5 Unusual Aspect Ratios

INTRODUCTION

Those black bars that we see on the top and bottom or sides of the screen may go unnoticed by many, but actually, this aspect ratio reflects the very way that filmmakers want audiences to view their cinematic world.  

Different aspect ratios can be used to evoke an era, confine a character, or stretch a world into something larger than life. 

While widescreen and standard formats dominate the cinematic landscape, some directors like to break convention by choosing to shoot or display their work in a more uncommonly sized frame. So, let’s take a look at five unusual aspect ratios and how these bold choices reshape the way we see cinema.

STANDARD DCP ASPECT RATIOS

In order to show why certain aspect ratios are unusual we need to first establish what the most common, standard aspect ratios are. 

Almost all movies that are projected in a cinema are done so with a digital projector and a DCP - a digital cinema package. This is basically a fancy hard drive which contains all the video and audio files.

There are two commonly accepted aspect ratios for DCPs: flat or scope. Flat presents images in a 1.85:1 aspect ratio, while scope uses a 2.40:1 aspect ratio. Since about the mid 50s 1.85 has been the standard viewing ratio in US cinemas for movies shot with spherical lenses - which is a similar ratio to today’s 16:9 monitors. 

Meanwhile, filmmakers who chose to shoot widescreen with special anamorphic lenses produced a final aspect ratio of 2.35 or 2.39:1 which gets lumped into calling it 2.40:1.

Although the vast majority of productions use one of these two ratios, over cinema’s history filmmakers also used other less popular frame sizes. Let’s go over a few of them now. 

UNIVISIUM - 2.00:1

“I came up with an idea that was given to me by Leonardo Da Vinci - this incredible fresco that was called ‘The Last Supper’. I was so enchanted in front of this painting because you really see the equilibrium. So, I said to myself, ‘how can it be so perfect’ and I read the measurement: two times by one time.” - Vittorio Storaro, Cinematographer

In the early 90s renowned cinematographer Vittorio Storaro pushed for this 2:1 aspect ratio to be adopted into mainstream cinema - which he called Univisium. 

It was partly inspired by what he saw as the simplistic and perfect balance it offered when framing shots, as well as being able to use spherical lenses which, unlike anamorphic lenses, wouldn't distort the image. 

Additionally, he advocated for it on the basis that modern films would normally see both a cinema release, which could be projected on wider screens, along with a TV release, which was more confined to a narrower screen.

He saw Univisium as a compromise which worked well for framing in both mediums, and could preserve the cinematographer’s original framing - rather than shooting in 2.40:1 and then chopping off the sides for a TV release.

To get to this 2:1 ratio he proposed exposing the full width of a 35mm film frame at a height of 3 sprockets or perfs, rather than the traditional height of 4-perfs which was normally used.   

Although initially it was only Storaro who pioneered and shot with this ratio, much later, especially since the rise of streaming, this frame size has caught on and been used on many productions by modern filmmakers.

It gives frames some of that larger than life, epic, widescreen perspective, while at the same time not being so wide that the image for home viewers streaming on 16:9 devices will cut off too much real estate off the top and bottom of the frame.

ULTRA PANAVISION 70 - 2.76:1

“The minute I went into Panavision I went around and on the far side of the wall in the darkness were these oddly shaped lenses. And I walked up. What are these? Those are the Ultra Panavisions.” Robert Richardson, Cinematographer

Ultra Panavision 70 is an extremely niche format. So niche in fact that only approximately 10 films have ever been shot exclusively using it. 

These cameras take large format 65mm film and specialised Ultra Panavision 70 anamorphic lenses with a 1.25x squeeze factor - compared to the 2x squeeze factor from regular anamorphic lenses - and record a frame that is 5 perforations tall.

When this squeezed negative is later decompressed by a factor of 1.25 and then printed on 70mm film it creates an aspect ratio of 2.76:1 - the widest frame in cinema.   

One of the reasons that so few productions use this format is because filming with 65mm film and making 70mm prints is very expensive. Additionally, there are only a handful of cinemas in the world with 70mm film projectors which can still display this analogue format.   

Back in the 50s and 60s when this format was mainly used there was a certain prestige and grandiose associated with frame width - hence why it was mostly used to film historical, war, or religious epics.

The wider the frame is, the more of the landscape and background can be seen, which lends it to being better for photographing vistas or gigantic sets. Expanding the horizon of what the audience sees can also be used to layer various characters and information within a single frame.   

