Widescreen TV Dilemma [Archive]

HTguy

07-15-02, 08:08 PM

:hi:

This is the aspect ratio dilemma that we all have to face some day.

Widescreen 16:9 is best for HDTV & anamorphic ("WS enhanced") DVD.

4:3 is best for SD whether it's NTSC or ATSC.

I'm not sure why you think you need a "bigger" TV for the PVR721 since it is SD and bigger screens make DBS artifacts more noticeable.

But if you do a lot of DVD & plan to get HD soon you might as well go WS.

I'm in the minority, but as things stand, with most of us watching SD most of the time I think the best compromise is a big (50-60") 4:3 HD capable RPTV. True, HD & WS DVDs are letterboxed just as you see them now but it's not a distraction on a large display. But you get to see all the SD w/o stretching, zooming or window-boxing which I find much more annoying & it turns out the SD has higher resolution & fewer artifacts on that kind of set.

:righton:

MarkA

07-15-02, 08:14 PM

Nonsense. The picture will be just fine, it will just have black bars on the side. You'll only have problems if you stretch it or crop it to fill. This is just like movies being in pan and scam for 4:3 TVs. Just run it with black bars (or gray) on the sides, and you'll be fine.

Craig Fogus

07-15-02, 08:38 PM

I don't think that I "need" a bigger TV because I'm getting the 721. I suppose I phrased that wrong. I've been in the market for a bigger TV for some time now. I can't help it. I really love home theatre. I really want an HDTV Dish receiver, but I want the dual tuner PVR more. What I need is the 921! :)

Mark:
Will the side bars burn in? I thought that I saw someone mention that somewhere.

Scott Greczkowski

07-15-02, 08:57 PM

Black bars will burn in faster then grey bars.

Craig Fogus

07-15-02, 09:05 PM

On my 501, there is a selection for picture size: 4x3 or 16x9. It's under the Installation/Setup menu. What is that for? Does the 721 have that as well?

Scott Greczkowski

07-15-02, 09:08 PM

The 721 does not have this feature yet. I don't have a 501 so I can't tell you if the widescreen mode indeed works on the 501/508.

Craig Fogus

07-15-02, 09:11 PM

Hmmmmm......my JVC DVHS has it too. Can anyone verify if it actually works? What does it do? Does it stretch the screen?

Scott Greczkowski

07-15-02, 09:16 PM

Its on the Dishplayer too, it doesnt do anything. (At least on the Dishplayer)

Your receiver really has no idea what kind of TV its hooked up to so try turning the widescreen on in the 501, if it stretches the picture it works, if it does nothing... then it does nothing. :)

Craig Fogus

07-15-02, 09:23 PM

It doesn't appear to do anything on the 501 either. I wonder why it's there if it does nothing?!?!

MarkA

07-15-02, 09:38 PM

"Will the side bars burn in? I thought that I saw someone mention that somewhere."

No more than any other picture element will burn in. Black bars won't burn in (but read below), grey bars are generally the best.

"Black bars will burn in faster then grey bars."

No, they won't burn in at all. But they also won't wear the TV, whereas the picture will, causing the color to be different at the sides if you don't watch widescreen movies very often. Grey bars cause the TV to wear more evenly, and therefore are sometimes considered better. The truth is you're pretty safe with either one. It's bright objects staying on your TV you really need to worry about.

"It doesn't appear to do anything on the 501 either. I wonder why it's there if it does nothing?!?!"

It doesn't do NOTHING. It's the same as the control on your DVD player. If you set it to 16x9 it outputs content unedited. If you set it to 4x3 it squishes flagged anamorphic content into letterbox format so it isn't distorted. There has never been a broadcast on DISH Network that took advantage of this feature however.

Scott Greczkowski

07-15-02, 09:41 PM

Originally posted by Mark
[B]"Will the side bars burn in? I thought that I saw someone mention that somewhere."

No more than any other picture element will burn in. Black bars won't burn in (but read below), grey bars are generally the best.

"Black bars will burn in faster then grey bars."

No, they won't burn in at all. But they also won't wear the TV, whereas the picture will, causing the color to be different at the sides if you don't watch widescreen movies very often. Grey bars cause the TV to wear more evenly, and therefore are sometimes considered better. The truth is you're pretty safe with either one. It's bright objects staying on your TV you really need to worry about.

