2018 - 09:41 PM

Older than that — the mid-1950’s RKO SuperScope format was usually 2:1 and the Fox Grandeur version of “The Big Trail” (1930) was around 2:1.
  • 0

#15 Wilfried E. Keil

Wilfried E. Keil
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Germany

Posted 24 April 2018 - 08:13 PM

Thank you, Davis Mullen for you correction.

I did not know this two formats. So I learn more...

...now I was more interested and looked up in my "old" book about some some formats. I did not found the two you mentioned. Maybe because it is a book from Germany and the system was never used in Europe.

There are so many formats and aspect ratios, especially also in the old 3D filming, which you cannot find in any publication and also not in the web.

 

But I found another format with the aspect ratio 2:1.

It is Colorama. It was shoot in 2perf and the print was with skip-frame and without an Anamorphot.

Unfortunatley I did not found more about this format.

 

Maybe, you David, know more about it...


  • 0


Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

CineLab

CineLab

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Abel Cine

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC