Magnum on 35mm or 16mm?

[Pahonu]

This means that somewhere there are film-quality (HD) prints sitting somewhere that could be re-mastered to H.264 (Blu-Ray). Here's the other thing about that though. 35MM panavision cameras would have filmed the show in the standard film format aspect ratio (16:9 wide). I assume they just lost the edges when they transferred to tape - for broadcast to 4:3 televisions in the 80s, well, even 90s. In fact, they probably had some kind of matted viewfinder when they filmed so they would always frame things for 4:3 aspect ratio. So, can others concur that a blu-ray re-mastered Magnum release will also be in widescreen, AND contain some addition picture we never saw?

You are correct about the cameras filming in the standard film aspect ratio. The cameras were very likely Panaflex 35mm, as those were ubiquitous in that era. They debuted in the early to mid 70's and were still in use in the 90's from my experience. The camera operator would "mask down" the edge opposite the sound strip. The viewfinder would reflect this cropping of the image. There would be additional picture, but who knows what was in it.

I am a big proponant of leaving the image as the cinematographer intended it to be viewed. The quality of the image would far exceed any other format, but I wouldn't be interested in watching an altered aspect ratio version with picture unintended for our viewing.

With modern technology, you should be able to select either/or with the same disc. Kind of the standard or letterbox settings for older discs...

This is certainly possible to do, but the difference is the masked off area was never intended to be seen and may include images of boom mikes, dolly tracks, who knows what else? The director and cinematographer simply ignored anything in that part of the viewfinder as out of scene.

Going from a film aspect ratio to television involves removing picture that was intended to be seen or else watching it in letterbox format. This is frequently done. Going the other direction from TV to film, however, means looking at picture that was not meant to be seen and wasn't "composed" for the shot. I hope that makes sense.

[Kevster]

I thought it might be cool to see that stuff...

If it were my job, I would have shot it right for the entire view... You never know when the editor might see a need to fudge left of right.

[Pahonu]

I thought it might be cool to see that stuff...

If it were my job, I would have shot it right for the entire view... You never know when the editor might see a need to fudge left of right.

I agree. It might be cool to see some of that stuff, but I wouldn't pay for new Blu-Ray discs just to see what is essentially background. If anything, I would prefer just the sharper copy in the original aspect ratio made possible by the 35mm stock.

[mikeaz123]

If you've seen Seinfeld in HD on TBS, you can see exactly how this effect would look like. From what I recall, you gain picture at the sides, but lose some on the top and bottom. I read that they mainly cropped the bottom. It's actually kind of weird seeing it in HD... it's almost unreal. I'd kill to see Magnum get the same (hd, not necessarily 16x9 cropping) treatment some day.