Mark, you need to go read up on black bars and grey bars over at AVSforums. :)

MarkA

07-15-02, 09:47 PM

If you or any of those people think you can convince me black bars can burn in, you're wrong. For black bars to burn in, the laws of physics would have to be changed. Black bars are created by NOT zapping the CRT with electrons. Burn-in is created by zapping the CRT with too many electrons or for longer than it is designed to handle. Now tell me again, HOW COULD BLACK BARS BURN IN? THEY CAN'T. They CAN be visable on the TV (or at least, some people think they can:) ) after they have been gone. But I assure you they DID NOT burn in, the rest of the phosphor got worn and it's colors shifted (which can be compensated for in the controls) and the black bars remain as good as new. The theory behind grey bars, and the whole reason they were created was to slowly and evenly wear the phosphor coating at the same rate as the used portion of the picture tube would be worn. Therefore, intentional burn-in to match the rest of the tube. Anybody who says anything else needs some basic understanding of the physics behind a TV:)

Craig Fogus

07-15-02, 09:57 PM

Makes sense. The only thing I would add is this. If the black bars aren't truly black but rather a lesser black or grey, they would burn in. However, like you said, the brighter the color, the more it would burn in, so it would burn in a lot slower than the rest of the screen. I would hope that the TV would send no signal at all to those areas which would indeed be black. Interesting debate. :)

MarkA

07-15-02, 10:10 PM

Correct. But not much. The idea behind the grey bars is to match the average power level to all three colors of phosphor in that area relative to the average in the picture area. Not so they won't burn in - but so they WILL age the tube, in a gentle, controlled fashion. Grey bars are also REALLY annoying, and black bars can't even be noticed. Also, to avoid other sources of burn in (esp. BUGs), make SURE your brightness and contrast aren't up to high (the factory settings are usually WAY too high).

Of course, you could get an LCD projector and have NO risk of burn in, and a better picture (IF you can keep the room it's in REALLY dark).

James_F

07-15-02, 10:11 PM

I've heard this both ways. I've had engineers tell me what mark is saying in that there is no difference between black and grey. Not that I ever agree with Mark, BUT I the grey isn't saving the set from anything, it just looks more like the normal screen that the high constrast black.

This isn't something I worry about. I seem to either break my TV or sell them before too long... I figure 18 month free financing is just a trip down the road to Ultimate Electronics. :D

Craig Fogus

07-15-02, 10:13 PM

ROTFLMAO Good points!

MarkA

07-15-02, 10:24 PM

"Not that I ever agree with Mark"

See, that's the problem around here. Everybody hates me so much it doesn't really matter what I say. I wish some of you guys would see who I really am...

Craig, HAVE you ever considered a front projector? The modern ones have a nice, bright, big, high contrast picture and are fairly inexpensive. No risk of any kind of burn-in either...

Nick

07-15-02, 10:25 PM

Mark is right - this time.

James_F

07-15-02, 10:28 PM

Originally posted by Mark
I wish some of you guys would see who I really am...

And who would that be... :angel:

Craig Fogus

07-15-02, 10:41 PM

Originally posted by Mark
"Not that I ever agree with Mark"

See, that's the problem around here. Everybody hates me so much it doesn't really matter what I say. I wish some of you guys would see who I really am...

Craig, HAVE you ever considered a front projector? The modern ones have a nice, bright, big, high contrast picture and are fairly inexpensive. No risk of any kind of burn-in either...

Yes, but I doubt that it would be practical for me. I'd need a screen and a place to put the projector. Granted the screen would go where the TV would go, but the projector would be a problem. I assume that in order to get a bigger picture, the projector needs to be moved farther away from the screen? What aspect ratio are they?

MarkA

07-15-02, 10:54 PM

They are a 4:3 aspect ration in almost all cases, but you can get a 16:9 screen. Zoom in to watch 16:9 material, and out to watch 4:3 material. The projector would typically be mounted upside down from the ceiling in front of the screen. The software mode on the projector is then changed to flip the image over. One thing to know is the expensive lamps (several hundred $$$) don't last much longer than a typical light bulb... (But, assuming it's just used 3 hours a day, a lamp will last about a year). Image quality is superb. I'd suggest getting one with DVI input and a dedicated A/V computer with DVI output for the best image (and get an ATI All-In-Wonder Radeon 7500 to tune TV stations and to run SVideo through). Picture is absolutely amazing on a setup like this. Sure, it's expensive both to get and maintain. But I think it'd be well worth it:)

"And who would that be..."

