I have no idea about widescreen tv's and I was wondering what do they really do for the picture? If mostly all dvds are in widescreen do the widscreen tvs just make the picture fit better? Also say I'm watching cable on a widescreen tv what will it do anything to the picture? Thanks

For the best picture with a widescreen tv you would need a progressive scan dvd player. In a way it "fits" better, but it depends on the aspect ratio of the movie. So a movie with a 2:35:1 ratio will still have some "black bars".

I dont have a progressive scan player yet, but will buy one shortly. But the picture still looks good on my 40H80(widescreen tv).

Cant coment on the cable, but from what I've heard the picture is not all that great.

So on some dvds it removes the blacks bar but you still keep all the picture? How much does a progessive Scan dvd player cost?

The widescreen TV needs to able to accept a progressive image, which I'm sure most do but check it out anyway. Not up on the costs of progressive DVD players, but know they have come down a lot recently.

Most of the benefit, however, comes from being able to select 16:9 image aspect on the DVD player. For 16:9 enhanced DVD's (majority), this outputs the image as it's stored on the DVD. If the DVD player is set to 4:3 (required for vast majority of 4:3 normal TV's), the player must first drop (remove) many scan lines from the image to squeeze it into a 4:3 frame before sending it. This reduces the quality before it even leaves the DVD player.

For cable TV, you would either watch it with black (or grey) bars on either side, or some models allow the image to be intelligently stretched to fill the screen, and can actually look okay. If a movie or show is broadcast in widescreen, many sets will also allow you to zoom in to fill the screen with the whole image.

Aside from the technical details indicated here, a
widescreen image will be much larger
on a widescreen TV; and with home theater, the larger
the image, the better (all things being equal of course).

Progressive scan is not needed, because my dvd player can be set to 16:9 mode (not removing scanlines as in letterbox mode), this means that when you have an anamorfic movie, it will look strethed on a 4:3 tv. My Philips 32PW9525 widescreen tv will than squeeze it back to original proportions, so no scan line is lost, because of the fact that the tv doubles the frame rate (50 f/s) 100Hz. it will almost look like progressive mode. Sorry but this set is not available in the U.S.A!! Its a european PAL set also capable of playing real NTSC via video inputs.

This is quite true. For example, this weekend I watched Unbreakable. Due to the apsect ratio, I had thin black bars on the top & bottom of my widescreen TV, which is normal. Later, I loaned it to my parents who have a traditional big screen, and the black bars on it were huge. The top & bottom combined took about half the screen!

Now here's the point: Even though my parent's TV is bigger in size, the actual picture on my TV was much bigger. Not to mention a much sharper image due to the amamorphic capability of the digital TV.

So am I going to need a Progresive scan DVD player for 16:9?

In a word: No.

It's true that a Progressive Scan player combined with a widescreen HDTV can provide a better, more film like experience but any old DVD player should provide an excellent image.

Plus, some of the new HDTV's have excellent internal line doublers and offer 3:2 pulldown; how much of an improvement a progressive scan player provides will vary quite a bit.

...a little more on progressive scan DVD players. With a non-progressive DVDplayer you see an interlaced picture, meaning that about 240 lines of the picture are "painted" on the screen at once, thus interlaced(480i). With a progressive scan player all lines of resolution are "painted" at once(480p). Giving the image a smoother, cleaner look.

For what it's worth I have a Mitsubishi 46" 16:9 set and a JVC progressive scan player. The difference was quit noticeable, I had tried it with my old Sony player(s3000) and a newer Pioneer, but the JVC pic was just that much better.

Cost on progressive players has come down fairly quickly(mine was $400)to the $250-300 range but go into the $1000's.

If you get a widescreen set there is no reason not to get e PS DVD player. If you have the technology, you might as well use it.

I don't mean to nit pick, but that's not entirely accurate. It's true that a non progressive player will output an interlaced signal, but the TV (assuming we are talking about HDTV) will upconvert that signal to 480p or 1080i. Aside from 3:2 pulldown, the theoritical advantage of the progressive player is that the conversion takes place in the digital, rather than the analog domain.

Some HDTV's have excellent internal line doublers and some don't. How much of an improvement a PS player provides will depend on the quality of the set's internal converter vs. the quality of the DVD player's.

True, quite true. But the prevalent opinion is that most tv's internal doublers pale in comparison to those sported by quality PS DVD players or standalone doublers. I love my Mitsubishi, but it's doubler isn't that great.

But as I stated earlier, with my particular setup the improvement was considerable.