2:35 or 1:85..?

T

tomflint

Member
I'm putting the finishing touches on a feature length suspense film I've been working on over the last few years and I've been trying to figure out whether to go 2:35 or 1:85. I'm planning to send it through the film festival circuit once it's done so it'll presumably be playing on some big screens. Also, I'll be selling a bunch of DVDs on Indiegogo as well so my audience is split between people who'll be watching it in a theater and people who'll be watching it at home. Is there a standard for low-budget films aimed for film festivals and eventual distribution deals?

I've tried playing with both ratios, and in my opinion 2:35 just inherently makes it looks better, more polished and ultimately more professional. Thoughts...?
 
It's irrelevant as far as film festivals or distribution go.

What matters is what it does for your image. Both aspect ratios have different feels which are appropriate for different things.

You pick based on what works better for the artistic intent of your film. Does your CONTENT benefit from a wider picture or a more narrow one? What does it do for you thematically?

This is something you should decide in pre-production, before you shoot, as a matter of image composition. This isn't a decision you should leave to post. You need to be framing for the aspect ratio you want while you're shooting.

One aspect ratio does not look more "polished" or "professional" than another; that's the wrong way of looking at it and thinking about it. Also, if you're looking at the black bars and thinking they look cool, then you're not thinking about the right thing. You should be ignoring the bars. They aren't part of your image. Your image is entirely what's between the bars, and you should be thinking about what the SHAPE of the image does for you and your narrative and your visual intent, and how you USE that shape to tell your story, and how you fill that shape with the elements of your image. This is an artistic question, not a technical question or a "professional vs. unprofessional" question.
 
I second everything David says - and just one quick technical note... 2.35 hasn't really existed since the 70's. Today is is 2.39 and just rounded to 2.40.

Michael
 
Here's what it comes down to... In my humble opinion. It's all about the feel. If this is a documentary/found footage suspense I would go with 1:85. For a more blockbuster feel I'd go with 2:35. But this isn't really a matter of professional vs non.
 
I love the squeeze. 2.4, yes! If it's appropriate. I think you can mix it, if my memory serves me correctly, Nolan did it at the beginning of the second Manbat.
 
Nolan did it to great effect only in the IMAX theaters where the full frame aspect ratio of the format was used to bring the audience into the story - I loved it. But in non IMAX theaters and DVD, the aspect ratio is the same as it wouldn't have the same effect as those 4 story high IMAX screens.

Michael
 
Actually, the Blu-ray switches aspect ratios constantly and it's annoying as all get-out.

But no, you don't REALLY need to keep the same aspect ratio throughout as long as you have a bona-fide, motivated reason to switch that makes sense and isn't distracting. This, of course, will require very thorough planning. Pre-production.
 
I'll have to check out the Blu Ray version then. But I would suspect that it would be annoying on anything but an IMAX size screen as there is not enough size to get lost in the image when viewed at home.

Michael
 
Actually, 2:35 sounds really, really, really widescreen. But 1:85 is even worse! Let's say you have a screen 30 feet wide. An aspect ratio of 1:85 would give you a picture height of about 4.235 inches! I would much rather go with a ratio of 1.85:1 ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top