Crusade DVDs announced

[Dave Thomer]

I'm just glad that this is the last set for which we'll have to have the widescreen/4:3 discussion.

And while I had no real problem with the widescreen B5 sets, I am glad that the folks who did will get at least one set that satisfies them.

 

[Recoil]

Probably people who don't own 16:9 TV sets.

I agree I'm just glad to have the set, and am fine with the format. If I had a choice of course I would want widescreen, but I'm sure it will look just great as-is and I'm glad to finally get the last current piece of the B5 universe on DVD. (rangers pending)

 

[KoshN]

Probably people who don't own 16:9 TV sets.

I agree I'm just glad to have the set, and am fine with the format. If I had a choice of course I would want widescreen, but I'm sure it will look just great as-is and I'm glad to finally get the last current piece of the B5 universe on DVD. (rangers pending)

If I had a widescreen set, I'd STILL want Crusade in 4:3. Just watch in 4:3 mode. I watch 2.35:1 movies on my 4:3 set and don't complain about it. Why would I complain about watching a 4:3 subject in 4:3 mode on a Widescreen TV? I wouldn't. I do hate the top and bottom cropping of CGI picture area that I'm used to seeing, just so I can get to see a few more elbows in some live action shots, not to mention how it FUBARs the Composite CGI shots.

I swear, some people have widescreen on the brain. If it isn't "Widescreen," it's crap. It's the reverse of the old "Widescreen means you're seeing less picture." attitude. What was it about the original 4:3 airing of B5 and Crusade that was so deficient? Nothing. It was made to look good in 4:3, and it does.

 

[Fas]

I'm one of those people. And i don't even have a widescreen tv.

Star Wars Fullscreen DVD editions. WTF????

 

[Sigma]

I swear, some people have widescreen on the brain. If it isn't "Widescreen," it's crap. It's the reverse of the old "Widescreen means you're seeing less picture." attitude.

Couldn't agree more. I'm frequent lurker at HTF and there have been many many times where i just can't belive how biased everybody is towards Widesceen (for example Crusade DVD thread at HTF). I love 16:9 and think it is the future of TV, but people expect that every TV show is meant to be viewed that way.

 

[KoshN]

I swear, some people have widescreen on the brain. If it isn't "Widescreen," it's crap. It's the reverse of the old "Widescreen means you're seeing less picture." attitude.

Couldn't agree more. I'm frequent lurker at HTF and there have been many many times where i just can't belive how biased everybody is towards Widesceen (for example Crusade DVD thread at HTF). I love 16:9 and think it is the future of TV, but people expect that every TV show is meant to be viewed that way.

Right. Things have to be judged on a case-by-case basis. For some things, Widescreen is better, and for other things, 4:3 is better. If B5 and Crusade CGI had been rendered 16:9, then Widescreen would be better. However, that was not the case.

 

[darth_librarian]

>Not widescreen then?

Alas, no.

The reason that WB was able to release B5 wide is that TNT had paid to have
them re-telecine'd to that format. It would take about two hundred grand to go
through and do that with Crusade...and even though they've now grossed about
half a BILLION dollars on the B5 dvd's to date, they don't seem inclined to
want to spend that.

(Needless to say, my last profit statement showed the show still in the red,
which gets increasingly hysterical as time passes.)

jms

(jmsatb5@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2004 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)

In case no-one has seen this. Cost was the main issue.
But hang on, Half a BILLION Dollars??? (you should say the last sentence in your best Dr. Evil)

 

[ibwolf]

Right. Things have to be judged on a case-by-case basis. For some things, Widescreen is better, and for other things, 4:3 is better. If B5 and Crusade CGI had been rendered 16:9, then Widescreen would be better. However, that was not the case.

Agreed. Movies and TV shows should always be presented in their original aspect ratios. For Crusade that is 4:3. Heck, B5 should have been 4:3 also but that's a subject I'm not willing to get into.
This also goes for many old movies. I expect movies like the Maltese Falcon to be 4:3. No one in his right mind would suggest presenting it in 16:9. It was filmed in 4:3 and that is how it should be.

