Incorrect DAR of 2.40:1 instead of 2.39:1 ?

[Sami32]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_ratio_(image)

The motion picture industry convention assigns a value of 1.0 to the image’s height; an anamorphic frame (since 1970, 2.39:1) is often incorrectly described (rounded) as 2.40:1 or 2.40 ("two-four-oh").

This aspect ratio of 2.39:1 was confirmed by the most recent revision from August 1993 (SMPTE 195-1993).[5]

http://www.arri.com/?eID=registration&file_uid=7737

Unfortunately, everyone was so used to calling anamorphic films 2.35:1, that many still use that aspect ratio erroneously, even when talking about films shot after 1970. Similarly, 2.40:1 is an incorrect, unfortunate and unnecessary rounding up; a proper rounding up would be 2.4:1. The correct aspect ratio for anamorphic films shot after 1970 is 2.39:1.

Samples: audio-issue-sample-file.mkv.txt

EDIT: Feel free to close this issue if it is not pertinent, relevant.

[kieranjol]

Hi, I just noticed this issue. DisplayAspectRatio/String displays aspects ratios almost exactly how we would like: mediainfo -f --Language=raw *.mov |grep -i aspectratio/string

DisplayAspectRatio/String        : 1.85:1
DisplayAspectRatio/String        : 4:3
DisplayAspectRatio/String        : 2.40:1
DisplayAspectRatio/String        : 16:9

The only exception being our 2048x858 DCP files, which have a ratio of 2.39:1 but it is listed here as 2.40:1. i've attempted to fix in https://github.com/MediaArea/MediaInfoLib/pull/829

[mivk]

Note that 2.40:1 is not just a rounding of 2.39. It is also actually used for BluRay. A scope film on a 2K DCP will be 2048 x 858 ( = 2.3869... =~ 2.39:1), but on BluRay it will be resized and cropped to 1920 x 800 = 2.40:1.

[ValZapod]

2.40:1 is not just a rounding of 2.39. It is also actually used for BluRay

Wikipedia also mentiones that

Blu-ray Disc film releases may use only 800 instead of 803 or 804 lines of the 1920×1080 resolution, resulting in an even 2.4:1 aspect ratio.