anamorphic (?) laserdisc for "The Deer Hunter"

[toptentwist]

I picked up five laserdiscs the other day at Half Price Books.

1.) Bladerunner (original cut - the date on the disc is 1983)
2.) Silverstreak (with Gene Wilder and Richard Pryor)
3.) The Deer Hunter
4.) The Natural
5.) Ghostbusters (criterion edition)

All of the discs are pretty old. The only one that claims
to be a widescreen version is the Critrion version of
"Ghostbusters"

I only saw Bladerunner once - in the theater - the day it was
released. I remember being sleepy and I didn't even really see
it that day. I always wanted to give the film another chance
but I wanted to avoid the directors cut - which I *think* is the
only version available on DVD.

I was curious about the different versions of the movies above
sold on laserdisc and dvd - so I went to imdb.com - and I looked
each of the movies up.

To my surprise, imdb.com mentioned an anamorphic laserdisc
of "Ghostbusters" - specifically mentioning that one version
of the movie had "an image as wide as the Criterion laserdisc,
but TALLER, with anamorphic distortion"

That sounded intriguing to me.

I've bid a few times on ebay for the Japanese laserdiscs that are
labeled as "squeeze"... because I wanted to see how they
would look... finding out that there might also be a 1992
laserdisc that basically does the same thing - was somewhat
surprising - because I had never ever seen mention of a "squeeze"
version for "Ghostbuster"


Now... for the real shock...

I popped in "The Deer Hunter" laserdisc tonight - and I'm certain
that it is ALSO formatted for a widescreen display. The transfer
is still somewhat sloppy (the print has scratches - and its kind
of dark).... but I watched it for about ten minutes wondering
why everyone kind of looked tall and stretched... so for grins,
I turned on the "16:9 squeeze" feature on my 4:3 Sony Wega
and all of a sudden the movie looked a LOT better.

I still think there's some cropping - of the left and right sides -
but its not drastic... and the grainy look it had before cleaned
up considerably when the aspect ratio was squeezed.


I don't think this laserdisc would seriously compete with the
latest DVD version of the same movie... but if anyone is
curious about how a laserdisc would look if it was formatted
for widescreen... you might try looking for a copy.

[Dennis Metz]

I kept my original Blade Runner DVD...you need to have both.

[harmonica98]

I'm not quite sure what you are seeing, but The Deer Hunter was never released on squeeze LD. The complete list is at:

http://www.lddb.com/list.php?format=laserdisc&list=squeeze

As you can see, very few titles were released. A squeeze LD will not look correct on a 4:3 display in any case - one of the reasons they never took off. The following is an interesting article about them:

http://www.mindspring.com/~laserguru/squeeze.html

So I would suggest that something is happening with the way your display is coping with the LD signal - though why this should only happen on this disc I do not know.

The original theatrical cut of Blade Runner has not yet been released on DVD - but is due to be finally released this year in a multi-disc set. The LD is still nice to have for the jacket art though, especially on the 2-disc CAV disc with it's gatefold jacket.

The imdb is not a very trustworthy source for LD information BTW.

Tom

[HGN2001]

There was a time, as I recall, that widescreen movies were presented on both home video and on movie services like HBO in a kind-of squeezed fashion. Movies that were really wide, like a 2.35:1 format, sometimes were squeezed so that *some* info was cropped left/right, and the rest of the image was squeezed, almost as if it were a 1.78:1 film. That format, I suppose, was thought to avoid the unecessary panning and scanning, yet still present more of the image that a standard 4:3 screen could.

I can't recall any titles that did this - I know I remember seeing it, and probably even taping a few off of HBO. And there were a lot that had widescreen title sequences in a squeezed format that would change as soon as the next scene would allow. That's very common. I have VHS tape of Paul Newman's THE PRIZE (still not released in any other format) that has a squeezed title sequence. I can use my TV's "wide" mode to make it appear more normal. I also recall that "Journey To The Center Of The Earth" had a squeezed title sequence where the image of Earth's globe looked egg-shaped.

I seem to remember seeing a Roy Scheider movie that was squeezed all the way through. Could have been JAWS or even SORCERER, but I remember Scheider's somehwat narrow face looking oddly narrower in that tele-presentation.

Harry

[toptentwist]

There was a time, as I recall, that widescreen movies were presented on both home video and on movie services like HBO in a kind-of squeezed fashion. Movies that were really wide, like a 2.35:1 format, sometimes were squeezed so that *some* info was cropped left/right, and the rest of the image was squeezed, almost as if it were a 1.78:1 film. That format, I suppose, was thought to avoid the unecessary panning and scanning, yet still present more of the image that a standard 4:3 screen could.

