kvrdave

This may sound naive, but here is the situation.

My Dad just bought a beautiful 50" widescreen Samsung DLP and it is amazing. But on normal tv, the picture is stretched. You really only notice when the camera pans, so it isn't the end of the world. But, on dvds that are widescreen, you still have the black strips at the top and bottom (although smaller). So what is the point of a widescreen if you still have black lines and your normal tv is stretched?

Brian Shannon

Eventually all tv programming will be 16x9 format (HDTV).

Until that time you will need to live with tv programs that are not native hdtv.

As for the bars that is due to the various ratios for movie film. On 2:35 to 1 ratio films you will have some letterbox bars at the top and bottom.

As a side note I would be more concerned about the picture quality (you note is is great) than whether or not the image completely fills the display area.

kvrdave

But....will you have the same tv when all programming is 16x9? That is my question. I have a 61" standard big screen, and the amount that I see on letterbox is similar to what he has. But it also looks like if you are going to by lcd, or dlp, you don't really have the option of a regular screen.

Brian Shannon

Nor would you want that option.



Not sure I understand? Are you speaking about network programs? If you watch a non-hdtv broadcast on a native 16x9 tv you will have side bars unless you stretch the picture.

Eventually that situation will reverse itself and all programming will be 16x9 meaning those who do not have a 16x9 set will have letterbox bars. The stretch is trying to compensate for the ratio of regular tv now.

kvrdave

What I mean is, we (all of us around here) tend to go through tvs quicker than most of society. I would be suprised if this tv was still being used in 5 years. I wouldn't be suprised if the 16x9 format is not still the standard by then. But I suppose anything could happen.

JimRochester

Get whichever you watch most. If the bulk of your viewing is 4x3 material then get a conventional TV of whatever size suits you. But if you watch mostly WS, get a WS TV. You can get a huge 4x3 to get the same picture area as a midsize 16x9, but most TV material is pretty obnoxious to watch on a massive screen.

Steve Phillips

You don't HAVE to stretch the picture with normal TV. You can simply watch in 4X 3 mode to see the picture as intended.

kvrdave

True enough, but it just "feels" wrong for some reason.

tonyc3742

Much native-HDTV programming is 16x9, and fits the screen perfectly [CSI last week looked incredible, and Discovery is always eyecatching.] And I think it's heading more that direction [Simpsons last night was 4x3, but Bernie Mac was 16x9].
DVD's are where you get the 'black bars' due to the various aspect ratios they were filmed in. 16x9 is basically 1.78, but there are also dvd's in things up to, what, 2.35? So in order to show the correct image, there are still slight letterbox effects.
Both my cable box and my HDTV have multiple stretch settings--I usually watch 4x3 content on 'Panorama' mode, which does fill up the screen [which I'm mainly concerned about due to burn in concerns], and doesn't distort the image noticeably.

I agree, 'regular' [ie, non-digital or non-upconverted] content can look pretty bad on a bigscreen. My 'default-on' channel is VH1 Classic, and it's on Panorama setting on my 60", and it looks pretty bad sometimes. But I don't know how much of that is due to digital cable bandwidth concerns, the 'stretching' of the image, the source signal, or the source material--because HBO and Showtime, even non-HD stuff, looks very nice. Not HD quality, but noticeably better than analog.

I even play videogames on 'stretch' mode--that in Baldurs Gate was one big, ugly mother ; )

Brian Shannon

Herein lies the great dilemma for most people.

Some feel that there is a "need" to fill the entire display area with image. If the image is not made to fill the display area then there is a conflict.

Attend a good movie theater a watch the curtains moving to mask the unused parts of the screen prior to the start of the film.

At this time regular broadcast tv simply is not the correct aspect ratio to "fit" onto a 16x9 tv. Nor would a 4x6 photo print fit properly into a 5x7 frame.

Gil Jawetz

Why don't you just shoot the unused part of the screen off?

