Will we ever see 16:9 pan & scan? (1 Viewer)

[Neil Joseph]

No matter how wide you make a TV there will always be problems, at least over here. If a TV has a 2.35:1 aspect ratio and it has to display a 1.85:1 movie thus having black bars on each side, the public will want it stretched and cut at the top and bottom to fit their 2.35:1 display. :rolleyes

 

[DaViD Boulet]

The only perfectly shaped TV is a constant-height/vary width front projection system with masking (like curtains) that can be adjusted to make any aspect ratio appear native" with no unused screen-realestate.

That's my dream HT

Maybe GLV will make it easily possible one day (GLV is a contant-height/vary-width projector by its design).

I'm with all of you about the sins of panning a 2.35 film to 1.85 *and* with cropping 1.33:1 TV and academy films to 16x9 for HD.

Irg!

Be sure to write your studios and let them know how you feel...if all they hear are best-buy shoppers complaining about seeing "black bars" on their new HDTV when watching LOTR they will get a skewed perspective. OAR advocates need to speek up too. If we're silent, we're letting the J6P decide things for us becuase they *do* complain.

Of course...it would all be so much better if the studios would put little "widescreen/OAR tutorials" on their video software to help educate the masses as to why those black bars are there in the first place...

-dave

 

[Lars Vermundsberget]

Quote: "The only perfectly shaped TV is a constant-height/vary width front projection system with masking (like curtains) that can be adjusted to make any aspect ratio appear native" with no unused screen-realestate."

What do you mean by "no unused screen-realestate"? There is still going to be a certain amount of "screen" covered by something black (or other color if that's any better...).

Your "dream HT" would certainly be very nice, but my point is (just like the point of many others): The stupidity might never end unless people are made to understand that movies quite legitimately come in different ARs.

 

[MarkHastings]

Of course...it would all be so much better if the studios would put little "widescreen/OAR tutorials" on their video software to help educate the masses as to why those black bars are there in the first place...

Just like the hidden tutorial on the "Pearl Harbor" Directors Cut discs.

I just wish it wasn't hidden, most J6P's might pass by it and not get the information.

Idea!!!! Instead of those damn FBI warnings and Previews, why not have FORCED OAR demos! That would be cool!

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Lars,

My point about "no unused screen" is that there's not *visible* screen area that's being wasted while you watch your movie.

When you go to the theater and watch a 1.85:1 film...are you ever distracted by the "unused" screen covered by the curtains to the left/right of the image?

Nope...because it might as well be a bonifide 1.85:1 screen on a black wall...that's what it looks like and the movie can be enjoyed without anyone ever asking "why didn't the movie fill the screen...why was part of the screen wasted".

 

[Jerry Gracia]

I have HD-HBO and it is a shame that they re-format their 2.35:1 films to 1.78:1...a shame.

The trend on DVD will switch from 4:3 full screen to 16:9 full screen, there's no doubt in my mind. The only "good" thing about this is that all 1.85:1 (approx.) films will be preserved nicely.

I also see many movies being shot in a "Super 35" type format for a cropless 1.78:1 DVD open-matte transfer on video becoming the norm in the near future.

I'm sure we'll still see some anamorphically shot 2.35:1 scope films preserved, but they'll be cropped to 1.78:1 as well.

All well.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Idea!!!! Instead of those damn FBI warnings and Previews, why not have FORCED OAR demos! That would be cool!

Mark,

that's such a good idea and such an obvious "solution" to the problem. A quicky-3-min demo of "what's widescreen" showing shots from the film in both WS and P/S. It's so simple!!! Certainly can't be more complicated than many of the animated menus and other fancy frills they seem to give us whether we ask for them or not. For some reason the studios don't seem to see this as a option...go figure :frowning:

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I've often thought that the HD generation of TVs should have had round screens, so that no ratio ever fills up the whole thing.

 

[Jack Briggs]

I was advocating a forced, pre-movie letterboxing tutorial on DVDs way back when I joined HTF. Nobody paid me any attention, though. I was just another loudmouthed HTF newbie.