A caring guy who loves the world and tries to do good. A guy who does lots of volunteer work around the community. A guy who doesn't care too much about money (which should be obvious - I'm going to be a teacher. Teacher pay in Montana is AWFUL:) ). And a guy who sometimes makes contoversial statements on the internet because of the fact that I'd never DARE say the same stuff in real life:) But I do still try to be nice! And most of all - someone who wants world peace!!!!!

Nick

07-15-02, 11:27 PM

Aw shucks.

dondude32

07-15-02, 11:58 PM

My dishplayer goes to 16 x 9 on my mitsubishi 55" widescreen. Picture looks great. When the tv is set to input from dish it says standard mode on my tv and with the dish set to 4:3 Ihave to expand the picture to fill the screen.

MarkA

07-16-02, 12:25 AM

Of course you're either losing picture or stretching it. A proposition no better than pan and scam or watching a DVD in anamorphic mode on a 4:3TV...

Jacob S

07-16-02, 01:45 AM

isnt the LETTERBOX format ppv's and movies for the widescreen or just for words to translate language?

Mark Lamutt

07-16-02, 08:48 AM

Craig - I have a widescreen Sony 51" HDTV. I'm REALLY glad I went with the 16x9 model over the 4:3 model. Anamorphic DVDs and HD is absolutely stunning! I want to correct a couple of impressions that have been given in this thread. First, all widescreen televisions that are coming out today have various picture modes that can be used to fill the screen with 4x3 SD material. My Sony has a Widezoom mode that zooms the picture vertically 2% and stretches the left third and right third of the screen horizontally to fill the screen. It looks very natural. You'd think that the stretch would distort the picture, but it really doesn't very much because of how that mode handles the overscan of the television. Most televisions have between 5% and 10% overscan all the way around. I have my television calibrated for about 3% overscan vertically and 5% horizontally. When I use the widezoom mode (most of the time), the vertical zoom results in about 5% overscan. Horizontally, it brings the overscan into the picture - that is goes from about 5% to about 2% and then gradually stretches that out, so it doesn't appear distorted. To see what I mean, go to a higher end video store and check it out for yourself. Pop in a store copy of Avia and check out the overscan patterns and you'll see what I mean.

Black side bars vs Grey side bars - As Mark said, the black side bars won't burn the sides of the screen. However, the 4x3 portion of the screen will wear unevenly resulting in the middle part of the screen burned more than the sides of the screen. Watch too long in this mode, and then when you watch something in widescreen, you will see a darker 4x3 window in the 16x9 screen - especially with whites and bright colors. That's why most (if not all) televisions today will make the sidebars grey. The grey will cause the sides to wear more evenly with the center of the screen. It's not perfect, though, so I pretty much always watch in widezoom mode.

If there were anamorphic television SD broadcasts, then the 16x9 setting on the receivers would do something, but as there aren't any broadcasts in this format, the setting does nothing. There aren't any broadcasts like that because anyone with a 4x3 SD television would see the image as stretched vertically.

Mark seems to be a big fan of the front projection systems...they are more expensive across the board, and the maintenance costs are high. And they have to be in a room that you have complete light control - you wouldn't want one in a room with windows that you couldn't completely black out, for example.

MarkA

07-16-02, 11:24 AM

"First, all widescreen televisions that are coming out today have various picture modes that can be used to fill the screen with 4x3 SD material."

No matter what "mode" you use it's a form of stretching or cropping. If you're smart enough to never watch a pan and scam movie, or an anamorphic movie in anamorphic mode on a 4:3 set, you shouldn't be trying to fill a 16:9 screen with a show made for 4:3!!!!!!!!!!!

"Mark seems to be a big fan of the front projection systems...they are more expensive across the board, and the maintenance costs are high. And they have to be in a room that you have complete light control - you wouldn't want one in a room with windows that you couldn't completely black out, for example."

I am. I'm one of the people who helps maintain the front projectors at the church I goto (keep them lined up and calibrated for color, etc. Make sure the computer stays working). They're just used for PowerPoint and VHS tapes a couple mins long. In a bright church. And the truth is that the image is as good as most rear projectors in a bright room as long as you keep the lights aimed directly at it off (or, honestly, it looks fine with them up to about 30% or so). And, hook up a PS2 to the projector (for game nights and stuff) and it looks AWESOME with the lights all on low!!! Now admittedly, that's a 4,000 lumen dual-lamp projector. Not something you'd install at home. But I've seen the modern low-end projectors (the school I went to has some single lamp 1,100 lumen EPSON's) and even they look pretty darn nice. Not AS good, and the lights have to be down VERY LOW (off:) ), but heck, I'd still take that over a rear projector (as if I could afford either). I do agree, if you get a front projector, you'll also need to get EXTREMELY heavy curtains over the windows, and at the very least, dimmers on your lights. Total control over lighting is essential.