 

[masaru]

reading this news just now made me think of what the best possible extras for this set could be. complete scripts of all unfilmed episodes, and the series outline of where the story would go. Would love to have an official statement of just what would have happened to this show.

I wonder what order this episodes will be in? The airing order or the JMS preferred order?

 

[Fas]

probably airing order. as b5

 

[Sindatur]

Scifi Channel airing Order was JMS preferred order, so Airing order and JMS preferred order could be one and the same. It was TNT who showed the episodes all mixed up.

So, if it's TNT airing order, it will be mixed up, if it's Scifi Channel airing order, it will be in JMS preferred order.

 

[Recoil]

Movies and TV shows should always be presented in their original aspect ratios. For Crusade that is 4:3. Heck, B5 should have been 4:3 also but that's a subject I'm not willing to get into.

Well I dont want to fully open that can of worms either, but I completely disagree on "original" aspect ratios. Just because the CGI was formatted 4:3...JMS didn't take the time to shoot the entire series in Super30 film for shits and giggles you know. He always said that his choice to shoot it that was was a very forward thinking move, anticipating HDTV specifically which is 16:9. He filmed it with that film so it COULD be widescreen. IMO that means no matter what a few CGI scenes say...16:9 was his original intended format.

Just because when the show aired there were very few 16:9 TV's out there and he had to present it in 4:3 doesn't mean he didnt realize that with each passing year more and more 16:9 TV's would be out there, and that he always intended it to be for the widescreen.

If he looked that far ahead, then as far as Im concerned 16:9 IS the original format...the film he used says it all.

 

[Flounder]

@Recoil.
Yes.
B5 was intended to work as both widescreen and regular aspect. The reason people complain is that they first saw it in 4:3 and got all the CGI without the fuzzyness. This is about to become yet another lament for the lost CGI files, so don't you let me go there. :devil: It just shows how forward-looking JMS was and how bad archiving routines can jeaopardize the core business of a company. (I'm a computer security student, so I care about these things.)
Colorized B/W and widescreened 4:3 is da suX0r in my not so humble opinion.
And us in region 2? Well, I think I'll wait untill WB UK gets around to it even though my family has multi-region DVD players.

 

[PillowRock]

Movies and TV shows should always be presented in their original aspect ratios. For Crusade that is 4:3. Heck, B5 should have been 4:3 also but that's a subject I'm not willing to get into.

Well I dont want to fully open that can of worms either, but I completely disagree on "original" aspect ratios. Just because the CGI was formatted 4:3...JMS didn't take the time to shoot the entire series in Super30 film for shits and giggles you know. He always said that his choice to shoot it that was was a very forward thinking move, anticipating HDTV specifically which is 16:9. He filmed it with that film so it COULD be widescreen. IMO that means no matter what a few CGI scenes say...16:9 was his original intended format.

Just because when the show aired there were very few 16:9 TV's out there and he had to present it in 4:3 doesn't mean he didnt realize that with each passing year more and more 16:9 TV's would be out there, and that he always intended it to be for the widescreen.

If he looked that far ahead, then as far as Im concerned 16:9 IS the original format...the film he used says it all.

I would also point out that the CGI shots also were generally composed with the 16:9 aspect ratio in mind. *Many* of the CGI shots look *better* that way, in terms of artistic compostion of the shot.

That said, in B5 there were definitely some (though relatively few, really) composite shots where the fact that they didn't go back and re-build the shot from the components really did screw up the scene. For the various "TV talking head" shots that were from ISN feeds, it seems (to someone not in the industry, anyway) like it shouldn't have been all *that* difficult or expensive to go back to the super-35 and re-superimpose the subtitles running at the bottom. The pan-and-scan versions of some of those scenes are truly hideous.