I can't recall any titles that did this - I know I remember seeing it, and probably even taping a few off of HBO. And there were a lot that had widescreen title sequences in a squeezed format that would change as soon as the next scene would allow. That's very common. I have VHS tape of Paul Newman's THE PRIZE (still not released in any other format) that has a squeezed title sequence. I can use my TV's "wide" mode to make it appear more normal. I also recall that "Journey To The Center Of The Earth" had a squeezed title sequence where the image of Earth's globe looked egg-shaped.

I seem to remember seeing a Roy Scheider movie that was squeezed all the way through. Could have been JAWS or even SORCERER, but I remember Scheider's somehwat narrow face looking oddly narrower in that tele-presentation.

Harry

I think the way you described it is accurate.

It appears to be squeezed on MOST sequences - the wedding scenes
at the beginning - for example... but then there are other scenes
where it doesn't appear to be doing it.

But if I had to guesstimate - I'd say 85% of the movie is squeezed.

There is nothing wrong with my display. I think it was just someone's
decision to present it that way - as opposed to cropping...

Obviously there was no "correct" way to display the video when it
was first made - because televisions didn't have a button on them
that would stretch the image into a 16:9 (or squeeze them down
into a 16:9 window inside of a 4:3 frame).

I suspect that the VHS tape looks the same - as did broadcast
presentations of the movie - and possibly even the first DVD.

In any case - the squeeze button on my Sony made the movie
a LOT more watchable... I'm going to try the stretch mode
on my 55" widescreen Mitsubishi and see how it looks there...

[Rachael Bee]

I actually own two Squeez LD's, T2 THX & Cliffhanger. I've also seen 5 others. Cliffhanger look real good at times but has massive, horrid edge enhancement in some scenes. Treasure Island, another Squeez title was just plagued with enhancement attempts. I had it on loan.

T2 was released twice in Squeez, the THX one and a non-THX edition earlier. T2 THX, to me, is the purr-fect LD. They were given a good transfer to work with and I don't see any attempt at enhancements. It would pass for a DVD when played by a real good LD player. It might be a tad less detailed than DVD but the colour is natural and free of compression. It's a looker.

Free Willy was in my borrowed lot and another Warner film...I'm forgettin'....they were commisioned by Toshiba for demos and throw-in's of their early 90's 16 x 9 TV sets....that cost alot, atleast $5000. The Toshiba discs had noise problems in places and some edge problems at times.

T2 stands alone out of the 16 x 9 NTSC LD's I've seen. I have a dozen 16 x 9 Muse LD's but they're a whole other thang.

[Rachael Bee]

I have the Buckaroo Banzai 4/3 LD. The opening credits are in the wrong aspect. Everybody and everything are stretched thin in 4/3. I ought'a put it in and play around with aspects and see what gives....?

[toptentwist]

I have the Buckaroo Banzai 4/3 LD. The opening credits are in the wrong aspect. Everybody and everything are stretched thin in 4/3. I ought'a put it in and play around with aspects and see what gives....?


I tried putting my laserdisc of The Deer Hunter into the player connected
to my 55" widescreen HDTV. It still looks more correct when watching
it stretched.

It definetly looked better when it was squeezed into a 16:9 window on
my 27" (4:3) Sony.

But thats because the transfer was fundamentally bad to begin with.

[SamS]

It still looks more correct when watching
it stretched.




You say "stretched", but you mean you watched it with the "Standard" setting on your Mitsubishi, right?

[toptentwist]

You say "stretched", but you mean you watched it with the "Standard" setting on your Mitsubishi, right?


My previous Mitsubishi had three modes. My new one has five.

Its easier to talk about the old tv - since there weren't as many options.

Option 1:) Normal... meaning - 4:3 material is displayed using grey bars
on the left and right

Option 2:) Stretch... this is what I had to use to view an anamorphic
DVD... basically the DVD player puts out an image where everything
is tall and skinny... and the TV pulls that image to the left and the
right

Option 3:) Zoom... this is what I had to use to view a letterbox
DVD (e.g. The Graduate)... basically the tv attempts to zoom in
on the movie and eliminate the black bars above and below - while
also stretching the image to the left and right


My new tv has two additional modes but they are more like partial
modes - or variations on the above three...


Basically I was always happiest when a DVD allowed me to use
Option 2 to watch a 16:9 movie or a 2.35 movie.