Craig Fogus

07-16-02, 12:09 PM

There's no way I can practically use a front projection system in my situation. There's just not enough room, I'd like to be able to have my lights on, and the cost is prohibitive. Thanks for the info though!

That being said, what features should I look for in a widescreen TV? What should I avoid especially in brands? I'm looking for a 65".

Mark Lamutt

07-16-02, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by Mark
"First, all widescreen televisions that are coming out today have various picture modes that can be used to fill the screen with 4x3 SD material."

No matter what "mode" you use it's a form of stretching or cropping. If you're smart enough to never watch a pan and scam movie, or an anamorphic movie in anamorphic mode on a 4:3 set, you shouldn't be trying to fill a 16:9 screen with a show made for 4:3!!!!!!!!!!!

And what I'm saying is that even though it does stretch and crop a little bit, the widezoom mode on my Sony is almost as good as watching at 4:3. And it causes no damage to my set like watching 4:3 with grey or black bars will. And, the 16x9 format of the screen makes HD and DVD presentations so much better than they would be on a 4:# screen, that it's well worth it to me to stretch and crop 4:3 material a little bit. That's my opinion, and it's an informed one because I watch my television every day.

MarkA

07-16-02, 12:25 PM

"I'd like to be able to have my lights on"

That seems to be the part that gets most people:) And the cost is expensive! I like the things, but I never said they were best for everybody!

As for TVs, I REALLY like the Mitsubishi sets. The Pioneer sets aren't half bad either! DON'T EVER GET AN RCA TV OF ANY KIND!!!!!! (I think that's the best advice of all when it comes to TVs!). Make sure you turn down the brightness and contrast to better levels the moment you get it home - it will drastically reduce picture tube wear and chance of burn-in. Make sure you get a progressive DVD player to go with it - the difference is amazing! Hook up the 721 with SVideo:) But for what TV to buy? Trust your eyes above all else! Look at sets in the store. Not for color or brightness (adjustable) but for things like geometry and convergence. If you get lucky, a small store might let you take a test DVD along to compare them with (but don't expect that somewhere like Best Buy!)

Chris Blount

07-16-02, 12:37 PM

Mark,

As usual you are getting too extreme. Obviously you don't own a 16X9 TV so how in the heck would you have any idea how me or Mark L or anyone else should watch 4X3 material.

Examples why we use stretch modes:

First, using the stretch modes help alleviate burn-in problems because the grey bars can get annoying.

Second, there are times when some shows actually work well in stretch or zoom mode. Star Trek Enterprise is shown in letterbox format so the zoom mode is essential on a 16X9 display to fill the screen. Also, some movies shown on TV have had their theatrical matts removed on the top and bottom so zooming or slightly stretching would actually restore the original aspect ratio.

Third, there are some programs on Discovery that involve a great many nature shots with no people so it would't be too noticeable using a stretch mode.

Granted, most of the time when watching 4X3 material I use the grey bars but whenever possible I use stretch or zoom.

Mark, when you spend thousands of dollars for a TV you find ways to protect your investment. If you are so stuck on watching 4X3 material with sidebars on your HDTV no matter what the outcome, enjoy your burned in tubes after about a year of having your set.

MarkA

07-16-02, 12:56 PM

"Obviously you don't own a 16X9 TV so how in the heck would you have any idea how me or Mark L or anyone else should watch 4X3 material. "

And you don't own Echostar 7, but you do understand how spot beams work, correct. And you've even seen their effects. I actually have a friend with a 16:9 RPTV. And he does the same thing. And he claims the black bars are annoying (sometimes I go over there andwatch TV with him. I can't stand the fat people on his TV!)

"Star Trek Enterprise is shown in letterbox format so the zoom mode is essential on a 16X9 display to fill the screen"

Uh, correct. BECAUSE THE SHOW IS MADE FOR IT! It's NOT 4:3 CONTENT - IT'S 16x9 Content MEANT for zoom mode. Making that comparision is insane!