One scene where it made a material difference and where it probably would have been more expensive to re-create (since it involved more movement and shapes that weren't simple text and logos) was the scene at the end of Soul Hunter where Delenn is releasing the souls. The cropping really took away some of the information that the scene really needed to get to the viewer.

 

[Sigma]

I would also point out that the CGI shots also were generally composed with the 16:9 aspect ratio in mind. *Many* of the CGI shots look *better* that way, in terms of artistic compostion of the shot.

That is not a case with Crusade CGI. I'm as sure as it gets. Maybe JMS indented it would, but SpecialFX guys rendered it with 4:3 in mind.

 

[Recoil]

Regarding the "fuzziness" I do think many of the Season 1 CGI shots appear a bit fuzzy, but later seasons are extremely crisp. Not sure where the real complaint is here either. I always figured it was like many things with the show, early on it was a bit off, but as they progressed the CGI improved dramatically.

 

[PillowRock]

I would also point out that the CGI shots also were generally composed with the 16:9 aspect ratio in mind. *Many* of the CGI shots look *better* that way, in terms of artistic compostion of the shot.

That is not a case with Crusade CGI. I'm as sure as it gets. Maybe JMS indented it would, but SpecialFX guys rendered it with 4:3 in mind.

Just to be clear (moreso than I was in my last post), my statement here was referring to B5, where I have actually seen the results both ways.

To be honest on this point, I have not looked at the Crusade shots with that idea in mind. However, since the silhouette of the Excalibur had the same kind of long but not tall aspect ratio that the Babylon 5 station had, it would not surprise me if a fair number of those CGI shots also looked as good or better when cropped to 16:9.

 

[KoshN]

Movies and TV shows should always be presented in their original aspect ratios. For Crusade that is 4:3. Heck, B5 should have been 4:3 also but that's a subject I'm not willing to get into.

Well I dont want to fully open that can of worms either, but I completely disagree on "original" aspect ratios. Just because the CGI was formatted 4:3...JMS didn't take the time to shoot the entire series in Super30 film for shits and giggles you know.

Oh, now you're just doing it on purpose. 35 ....It's Super 35.

He always said that his choice to shoot it that was was a very forward thinking move, anticipating HDTV specifically which is 16:9. He filmed it with that film so it COULD be widescreen. IMO that means no matter what a few CGI scenes say...16:9 was his original intended format.

Then, he should have cropped and enlarged the CGI and Composite CGI scenes to make them 16:9 way back when (and in doing so, all these problems would have reared their ugly heads, and something in JMS's head would have gone "DING!...maybe this half-a**ed approach ain't such a good idea."), and then cropped the edges again (to take the 16:9 to 4:3) for the airings. Then, in all of the widescreen airings, it would look like we're getting more in all of the frames.

 

[Recoil]

Oh, now you're just doing it on purpose. 35 ....It's Super 35.

Meh, you knew what I was talking about.

Although, I believe he could have done something in the B5 conversions if the CGI was not lost? So maybe that part wasnt his fault, they just did the best they could with what they had left, which I appreciate.

 

[Kosomot]

Then, he should have cropped and enlarged the CGI and Composite CGI scenes to make them 16:9 way back when (and in doing so, all these problems would have reared their ugly heads, and something in JMS's head would have gone "DING!...maybe this half-a**ed approach ain't such a good idea."), and then cropped the edges again (to take the 16:9 to 4:3) for the airings. Then, in all of the widescreen airings, it would look like we're getting more in all of the frames.

In defense of JMS I will add that when the effects where being made it was probably anticipated that they might have to be cropped to 16:9 but I seriously doubt that anyone working on the show in the early nineties knew anything about anamorphic transfers.

They main problem with the CGI shots is the anamorphic enhancement. A standard letterboxed transfer of the CGI shots looks much better with the only problem being the cropping of the image to 16:9. The shimmering and anti-aliasing is a result of the anamorphic enhancement.