Option 3 gets a correct aspect ratio for DVDs that are not
encoded with the anamorphic trick... but the image suffers
from being blown up.


With respect to your question - the laserdisc appears to
be a 4:3 movie - given that the sleeve never mentions anywhere
anything about it being a widescreen movie.... but if I try to
watch it using Option 1, I watch tall and skinny people.

Option 2 corrects the problem by pulling the image to the left
and right.


My 27" Sony has a completely different (but similar) mechanism
that pushs an anamorphic image (an image with tall and skinny
people) from the top and bottom and creates a letterbox
with the movie inside of it.


Since the Sony TV makes the image SMALLER... as opposed
to my Mitsubishi TV making the image LARGER... its an
inherently less revealing process.

I remember seeing movies displayed this way on television
years ago... just as someone mentioned.... I just never
understood why some movies had tall and skinny people
and others didnt...


In any case - I can't really recommend The Deer Hunter
laserdisc - unless your curious about how it was transferred
years before widescreen tvs were sold. And I would bet
that there are other titles that were done this way.
Ghostbusters appears to be one of them.

[Rachael Bee]

I tried putting my laserdisc of The Deer Hunter into the player connected
to my 55" widescreen HDTV. It still looks more correct when watching
it stretched.

It definetly looked better when it was squeezed into a 16:9 window on
my 27" (4:3) Sony.

But thats because the transfer was fundamentally bad to begin with.

There were alot of really badly done LD's, particularly in the 80's. The LD could be way off? I've never owned a Deer Hunter LD....

Maybe you should troll e-Bay for a T2 THX Squeez and see what a real one looks like. I found mine there about 5 years ago and it only cost me about $30. It's an intresting LD to own. It does have Japanese sub's, BTW.

[toptentwist]

There were alot of really badly done LD's, particularly in the 80's. The LD could be way off? I've never owned a Deer Hunter LD....

Maybe you should troll e-Bay for a T2 THX Squeez and see what a real one looks like. I found mine there about 5 years ago and it only cost me about $30. It's an intresting LD to own. It does have Japanese sub's, BTW.

I've tried bidding on some Squeeze LDs on ebay. They always went for
a number higher than you mentioned. Usually around $80+ which was
always too high for me to buy on a whim.

And my guess is the newer movies specifically labeled as squeeze
would look a LOT better my Deer Hunter purchase.


I don't think the LD is "off" per se... I think whoever did the transfer
made the decision to do it that way because he (or she) didn't want to have
to cut too much from the sides.

Its exactly as described by someone else.... take a 2.35 movie... crop
the left and right slightly... and then push whats left over in from the
left and right... like would be done when creating a 1.78 anamorphic
DVD...

The only thing I'm wondering is if there were perhaps some kind of
tvs (perhaps projectors) back in the early 80s that could then adjust
the video so it could be viewed properly.

[Bahax]

I believe at that time you had to have a laserdisc player that supported 'squeezed' discs? By which I mean, un-squoze them before sending to TV.

[SamS]

My previous Mitsubishi had three modes. My new one has five.

Its easier to talk about the old tv - since there weren't as many options.

Option 1:) Normal... meaning - 4:3 material is displayed using grey bars
on the left and right

Option 2:) Stretch... this is what I had to use to view an anamorphic
DVD... basically the DVD player puts out an image where everything
is tall and skinny... and the TV pulls that image to the left and the
right

Option 3:) Zoom... this is what I had to use to view a letterbox
DVD (e.g. The Graduate)... basically the tv attempts to zoom in
on the movie and eliminate the black bars above and below - while
also stretching the image to the left and right


My new tv has two additional modes but they are more like partial
modes - or variations on the above three...


Basically I was always happiest when a DVD allowed me to use
Option 2 to watch a 16:9 movie or a 2.35 movie.

Option 3 gets a correct aspect ratio for DVDs that are not
encoded with the anamorphic trick... but the image suffers
from being blown up.


With respect to your question - the laserdisc appears to
be a 4:3 movie - given that the sleeve never mentions anywhere
anything about it being a widescreen movie.... but if I try to
watch it using Option 1, I watch tall and skinny people.

Option 2 corrects the problem by pulling the image to the left
and right.


My 27" Sony has a completely different (but similar) mechanism
that pushs an anamorphic image (an image with tall and skinny
people) from the top and bottom and creates a letterbox
with the movie inside of it.


Since the Sony TV makes the image SMALLER... as opposed
to my Mitsubishi TV making the image LARGER... its an
inherently less revealing process.

I remember seeing movies displayed this way on television
years ago... just as someone mentioned.... I just never
understood why some movies had tall and skinny people
and others didnt...