"Mark, when you spend thousands of dollars for a TV you find ways to protect your investment. If you are so stuck on watching 4X3 material with sidebars on your HDTV no matter what the outcome, enjoy your burned in tubes after about a year of having your set."

If your brightness and contrast are correct there is NO risk from showing the bars. The gray bars won't burn in. But they will average the power level out to even wear. Black bars are ZERO risk of burn in. To say black bars can burn in is bordering on sinful. PEOPLE! GET SOME COMMON SENSE! BLACK CAN'T BURN IN ANYMORE THAN THE TV BEING OFF CAN BURN IN!. It can cause an unworn section of picture tube compared to the rest. And that is a problem correctable with grey bars. But it isn't burn in, and it's just not morally right to call it burn in!

James_F

07-16-02, 12:59 PM

Well I ALWAYS stretch my screen. I can't stand watching anything 4X3. Unless I see a TV right my Big Screen, I'm sure I couldn't tell that it was stretched. I bought the TV so I wouldn't have to see any bars....

MarkA

07-16-02, 01:07 PM

The number of people obsessed with NOT seeing bars at any cost amazes me. If you owned the Mona Lisa, would you chop it up to fit into a frame? NO WAY. And similarly, you shouldn't destroy the art of motion pictures by chopping or stretching them to fill your screen completely!

James_F

07-16-02, 01:12 PM

Do you really think it looks bad? You can't tell the difference most of the time. Don't even compare it to chopping a movie to fit to 4X3. Its totally different.

Scott Greczkowski

07-16-02, 01:13 PM

Mark what kind of TV do you have?

I personally watch everything stretched, as I think the picture looks good on my 16 x 9 screen. :)

(Plus it keeps my wife off my back, she use to say "we purchased a widescreen TV not a regular one, so get those ugly black bars off the screen") :D

Chris Blount

07-16-02, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by Mark

And you don't own Echostar 7, but you do understand how spot beams work, correct. And you've even seen their effects. I actually have a friend with a 16:9 RPTV. And he does the same thing. And he claims the black bars are annoying (sometimes I go over there andwatch TV with him. I can't stand the fat people on his TV!)

Having a "friend" that owns one is NOT the same thing. You of all people should know that. Living with a wide screen TV is different then just seeing one on a showroom floor or at someones house. Sorry Mark, I don't value your opinions on this one because you have not walked in our shoes.

Uh, correct. BECAUSE THE SHOW IS MADE FOR IT! It's NOT 4:3 CONTENT - IT'S 16x9 Content MEANT for zoom mode. Making that comparision is insane!

Excuse me? No Duh! and I wasn't making any comparisons. I was just saying that the zoom mode is necessary in that case.

To say black bars can burn in is bordering on sinful. PEOPLE! GET SOME COMMON SENSE! BLACK CAN'T BURN IN ANYMORE THAN THE TV BEING OFF CAN BURN IN!. It can cause an unworn section of picture tube compared to the rest. And that is a problem correctable with grey bars. But it isn't burn in, and it's just not morally right to call it burn in!

Pull your head out! Where did I say black bars would burn in. It's common knowledge to anyone with an HDTV that the middle part of the picture will burn-in, not the black bars. Also, any educated HDTV owner knows that lower brightness and contrast levels REDUCE the possibility of burn-in but does not eliminate it. To say there is NO risk is just plain stupid.

MarkA

07-16-02, 01:22 PM

"Excuse me? No Duh! and I wasn't making any comparisons. I was just saying that the zoom mode is necessary in that case. "

Yes, it is. But it's not 4:3 content. Therefore, it can't be called 4:3 content. That type of letterboxed content is why they put zoom mode on there, so you can use it on content meant to be zoomed.

"Where did I say black bars would burn in. It's common knowledge to anyone with an HDTV that the middle part of the picture will burn-in, not the black bars."

You didn't, others did. And the middle isn't "burning in". It's just aging of the phosphor. But still, one way or another - it is a problem. That's why they made grey bars.

"Also, any educated HDTV owner knows that lower brightness and contrast levels REDUCE the possibility of burn-in but does not eliminate it. To say there is NO risk is just plain stupid."

I'm not stupid. You need to read. I said there was NO risk the bars would burn in. Of course burn-in still happens. Any high brightness CRT will face this problem. It is a flaw in the technology.

"we purchased a widescreen TV not a regular one, so get those ugly black bars off the screen"

Then your wife needs to learn to appreciate the value of art being shown as close as possible to it's original form, as the artist intended it.