Seriously, if you do decide to watch 4:3 content in 4:3 on a widescreen do a little research and make sure that model isn't overly suseptible to burn-in.

Joshic

One of the problems with a huge 4:3 traditional HDTV is that if you input a digital signal in 720p or 1080i, a lot of 4:3 TVs lock into widescreen mode. This is ok if you are feeding a digital widescreen image. You'll just end up with black bars on the top and bottom. But if the digital feed is a 4:3 image within a 16:9 frame (like most of the TV stations that broadcast their non-HD digital content), you end up with a digital image that has black bars on the top, bottom, left and right - all 4 sides.

It's not really a good idea to get a 4:3 HDTV. Either get a regular analog 4:3, or if you want to get a HDTV, make sure it's widescreen.

Nick_Scott

I see this MORE and MORE often as widescreen TVs are becoming mainstream.

IT DRIVES ME NUTS, but it was expected.

The purpose of a widescreen TV is so you get the maximum benefit from watching a widescreen movie/media.
But you will get BLACK BARS because widescreen movies come in many different sizes.

Plus, even though 16x9 is native to DTV, most shows still are done in 4x3.... including the masive 4x3 library from the 20th century. You will be seeing "black bars" for a very time.

Which makes me wonder:
10 years from now... 16x9 DTVs will probobly be in 90% of homes?
Will studios convert old 4x3 TV shows to a vertical pan/scan 16x9?

hmmm

Nick

sdcrym

From www.widescreen.org :






Obviously there are still black areas on the 16:9 TV, but the percentage of the screen that is black is significantly smaller.

airic43

When 16x9 sets came into fruition it was intended for HDTV viewing and it's native 1.78:1 Ratio. Since movies usually have two basic standard ratios 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 which are both wider than the standard 16x9 you will get the black bars no matter what. In 1.85:1 movies you probably don't get the black bars because of overscan.

Mr. Salty

And that's with a 2.35:1 movie. With a 1.85:1 movie as well as native 16:9 HD programming the screen will be filled.

16:9 is a good choice because, although you will have black bars with 2.35:1 and 4:3 material, they will be a much smaller percentage of the screen than the bars seen on a 4:3 TV with 2.35:1 or 1.85:1 material.

jscout

Naive, indeed. As explained above. Embrace the widescreen and all will be good.

airic43

Exactly! A little research can go a long way.

Drifter

Stop over my house and catch my 65 inch HD Mitsubishi in action playing NFL playoff's in high definition or watch HBO High Def with Digital surround sound and you will know why a big screen is a must have! BTW my Mitsuibishi will allow you to watch 4:3 aspect ration programing in several formats. 4:3 with bars on side. "Stretched" where the center of the picture is normal and only the edges are stretched, "Zoom" which enlarges the pic. "Standard" which stretches whole picture. With these settings it's no problem to find one that best fits the program I'm watching! But then Again if it's not High Def, might as well pop in the DVD and sit back and watch 65 inches of pure pleasure!

shelland

If the black bars on both sets are the same size, you may want to make sure he has his DVD player set to 16x9 output. A 2:35 movie will indeed still have black bars, but they should not be anywhere near as big on a widescreen TV as they are on a standard TV... (as you can see in the images that were posted above)

Randy Miller III

Hmm...I wonder if they plan on making 2.35:1 TVs in the future?

Blade

The Bits reported today (Mon.) that some number crunchers at CES were predicting 50% penetration of HDTVs by 2005/6.

It seems that things have sped up quite a bit since 2002/3 when it seemed that HDTV wasn't really taking off.

abintra

It's going to take, what was it Intel?, Intel's chip that says they will get the prices down within the year to reach anywhere near those numbers.

If that chip functions as they say then HDTV's will take off pretty quick at the $1000-$2000 prices they are talking about for picture and size similar to the $6000+ Plasma's.

steebo777

As well 1.85:1 TVs