In response to dealer feedback and requests, HBO management made the decision to pull the plug on 2.35:1 film. As of this past Saturday, all 2.35:1 films will now be "panned and scanned" to 1.85. This is unacceptable. HBO is setting the standard for high-definition film broadcast, and others are likely to follow its example. If HBO continues this just-implemented policy of cropping 2.35:1 film to fit a 1.85:1 widescreen window, such a practice is bound to be adopted by Showtime when it launches its HDTV channel in February or March. HD-DVD may well be next to see the cropping of 2.35. Unlike current DVDs where space is often available for both pan&scan and widescreen transfers, initial incarnations of HD-DVD will not offer sufficient space for multiple transfers. Studios will have to choose between full 2.35 or 1.85 to decrease the width of bars for those with 4:3 HD sets. We must ensure that they make the right choice before it is too late!

The decision to end broadcasts in 2.35:1 was apparently made in response to complaints back in September/early October---before HBO even had any end-user customers with its HDTV channel outside of Manhattan. Virtually all of those with the channel at that time were dealers with preproduction units (the Dish and DirecTV HDTV-capable receivers did not begin shipping until October).

It would seem that dealers more interested in sales (i.e. showing full picture of widescreen set in use w/o bars) to ignorant customers (than film reproduction) complained and campaigned to have all broadcasts 1.85:1 only. Presumably, these dealers belief that cropping film to fill the full screen would increase sales, despite past evidence to the contrary (need we remind ourselves of pan&scan DIVX).

If you want the future of HDTV and HD-DVD to be cropped for 1.85:1 to accommodate those who would prefer the absence of black bars to the full display of film, then by all means do nothing. If however, you believe that the future of HDTV broadcasts and HDTV DVD should continue to offer film in its original aspect ratio as the director intended, then let your voice be heard!

Currently, HBO offers only a feedback page on their site (select HDTV as topic for feedback on http://www.hbo.com/talktohbo), but I hope to have contact information for management in the near future. Those with contacts at Time Warner (parent company of HBO) should also let their voice be heard. From dealers and certain other individuals, HBO has developed the crazy idea that its customers (primarily home theater enthusiasts) want 2.35:1 to be cropped. Let us dispel that notion!

In the final days just prior to the FCC's placing their seal upon the ATSC standard, the Cinematographers in Hollywood complained in writing that the 16:9 aspect ratio is not wide enough. A better choice, they said, would be the 2:1 aspect ratio. While that too would not present full-screen imagery for a production delivered in 2.35:1, letter boxing of it would leave much smaller black bars for anyone to complain about.

Supporters of the 16:9 said that people will not complain over letter boxing because clarity is so good with HDTV that nothing is lost. With low resolution the loss of detail is just too great from the smaller picture and complaints have to be expected. But there would be no such reason to complain with HDTV and every reason to celebrate the use of the framing intended by the movie creator.

The Cinematographers argument went further. They said that not only would there be those same complaints resulting in their content being devalued by re-fitting it to a 16:9 display, it would also dull the entire creative process. Why? They worried that the 16:9 format would becomes such a pervasive influence around the world that it would feedback into the creative process itself, i.e., influence film makers to forego (for commercial reasons) the cinimatic advantages of 2.35:1, and frame everything (protected) for 16:9. That would then determine how a movie would be displayed even in its theatrical distribution, thus removing one of the most powerful creative decisions there is in a production's design. It would appear that the pressure they then feared is now visiting them. This is one mistake we will resist making with STONEHENGE INTERNATIONAL.


Dale Cripps,November 18, 1999