"Do you really think it looks bad?"

Yes, I know they say the camera puts on 40 lbs as it is. When you put a 16:9 TV in 4:3 stretch mode, it puts on closer to 440:) And everybody looks fat and ugly. And their heads - I don't even want to mention their heads. It's just disturbing how bad it looks:)

"Mark what kind of TV do you have?"

I've said it before, a crappy old 27" Mitsubishi. Still. That has nothing to do with what I know about TV sets, or what I've seen. Or my sense of art. Television is an artistic medium, to distort or crop it ruins the artist's freedom of expression.

Mark Lamutt

07-16-02, 01:30 PM

Originally posted by Mark
If your brightness and contrast are correct there is NO risk from showing the bars. The gray bars won't burn in. But they will average the power level out to even wear. Black bars are ZERO risk of burn in. To say black bars can burn in is bordering on sinful. PEOPLE! GET SOME COMMON SENSE! BLACK CAN'T BURN IN ANYMORE THAN THE TV BEING OFF CAN BURN IN!. It can cause an unworn section of picture tube compared to the rest. And that is a problem correctable with grey bars. But it isn't burn in, and it's just not morally right to call it burn in!

Mark, up until this point, you were technically correct with what you were saying, even though some of it was extreme. However, parts of this statement are wrong. The grey bars are designed to even out the wear on the sides of the screen, but over time, with continuous use of the grey bars, you will definitely see uneven wear resulting in the middle of the screen being darker than the sides. It will take longer than if you use black bars on the sides, but it will definitely happen. That's why I only watch 1 television show a week in grey bars - the rest are widezoomed.

The rest of your statement I mostly agree with, although I wouldn't call misconceptions "sinful"...the black bars don't cause anything - the middle part of the screen with the video is the part that's getting the wear. Grey bars on the sides will help, but they don't solve the problem.

As an aside, you have the same problems on a 4:3 RPTV watching letterboxed material - the middle portion of the screen will wear and the black bars on top and bottom won't. So if the viewing is primarily widescreen DVD (anamorphic or not) or HD, then you'll have the same problems with that set as with the 16x9 sets - just on the top and bottom.

Chris Blount

07-16-02, 01:33 PM

And the middle isn't "burning in". It's just aging of the phosphor.

Same damn thing!

I've said it before, a crappy old 27" Mitsubishi. Still. That has nothing to do with what I know about TV sets, or what I've seen.

It has a LOT to do with what you know about TV sets. You of all people should understand that. Someone could go look at your 27" Mitsubishi in a store, play around with it, read the specs and schematics but still wouldn't be 1/10th as knowledgeable about your TV as you are since you live with it on a day-to-day basis.

Scott Greczkowski

07-16-02, 01:35 PM

Umm I am gonna move this one, as it has nothing to do with the 721 anymore. :)

Craig Fogus

07-16-02, 01:37 PM

Sorry....didn't think this would turn into a religious battle. :(

James_F

07-16-02, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by Mark
Then your wife needs to learn to appreciate the value of art being shown as close as possible to it's original form, as the artist intended it.

So by watching Baywatch in 16x9 I am hurting the artists vision when he intended it to be in 4X3. You have got to be kidding me!!!!!! Thats bull. Converting 4x3 to 16x9 doesn't do a damn thing.

Scott Greczkowski

07-16-02, 01:44 PM

MMMmmm Baywatch stretched to 16 x 9 = Bigger booo.... Umm Lifeguard chairs! :lol:

MarkA

07-16-02, 01:53 PM

"Same damn thing!"

No it's not. Aging of the phosphor coating on the CRT occurs naturally over the life of the picture tube running within operating specs. Burn-in occurs by overheating (literally burning) a portion of the phosphor coating - either by running it WAY too bright, or by repeatedly drawing the same pattern on the same section for a longer timeframe than the phosphor is designed to be lit (like those damn bugs do!!!)

"So by watching Baywatch in 16x9 I am hurting the artists vision when he intended it to be in 4X3"

EXACTLY. The artists who created the show. The director, the videographer, the actors, and everybody else who contributed to that show intended their work to be viewed with approx 5% overscan (since that is the basic standard here in America) with a 4:3 aspect ratio. And don't even get me started on those fake surround modes on stereo receivers... Or people who use Pro-Logic decoding on content not mixed for Dolby Surround...