There have also been some movies which have chosen to use this aspect ratio without getting it natively with 65mm film and Panavision lenses. 

For example, The Creator was shot on a Sony FX3 with a 16:9 sensor with 2x anamorphic lenses - instead of the 4:3 sensor that is usually used to shoot the anamorphic format. This produced a super wide image which could later be cropped to get to their final 2.76:1 aspect ratio. 

FULLSCREEN - 1.33:1

You may have seen a recent resurgence in this narrower 4:3 format. To properly understand it we need to travel back to the beginnings of cinema’s history. 

Some of the very first silent cinema cameras ever invented used 35mm film. Each frame would record an image that was four perforations tall with the entire horizontal width of the negative used. This gave footage an aspect ratio of four to three, or 1.33:1.

With the invention of synchronised sound, a little audio strip was added onto the negative which cut some of the width, resulting in an almost square 1.19:1 ratio. A very niche format which has very rarely been revisited, such as on The Lighthouse.

“We shot this movie in 1.19:1 which is also called movietone. It was an early sound aspect ratio. If you’re using spherical lenses and you’re shooting with a boxy aspect ratio the frame is actually taller. You have more space to get juicy close ups of these two great faces.” Robert Eggers, Director 

Later, a common ratio for cinema that was slightly wider was established called the Academy ratio at 1.37:1.

Regardless of which of these ratios are chosen, this taller perspective can be used for a few different reasons, such as for photographing vertical objects - like a Lighthouse - or, for period films, as a throwback to the past when this was the aspect ratio which cinema was captured and projected on. 

Secondly, it can be used to visually differentiate various periods in a film - such as in The Grand Budapest Hotel - where 1.33 was used for the 1930s portion of the story, while 1968 was shot with anamorphic lenses and the 80s captured in 1.85:1.

Due to the lack of width on the edges, in some contexts it can also have a psychological effect, of trapping the character, making frames feel more claustrophobic. 

Or, finally, some filmmakers, such as Andrea Arnold, like it for framing individuals. She describes it as a human ratio, where the landscape doesn’t detract from the person and gives the characters the ultimate respect and importance.

EUROPEAN WIDESCREEN - 1.66:1

After the Academy ratio got phased out in the 1950s, 1.85:1 replaced it as the standard US widescreen viewing size in cinemas. However, in certain European countries they instead favoured a narrower 1.66:1 ratio - called European widescreen.

Although I often associate this ratio with many of the French New Wave films of the 60s, it’s a frame size which still continues to be used to this day throughout the world, although especially by European cinematographers.

In much the same way that Storarro’s 2.00:1 splits the difference between anamorphic and 1.85, European widescreen is a great middle ground between the squarer 4:3 fullscreen ratio and 1.85.

This makes it a great size for allowing the characters to take centre stage in the frame, while still feeling a bit more of the background on the edges of the shot, than something like 4:3. 

1.66 also has an important connection with being the native aspect ratio of Super 16 film. Many movies shot on 16mm like to preserve that original aspect ratio of the negative.  

IMAX - 1.43:1

Similar to Ultra Panavision 70, the aspect ratio of 1.43:1 came from another very expensive, large format that used 65mm film: Imax.

Unlike most film cameras which pass the film vertically through the gate, Imax cameras instead pass the film horizontally, giving each frame an incredible 15-perforations of length, and an aspect ratio of 1.43:1. This huge negative makes Imax by far the highest fidelity film system on the market. 

Although this is the native aspect ratio that is captured by the camera, interestingly it's not always the aspect ratio that is projected in the cinema. To accommodate the wider screens that many cinemas or TVs have, the top and bottom of this Imax negative is often cropped to get to a 1.90:1 aspect ratio.

So, depending on the cinema you go to, Imax will usually either be projected in 1.43:1 or more often in 1.90:1. For this reason, if you’re able to view the original 1.43:1 Imax print, you’ll notice that many of these shots will have excess headroom in order to compensate for the later top and bottom crop which will be done. 

CONCLUSION

All of these ratios we discussed are a legacy from the old days of film where the frame size was either determined by the camera system that was used to capture the image or by the physical prints which were projected using these established ratios.

Nowadays, in a world with digital cameras, post production software and a combination of streaming and digital cinema projection it’s become easier than ever to decide exactly what shape you’d like your image to be and how you’d like to crop it to get there.

Whether that means committing to a traditionally established aspect ratio or even changing the size of the frame as the movie and story progresses. 

So, embrace this as another creative choice you get to make, which subtly influences the way that audiences interpret your story on screen.