Maxwell Everett wrote:
You could've made a similar argument back in 1987. Demand that the guys over at The Post Group deliver the show on tape with only the action safe area visible (no overscan)... and just tell the public, "Hey, you want to see the area we intended you to see? Then you should have bought a professional underscan monitor that allows you to fit all of our picture into the visible part of your cathode ray tube. You made an ill-fated purchase decision.
|
I'd say there is a vast difference between 1987 (when the majority of the audience - 98%? - owned consumer grade CRTs with overscan) and 2012, where we have increasing large numbers of consumer-grade HD displays with 1:1 pixel mapping / no overscan and a superior consumer hardware quality awareness.
So what does this piece of carpet tell us?
That Corey Allen was a
bad director because he didn't pay attention to that piece of carpet in the overscan zone
or that he was a
good director because he knew that this production oddity would't be noticed by 98% of the audience because they couldn't see it on their CRT TVs?
I honestly had decided to remove myself entirely from the framing debate but when I noticed that people are complaining again about a supposedly "incorrect" presentation of "Sins of the Father" (correct as the framing matches what most saw on their 4:3 CRT TVs and just seem to have forgotten) I couldn't sit still.
Hope your beautiful and Andrew Probert sanctioned 16:9 enhancement of the Starbase 74 docking scene matte painting will make it into a future, corresponding release.
Bob