James_F

07-16-02, 02:10 PM

Originally posted by Mark
EXACTLY. The artists who created the show. The director, the videographer, the actors, and everybody else who contributed to that show intended their work to be viewed with approx 5% overscan (since that is the basic standard here in America) with a 4:3 aspect ratio. And don't even get me started on those fake surround modes on stereo receivers... Or people who use Pro-Logic decoding on content not mixed for Dolby Surround...

Mark you argument sounds more like personal opinion rather than defending the rights of producers/directors. Your argument isn't holding water with me. If I view the show on a handheld Sony Watchman in B&W, am I violating the trust of the artist because he assumed the show would be in color? Or is by converting the analog tapes to digital and sending up to a satellite violating how they expected their work to end up. Of course not... Explain it to me how its different.

Chris Blount

07-16-02, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by Mark

No it's not. Aging of the phosphor coating on the CRT occurs naturally over the life of the picture tube running within operating specs. Burn-in occurs by overheating (literally burning) a portion of the phosphor coating - either by running it WAY too bright, or by repeatedly drawing the same pattern on the same section for a longer timeframe than the phosphor is designed to be lit (like those damn bugs do!!!)

WRONG! and I'm through explaining things to you.

MarkA

07-16-02, 03:30 PM

"If I view the show on a handheld Sony Watchman in B&W, am I violating the trust of the artist because he assumed the show would be in color?"

To an extent, yes. However, you are watching it in the closest possible format available on your equipment.

"Or is by converting the analog tapes to digital and sending up to a satellite violating how they expected their work to end up."

Not turning it digital, but I do feel that at times, the compression does take away feeling and ruin the producer's vision of their show. Therefore, I do believe that overcompression IS a serious problem.

James_F

07-16-02, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by Mark
Not turning it digital, but I do feel that at times, the compression does take away feeling and ruin the producer's vision of their show. Therefore, I do believe that overcompression IS a serious problem.

But you still use DBS don't you? I'm sure most movies you have watched have artifacts on them that the producer didn't want. You still haven't convinced me that there is any difference between this and 16x9... Why is one thing so bad and the other just a problem?

MarkA

07-16-02, 03:59 PM

Because one is necessary in order to fit all the content on the bird, and we have no control over it. The other is even more distorting, and more importantly - completely unnecessary. Plus, everybody looks sssooooo fat!

James_F

07-16-02, 04:02 PM

But its changing the look that the artist wanted. I agree its the only way to have DBS, but doesn't that change the look and feel of a show? I've watched "The Perfect Storm" on HBO many times and the waves or clouds look terrible... I still don't understand your point. :shrug:

MarkA

07-16-02, 05:39 PM

It does change it. I said that. It gets rid of a lot of the artistic nature. Cable adds snow which does the same thing. BUT, it's all a matter of getting as close as POSSIBLE to the artistic intent.

James_F

07-16-02, 06:11 PM

Ok, I still disagree, but we aren't getting anywhere....

Nick

07-17-02, 10:32 AM

Hoo Haa! :rolleyes: This is the best pissing contest
I've witnessed since I left the other place. :rolling:

"...watching Baywatch in 16x9 ..."

:thats: James, would you kindly send me a screenshot
of the Baywatch babes in 16:9? :D

Nickster :smoking:
nick@dbstalk.com

James_F

07-17-02, 11:07 AM

No problem Nick, their breasts are twice as large due to stretching. :D

MarkA

07-17-02, 12:57 PM

And they are twice as fat. (Actually, 33% fatter if I'm correct)

Neil Derryberry

07-17-02, 01:13 PM

Mark,

I don't own an HDTV. It will probably be a while before I do, so I can't speak intelligently about them from a technical perspective. That said,

Television is an artistic medium, to distort or crop it ruins the artist's freedom of expression.

IMHO, the artist's freedom of expression is in the content. I doubt they give a rat's as* about what kind of tv you have to display it on. They produce their content on tape of some sort, and the television station brodcasts it you you... not the "artist".

Get off your high horse, and learn to pick your battles. There's my 2 cents.

James_F

07-17-02, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by Mark
And they are twice as fat. (Actually, 33% fatter if I'm correct)

Dude, you don't give up do you? :shrug:

Nick

07-17-02, 01:44 PM

"No problem Nick, their xxxxxxs are twice as large due to stretching"

Sorry, James, my NetMommy software deleted a word in your reply. :D

James_F

07-21-02, 01:48 AM

I'd take a screenshot for you, but it would violate the artists intent...