 

[MarkHastings]

Nobody paid me any attention

Maybe they were optomistic that DVD would evetually see the demise of P&S and there'd be no need for tutorials. I originally figured that DVD's would be pro-OAR, but that proved to be a big kick in the head :frowning:

 

[Phil Nichols]

David,

"The only perfectly shaped TV is a constant-height/vary width front projection system with masking (like curtains) that can be adjusted to make any aspect ratio appear native" with no unused screen-realestate."

Right on .......... constant height is the viewing approach that best fits our (humans') perception. Put your HT seats back about 2-3X of this constant/fixed height and your view is "filled" regardless of the resulting AR width. The amount of "width" merely and importantly adds peripheral vision affect for more immersion (....plus of course fitting in all of the image elements from the film's set as desired by the creator).

I prefer my 16X9 RP display height always filled to maximize how far back I put the seats. This means I have to crop the sides of anything above 1.78:1, as I can't vary the width of my RPTV's wooden case. Giving this priority over "OAR" is the reason I get burned by OAR fanatics.

Of course with a large enough screened FP system you can have both - OAR width plus some constant height that best fits your HT room logistics for total immersion.

 

[Dave Poehlman]

Do you think it's just a matter of time before a J6P burns his 16:9 screen in watching a 2.35:1 movie in torch mode?

Once this hazard becomes common knowledge to the burgeonning RP-HDTV market, I fear we'll see a greater push for 16:9 P&S over OAR.

I guess it's up to us to educate the public! Not only should we be preaching the benefits of OAR, but we should also be explaining how to properly calibrate your set to avoid damage.

Another question: Are the HBO-HD 16:9 P&S officially panning & scanning? Or are they just cropping the edges?

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Phil,

You GOTTA get a FP system. It just makes me sad to think of a HTFer watching 2.35:1 films cropped to 1.78! Not a moral judgement here...just shedding some tears

Anyway...yeah...with a nice 100" screen and a projector with decent black level (like most of the HD2 DLP units) you can watch a 2.35:1 film in style without it looking too small. Constant heigh/vary width systems would be perfect...and those who want to spend more $$ and have some more fuss are doing it nicely (with an anamorphic lens you can display 2.35:1 full-height from a 16x9 projector onto a 2.35:1 screen) without too much complication...but even without such measures 2.35:1 is much more comfortable *big*.

Gotta do it!

dave

 

[Lars Vermundsberget]

Quote: "Lars,

My point about "no unused screen" is that there's not *visible* screen area that's being wasted while you watch your movie."


Sure, DaViD, I really have no problem understanding your point - I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

From what I'm reading, it just seems to me sometimes that some people are almost looking for unused space to complain about...

 

[Phil Nichols]

Dave,

I actually don't crop 2.35:1's for my RPTV, as I can't afford a [good enough] video processor between my DVD player and RPTV to upsize anamorphics and NO player that I can find will directly do it either. My Denon 3800's lowest zoom step almost does it (1.5X) and at high enough quality no less, but not quite. So ........ I either move my seats in closer, which messes up my HT arrangement, or I squint at the slightly narrow image and leave 2.35:1's and higher as OAR.

FP's are getting much better on CR. The best advertised I've seen is an HD2 powered unit at 2600:1!! Allowing for exaggeration by the marketing folks, this unit SHOULD measure out somewhere near 2000:1 in the lab, I'd think. This is getting into the realm that catches my attention.

Now ...... the last fixed-pixel nuts to crack are a decent price for the triple DLP engine arrangment to get rid of that kluge rotating wheel and a black level that goes all the way down to the digital 16 on some DVD's. I estimate about 2 more years for these last two challenges. Then I'll put my 58" CRT display up for sale - or in the bedroom.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Phil,

I think that Sony's SXRD just might be the answer:

1920 x 1080 res.
> 2500:1 CR
no visible screen door (LCOS)
no color-separation artifacts (3-chip)

If it has this level of performance when it really gets here and if it's affordable...we'll have the projector we've been waiting for.

dave