What we are up against... (1 Viewer)

[Robert Crawford]

Jim,
You and everybody else in this thread have been formally warned about name calling if you want to continue in this discussion, feel free to do so but another name calling occurrence by anyone will not be tolerated.
Robert Crawford
HTF Administrator

 

[Jack Briggs]

To get back to the original post's point: I've had equally discouraging encounters with non-enthusiasts in A/V chain stores. They will look at a 16:9 display and complain about its being narrow. These people are seeing narrow instead of wide. If that is the base from which we must start, then it is discouraging when we think about what is an uphill battle.

The success of DVD has proved to be a double-edged sword, hasn't it? As the format hit the big time, it was inevitable that pan-and-scan would rear its cropped ugly head in a big way.

Thank goodness for Martin Scorcese's widescreen campaign. But how many people will hear him?

 

[SteveA]

The thing that amazes me is that a lot of non-educated people do not see 16:9 sets as widescreen at all. They perceive them as "short screen" TVs that cut off the top and bottom of the image. We need to educate people to eliminate this negative - and false - perception of 16:9 sets.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Sort of the same thing, eh Steve? And no less discouraging. Perception is everything. (Remember how Warner's original marketing campaign for 1989's Batman nearly backfired? People couldn't see a bat insignia; they thought they were looking at teeth!)

 

[Derrick_Ellis]

Sounds fair enough Robert, no name calling. Besides, we are all a little better than that. No need to bring this forum down to the usenet level. I do agree with Chuck though. I'll continue to educate, but I won't force my preference on anyone. But when I can't find the movie I'm looking for in it's OAR, the believe me, I'm going to raise some hell.

 

[Jim A. Banville]

The thing that amazes me is that a lot of non-educated people do not see 16:9 sets as widescreen at all. They perceive them as "short screen" TVs that cut off the top and bottom of the image.

Of course this is because they are used to viewing 4:3 material on their 4:3 TV their whole lives. Trying to picture that 4:3 material on a 16:9 screen could easily elicite the thought of a "short screen" to people that aren't technology savy. Basically that is what the new 51" 16:9 version of Sony HiScan RPTV's are - a 4:3 53" HS10 (like I own), with a shorter screen and permanenty set to "squeeze" mode. If I didn't know about "patio homes" and drove down a street full of them, I'd probably say, "Damn, look at those tiny houses!". Not knowing they are nearly as big as a "regular" home, just skinny, deep and spaced about 5 feet apart. Every retailer and rental outlet should have at least one prominent display set up to show what the new 16:9 HDTV's are and how they display ws material vs. 4:3 TV's. I'm glad to see HDTV's in the 4:3 format. That way both camps are somewhat satisfied. Most have a 16:9 squeeze function that mimics an actual 16:9 TV, but if you watch a lot of "regular" TV shows, you aren't wasting alot of unsued screen on a 16:9 TV, and you don't have to stretch or chop up the 4:3 material to fit the screen.

 

[Bill Catherall]

It would be great if all the OAR nazi's would post to a single thread and this whole issue about the numerous threads would end.

Well we've already been warned about the name calling, so I won't go there. But the thing is, everytime somebody does try to start a new thread somebody comes in and derails it (this thread for example). Then the thread becomes unrecognizable and totally off topic. So, time to start another thread. Plus, the multiple threads are not all about the same thing, dispite their appearance. Some are about Blockbuster, some are about Universal or Warner. They all are themed around one of the many OAR "battle fields." And many of those threads get derailed by a "do-gooder" trying to tell everybody to calm down. Why can't some people just leave these threads alone? If I interupted a Britney Spears fan thread just to say her music sucks and she can't sing I'd get slaughtered. There's a name for that...it's called "thread farting." But it happens all the time. Especially with Star Wars threads. Some people just can't leave it alone. Whenever there's a group of people that feel passionate about something, there's always an opposing group that feels just as passionate. Or at least a group that's feeling passionate about not being so passionate.
Although everybody has the right to post where ever they want, and to say whatever they want (within the forum guidelines), some people just aren't invited to be participating in certain threads. So the next time you see an OAR vs. P&S thread, there's an underlying consideration that the "anti-zealots" aren't welcome.
As RogerB stated, "If you're not part of the solution..."