Nick

07-21-02, 10:35 AM

Too funny :D

To heck with the artists intent, James.
I now like to scew around with a film just
to piss off Mark. Yesterday, I found myself
rewinding for no reason at all other than to
irritate him.

:lol:

Nickster :smoking:

<see following post>

Nick

07-21-02, 10:37 AM

Mark, your much-maligned effort to defend the integrity of artistic ex-
pression is laughable. That you hold the director's vision in such high
esteem suggests a youthful idealism, not creative realism.

Any producer/director knows (and hopes) that eventually his precious
film creation will make it to the small screen and will be displayed in 4:3,
16:9, stretched, zoomed, cropped, stopped, paused, slo-mo-ed, panned,
scanned, letterboxed, fast-forwarded, rewound, and viewed on a myriad
of screens from 2.3 inches to 2.3 meters. It will be keystoned, warped, dis-
torted, interfered, herringboned and every other conceiveable abberation
with the possible exception of being harpooned by angry Eskimos.It will
be added to, taken away from and commercialized to distraction. It's view-
ing will be interrupted by pottie breaks, snack-attacks, heart-attacks, tele-
phone calls, power outages, passionate amour and untimely childbirth.

There is nothing sacrosanct about a film creation or its creator's intent.

Finally, that you, Mark, of all people, would diefy the artistic products of
imperfect human minds just makes me crack up. Many, if not most of the
creative film professionals whose products you so diligently try to uphold
as inviolate are probably non-believers who may well delve into dark prac-
tices that, if known, would be an affront to most people of good morals.

The Nickster :smoking:

James_F

07-21-02, 10:44 AM

Not to harp on Mark, but his screen shot of his computer running all those programs showed "Bearshare" and "DivX". I wonder if the artists wanted him to download their songs and movies for free? Seems kind of hypocritical.

http://www.dbstalk.com/attachment.php?s=&postid=40170

MarkA

07-21-02, 11:19 AM

"Any producer/director knows (and hopes) that eventually his precious
film creation will make it to the small screen and will be displayed in 4:3,
16:9, stretched, zoomed, cropped, stopped, paused, slo-mo-ed, panned,
scanned, letterboxed, fast-forwarded, rewound, and viewed on a myriad
of screens from 2.3 inches to 2.3 meters. It will be keystoned, warped, dis-
torted, interfered, herringboned and every other conceiveable abberation
with the possible exception of being harpooned by angry Eskimos.It will
be added to, taken away from and commercialized to distraction. It's view-
ing will be interrupted by pottie breaks, snack-attacks, heart-attacks, tele-
phone calls, power outages, passionate amour and untimely childbirth."

That doesn't mean they LIKE it. They may have to LIVE with it. I know I can't afford a 35mm projector and 35mm movies (the ultimate home viewing experience:) ) - yet. But I try to get as close as I can on my 17" PC screen and 27" TV

"Not to harp on Mark, but his screen shot of his computer running all those programs showed "Bearshare" and "DivX". I wonder if the artists wanted him to download their songs and movies for free? Seems kind of hypocritical."

I don't know why I have the BearShare client. Oh wait, I do. In network technology class in school one of my projects was comparing Gnutella to Grokster. Yesterday I loaded them just to add extra programs to what is running. Even if I wanted to, the most I COULD get is MP3 songs. Forget about DivX movies and commerical software! Why do I have DivX player? Because I HAVE A CAPTURE CARD and DivX is a good format to put home videos into for burning to CD and mailing to friends and family! Since everybody can get the free DivX codec unlike MPEG2.

Craig Fogus

07-21-02, 05:52 PM

So, I finally bought one. A Philiips 60" Widescreen HDTV rear projection:
http://www.magnavox.com/global/b2c/ce/catalog/product.jhtml?divId=0&groupId=TV&catId=DIGWIDESCREENTV&subCatId=55_64PROJDIGWIDESCREENTV&productId=60PP9352_37
Check out the link and let me know what you think of their "APAC" which is supposed to save the screen.

Believe it or not, I got it at Best Buy for a lot cheaper than I could online. I even got them down $200 from their advertised price. You never know until you ask. :)

I checked out all of the different ways it has of filling the screen, and it looks very good! I was surprised! On some older models/brands, the people looked really fat, but on this one, it was very discrete! I cannot wait to get it delivered on 7/25!