In any case - I can't really recommend The Deer Hunter
laserdisc - unless your curious about how it was transferred
years before widescreen tvs were sold. And I would bet
that there are other titles that were done this way.
Ghostbusters appears to be one of them.

On the Mitsu, these modes should not be called "stretched", they should be called "Standard" if they are applying a linear stretch to the image. Mitsubishi also has a mode called "Stretched" which will apply a non-linear stretch (e.g. the sides are stretched more than the center). If you press the "info" button on your remote, the image mode will appear on screen. Correct mode for anamorphic DVDs or LDs would be "Standard", not "Stretched".

[Rachael Bee]

I don't know about any 80's TV's that did anything remarkable. I saw LD in the early 80's but didn't get it till '86. In the late 80's and early 90's, the best tubes for LD's were Sony's 32" XBR's 96 and later the 100. That's what I wanted and actually never got.

I knew of somebody projecting LD's back then but was never invited over. I struck up conversations a couple of times with him at a local A/V joint in hopes of such an invite.

[Rachael Bee]

...oh, I'm suprised Squeez LD's sell so high these days! It's hard to understand, other than they're relatively rare. With HD formats available......

[toptentwist]

On the Mitsu, these modes should not be called "stretched", they should be called "Standard" if they are applying a linear stretch to the image. Mitsubishi also has a mode called "Stretched" which will apply a non-linear stretch (e.g. the sides are stretched more than the center). If you press the "info" button on your remote, the image mode will appear on screen. Correct mode for anamorphic DVDs or LDs would be "Standard", not "Stretched".


I forget the labels... but I think the mode your talking about with the
non-linear stretch is one of the two extra modes on my newer model.
The two modes I avoided describing :-)

I think its called "stretch plus"... I thought it would be cool when
I read about it, but I don't really care for it much more than the linear
stretch. The picture STILL looks distorted.

What I *really* wish they had was some sort of "screen saver"
mode that replaced grey bars with some sort of active display.
Cartoons.... ANYTHING... besides a grey screen whose only
redeeming quality is that its more neutral than black with
respect to wear and tear on the television....

Most of the time if I'm watching 4:3 material on my widescreen
TV I'll "create" a screensaver by selecting a PiP mode where the
main image is on the extreme left - and then three smaller images
are stacked to the right. For music/concert videos - it almost seems
seems natural if you make the PiP input the same as the source
for the main (large) window. You get a recursive kind of effect
where it appears that you're watching the concert on a "video
wall" with slightly different views of the concert on each part
of the wall (the PiP views are slightly behind the live screen).

[harmonica98]

...oh, I'm suprised Squeez LD's sell so high these days! It's hard to understand, other than they're relatively rare. With HD formats available......

When has collecting ever been rational? ;)

Tom

[Drifter]

I'm not quite sure what you are seeing, but The Deer Hunter was never released on squeeze LD. The complete list is at:

http://www.lddb.com/list.php?format=laserdisc&list=squeeze

As you can see, very few titles were released. A squeeze LD will not look correct on a 4:3 display in any case - one of the reasons they never took off.Hmm...my "Star Trek - The Motion Picture" Laserdisc (1991) says "This film is presented in 'anamorphic widescreen' format" on the back of the jacket. I guess they just mean it was filmed that way?

[HGN2001]

Hmm...my "Star Trek - The Motion Picture" Laserdisc (1991) says "This film is presented in 'anamorphic widescreen' format" on the back of the jacket. I guess they just mean it was filmed that way?

Correct. It means that an anamorphic stretching/unstretching process was used in the filming of the movie, as opposed to it being a naturally-occuring widescreen image on the film.

There's nothing mystical or magical about what the original poster has experienced. It was simply a fact of the times (80's and before) that TV's couldn't show a full widescreen image without blanking out some part of the screen, which seemed an unthinkable option for a very long time.

Wide movies were either panned and scanned, squeezed horizontally to make tall-thin people, or they'd do fancy things with wide credits like filling in the top/bottom black portion with decorations, panning and scanning the rest.

THE DEER HUNTER was an important film in its day and whoever chose its presentation for TV decided that so much of the image was important, that squeezing the picture horizontally would be the least objectionable way of viewing the film on TV. It wasn't good, but that's the way it was.