 

[SpenceJT]

I say let all Widescreen movies be Widescreen! Abolish P/S and FullFrame!
Tell the J6P DVD owners who don't like the black bars at the top and bottom to set their DVD player to 16x9 display and get used to watching everything in the "Tall & Skinny" mode!
...it's kind of like what we 16x9 owners have to put up with when watching 4x3 broadcasts and don't want the bars on the sides!

 

[MikeF]

Counting all the posts from the past 5 days I see 21 out 245 that are about OAR vs. P&S. That's about 8.5%. Look out...we've got an epidemic!

Half of those posts are about specific DVDs and whether or not they're available in OAR. The other half are what I would call "generic" OAR vs. P&S. One of which was actually started by somebody that finds them "boring." Another for that one. If you don't like them, skip them.

I find it very ironic that those who come in here bashing us for being zealots are visiting and posting in every OAR vs. P&S thread just to call everybody zealots. Now who's the demeaning, "self-righteous," zealous one

Bah. As I said, up with OAR, down with P&S. Can't it go into another forum, however, for those who feel compelled to discuss the issue ad nauseum? The 8.5% of these posts that pertain to whatever P&S travesty is happening this week don't seem to achieve anything productive.

 

[Jeffrey_Jones]

Hello,
Are people really expecting the HT industry to draw a hard line in the sand and stop making DVDs, TVs, etc using 4:3 as apposed to 16:9? This doesn't make any sense at all. Far too many people still use 4:3 TVs and prefer to utilize 100% of their screen real-estate. Most non-DVD TV usage is still only available in 4:3. As this slowly changes over time we will see the continued progression to 16:9.
Some people will and have chosen to be early adopters to 16:9, some will follow the crowd and others will fight until the end to continue 4:3. Most of this will be due to television manufacturers producing a decent number of 16:9 sets in various sizes. That is not yet the case.
One more thing - Adam Barratt, I am surprised by your statement "The forum is officially pro-OAR". As an administrator of this forum I would assume your job would be to ensure the fair and respectful exchange of ideas. This forum cannot be officially anything unless you are trying to enforce your own ideas and beliefs on others as a "rule". I understand if your statement was in reaction to the name calling in this thread, but cannot understand if you are trying to censor one individual’s ideas or opinions.
Thanks,
Jeff
PS - I prefer to watch my DVDs in 16:9 and am hopeful that more TV manufacturers will start selling reasonably priced 16:9 direct view sets.

 

[Bill Catherall]

Ok, now I see where it's coming from. Although, personally, I can share my movie world with P&S as long as I can always find the movies I want in OAR...I don't disagree with SpenceJT and MikeF.

 

[Jerry AZ]

So how come I haven't heard much uproar over the networks putting logos onscreen all the time?

Good one Jesse. I agree that the logo's are extremely annoying.

 

[Robert Crawford]

One more thing - Adam Barratt, I am surprised by your statement "The forum is officially pro-OAR". As an administrator of this forum I would assume your job would be to ensure the fair and respectful exchange of ideas. This forum cannot be officially anything unless you are trying to enforce your own ideas and beliefs on others as a "rule". I understand if your statement was in reaction to the name calling in this thread, but cannot understand if you are trying to censor one individual’s ideas or opinions.

Jeffrey,
Since you've only been a member here for about six weeks, let me preface my comments by saying HTF is an official pro-OAR forum. We frown on any comments that recommend or favor any aspect ratio other than the original intent of the filmmaker. If you want to call that enforcing our ideas and beliefs on others then so be it! Furthermore, to use your own words, HTF endorses "fair and respectful exchange of ideas", however, OAR is a fundamental concept that HTF will never compromise on and will continue to promote as the only proper way to watch a video presentation of a movie in a home theater environment.
Robert Crawford
HTF Administrator

 

[Maurice McCone]

If you walk into a TV store in Britain you are hard pushed to find a 4:3 TV.

