American cinematographer (Jan-Dec 1963)

WIDESCREEN FOR TV Continued from Page 351 between 0.530" and 0.536", A visual¬ ization of this situation may be seen at C in Fig. 1. Here it is obvious that the vertical situation is now under con¬ trol and over-shooting and set height requirements are almost comparable to those required for the old 1.33:1 aspect ratio, illustrated at A in Fig. 1. This latter step was undoubtedly well-meant, but of course resulted in prints best suited for the theatre; and, having wide frame lines, not enough picture information is provided on the film frames to meet the requirements of standard TV screens in the event such films are subsequently exhibited on television. Because more and more feature films are being made available to tele¬ vision, it is essential to consider that all future film productions may eventually reach the television market and to re¬ move all technical sturnblimr blocks that may jeopardize the use of such films on TV. The need is for standard¬ ization that will benefit both motion picture producers and the television in¬ dustry. The Wide Frame Line Bugaboo To acquaint the less-informed reader with the film frame height : itnation involved in this problem, the following information will be helpful: lhe pic¬ ture aperture of the 35mm projector employed in TV stations in the trans¬ mission of motion pictures has a height of 0.612". The height of the transmitted area inside this field is 0.594". The height of the safe action area is 0.565", and the wide-frame line release print presently has 0.536" maximum picture information on the film. That the frame lines of such prints may show on TV screens is at once obvious. It is this situation which this Committee present¬ ly is attempting to correct. (For more complete details on aspect ratio dimen¬ sions, etc., refer to the Committee’s report on ASC Recommendation No. 4 published in American Cinematogra¬ pher for May, 1962, pp. 272). The following report by the Com¬ mittee Chairman, released in April, is self-explanatory and is reproduced here to bring readers up to date on this project and to reveal something of the activities of the Research and Educa¬ tional Committee of the ASC: THEATRICAL WIDE-SCREEN VS. TV-RELEASE ASPECT RATIO CONSIDERATIONS It was first pointed out in my article in the American Cinematographer Manual, published in October, 1960, (pp. 47) that the reduction of camera hard mattes to suit the 1.85:1 aspect ratio only would result in wide frame line prints — not too welcome for the theatre and absolutely undesirable in regard to future release of theatrical films for television. This problem was again the main reason for establishing ASC Recom¬ mendation No. 8, issued April 30, 1962, and subsequently published in Amer¬ ican Cinematographer for June, 1962, pp. 366. The drawings on pages A and B of that recommendation are selfexplanatory. On January 15, 1963, a joint meet¬ ing of members of the ASC and SMPTE was held to discuss the prob¬ lem, with the participation of repre¬ sentatives from ABC, CBS, AND NBC networks. (See American Cinematog¬ rapher for February, 1963, pp. 68). The basic points established were as follows : The major networks will refuse to telecast wide frame line prints of mo¬ tion picture films. They will consider as ‘‘non-standard for TV release” any print that does not have sufficient print¬ ed picture information to fill the 0.816" X 0.612" aperture of the net¬ works’ 35mm TV film projectors. There is full understanding for the fact that economic and technical reasons have caused studios to reduce picture height from 0.600 since com¬ position for 1:85:1 aspect ratio plays only between 0.477" which, even for 1.66:1 protection requires no more than approximately 0.530" pictuie height for presentation of the film on theatre screens. The chairman outlined the details of all problems with the aid of charts and celluloid overlays to demonstrate the incompatibility of the 1.85:1 produc¬ tion method and 1.33:1 aspect ratio TV home receivers. No definite solution was reached at the termination of the meeting. Among the many proposals offered by the Com¬ mittee Chairman was enlarging camera hard mattes to a height of 0.565" from the approximate present height of 0.530" — a move he considered a logical middle-of-the-road solution inasmuch as this dimension is the same as the presently recognized height of the TV safe action area. From 0.565" to the transmitted height of 0.594" is a differance of 0.029" or only 0.0145", top and bottom, which should not be con¬ sidered by the networks as an objec¬ tionable frame line to appear on home receivers. Subsequent to this meeting, Mr. Ray Johnson, head of the camera depart¬ ment at M-G-M Studios, prepared a short wide-screen test film that demon¬ strated the results of a scene photo¬ graphed with three different 35mm camera apertures: full TV aperture height, 0.536", and 0.565". The fol¬ lowing is a condensation of Ray John¬ son’s report to the ASC’s Research and Educational Committee: ‘Tn association with Walter Beyer “Quit worrying. Your mother will probably never see the picture. “ ■ — Der Film Kre-is. Germany 352 AMERICAN CINEMATOGRAPHER, JUNE, 1963