LaserDiscs themselves weren't really made for videophiles in those early days. They were simply "another" format - one that was more durable, that wouldn't crunch up in the player, and one that you didn't have to rewind. Most often, those early LaserDiscs used the same prints that their VHS cousins had, so whatever was on one, was on the other. Fans of the format and videophiles naturally noticed more detail visible in the pictures and thus began the gradual process of LaserDisc becoming a preferred format for those who cared about picture quality. Gradually, different and better transfers were made to LaserDisc as the "supreme" format of its day. But in those early days, it was just another way of playing a movie at home.

Harry

[toptentwist]

On the Mitsu, these modes should not be called "stretched", they should be called "Standard" if they are applying a linear stretch to the image.


To further confuse the issue, my Mitsubishi has two modes (as opposed
to five) when you present it with a 1080i signal.

Those modes are "standard" and another one that stretches the
picture (I think its called "stretch" but don't quote me on it).

The basic idea is that if my hi-def tuner is set to widescreen, and
the source material is wide screen... standard works best. But if
the source material is 4:3 and the tuner (or the broadcaster) has
added bars on the left and right... the "stretch" mode will get rid
of the bars on the left and right (at the expense of making the
picture look awful).

I think it operates the exact same way when presented with
a progressive scan signal from a DVD player... meaning the
5 modes are not an option - I only get two modes.

More confusing - the names of the five - and the names of
the two - don't seem to be consistent with each other.

In my case - if I'm feeding my tv a traditional NTSC interlaced
signal (480i), the first option will always put grey bars on
the left and right. I believe that option is labeled as standard
(which means relative to a traditional 4:3 NTSC signal - not
a newfangled 1080i 16:9 signal) If the source feeding my tv
is a dvd player, I can set the dvd player up to send tall skinny
people - and then I can correct the tall and skinny thing
by using a linear stretch mode.

Since in this case, my source was a LD player without any
option - I can't do anything BUT send tall and skinny images
to the TV when playing this specific disc... which I then
correct using the stretch mode.

This is exactly how I believe it would work if I had managed to
win one of the ebay auctions for the "squeeze titles"

[SamS]

toptentwist, I think I'm following along, but I'm not sure if you're asking a specific question. Here are the stretch modes you should have, and where/when you should you use each:

Narrow: only use this with native 4:3 480i input signals, you'll get gray bars on the left/right

Standard: Should be used for ALL anamorphic DVDs (and LD "squeeze" titles) and HDTV

Stretch: takes 480i 4:3 signals and does some non-linear stretching, sides are stretched more than the center. Looks bad. I do not recommend using ever.

Stretch Plus: same as above, but not as ugly. I still don't recommend using this.

Expand: should only be used for non-anamorphic/letterboxed 4:3 material. Good for watching letterboxed laser discs or the occasional non-anamorphic DVD.

Zoom: Zooms in 2.35 anamorphic DVDs to crop off the black bars. Also crops off the sides of the picture. Not recommended for any source.

[toptentwist]

toptentwist, I think I'm following along, but I'm not sure if you're asking a specific question. Here are the stretch modes you should have, and where/when you should you use each:

Narrow: only use this with native 4:3 480i input signals, you'll get gray bars on the left/right

Standard: Should be used for ALL anamorphic DVDs (and LD "squeeze" titles) and HDTV

Stretch: takes 480i 4:3 signals and does some non-linear stretching, sides are stretched more than the center. Looks bad. I do not recommend using ever.

Smart Stretch: same as above, but not as ugly. I still don't recommend using this.

Zoom: should only be used for non-anamorphic/letterboxed 4:3 material. Good for watching letterboxed laser discs or the occasional non-anamorphic DVD.


I think you accurately described the 5 modes - your names might be
wrong... part of MY confusion is I used to have a Mitsubishi that
had THREE modes - and I replaced it with a TV that essentially
has SEVEN modes (5 for NTSC, 2 for 1080i/480p) AND I think they
changed the names between the old and new tv - AND - the names
don't seem consistent across the NTSC and 1080i modes...

So the long and short of it - is I usually just play with the format
button until it looks ok :-)

And I avoid the two new modes like the plague - even though they
are somewhat better at taking a traditional 4:3 NTSC signal and
transforming it to fill the whole screen (which is not a specific
goal of mine)

[SamS]

names should be consistent. Check my original post again, I made an edit to the names.

[toptentwist]

names should be consistent. Check my original post again, I made an edit to the names.

Yes... I can see you edited your post.

I read the names before - which is why I said I wasn't sure they
were listed correctly.


I'm fairly certain what they are now calling "narrow" was previously
called "standard" and what they are now calling "standard" was
previously called "stretch"... the change occurred when they
added the two extra format modes.

Except after your edit - you now list 6 modes instead of 5