I am sure that some else will be able to furnish the sales stats, but I believe that the battle is all but won.

My point is that the desire for OAR material will be driven by the hardware - if people have a widescreen platform they are going to demand the material in that format - my question is why are there so few widescreen televisions available when ever I visit Circuit City in the States (I have forgiven them for Divx) I am curious as to what has driven the success of widescreen in Britain / Europe ?

 

[Adam Barratt]

Adam Barratt, I am surprised by your statement "The forum is officially pro-OAR". As an administrator of this forum I would assume your job would be to ensure the fair and respectful exchange of ideas.

This is one aspect of an administrator's duties, but we also attempt to uphold the foundation upon which the forum was created. This foundation, as detailed in the forum's mission statement, includes the belief that true home theatre requires the accurate reproduction of a film's theatrical aspect ratio.

Any presentation of a pan and scanned film cannot be regarded as a home theatre presentation, quite the antithesis in fact; consequently pro pan and scan arguments are prohibited at the Home Theater Forum.

If anyone wishes to argue the benefits of pan and scan, there are other venues available. These arguments will not be permitted here.

Adam

 

[jeff peterson]

As far as the "rules" of the forum; we are all here thanks to the generosity of Ron and Packy. As guests of theirs we abide by their "rules".

This is one of them. I just hope poor Ron doesn't have to step in here. He's stated the obvious enough times. BTW, there is a "Forum Feedback" topic.

 

[Jeffrey_Jones]

Robert,

While I have only been a member of this forum for six weeks I can assure you that I have been able to debate an interesting topic without feeling the need to push my own views and beliefs on someone else for the majority of my life.

This forum, and the Internet in general, can be an excellent medium for people looking to learn and exchange ideas. If you are "officially" saying that you would censor someone from debating in favor of 4:3, or any idea/issue/concern, then I think you need to reexamine your goals for this forum.

Just saw the update from Adam. This whole issue is almost too ridiculous to argue. I'm sorry but I completely disagree with anyone who censors someone from reasonably expressing an opinion that is contrary to what the majority of this forum believes. I have learned a lot more in life by listening to someone with an opposing view then I have by talking to someone who believes the same thing that I do.

Thanks,

Jeff

 

[Robert Crawford]

If you are "officially" saying that you would censor someone from debating in favor of 4:3, or any idea/issue/concern, then I think you need to reexamine your goals for this forum.

Jeffrey,
We will not reexamine our goals but perhaps HTF is not the best environment for your home theater posting needs! Furthermore, HTF is not interested in debating the pros or cons of OAR because there is only one proper way to see a movie and that's with it's OAR.
Crawdaddy

 

[Sean Conklin]

, OAR is a fundamental concept that HTF will never compromise on and will continue to promote as the only proper way to watch a video presentation of a movie in a home theater environment.

Period!

OAR is the only way, period.

DVD should be the format which caters to film enthusiasts!Why? Because we spend lots of money to reproduce the theaterlike setting at home, and if "average consumer" wants to do the same then he should be willing to accept OAR, if "average consumer" is not willing to accept OAR, then he doesn't deserve DVD! He deserves a nice VCR!!

P&S on DVD should be abolished, it should not even be a choice. The only choice for "average consumer" should be OAR, buy it or don't buy it!!

Nobody is going to convince me otherwise until all DVD releases are available in OAR.

Sean"OAR is the ONLY way"Conklin

 

[Sean Conklin]

If you are "officially" saying that you would censor someone from debating in favor of 4:3, or any idea/issue/concern, then I think you need to reexamine your goals for this forum.

The goals of this forum are to promote OAR. Hardly any member here will engage you in a "friendly" pro P&S debate, so why bother? You will not win a pro P&S debate here!