Will 1080p be the next misnomer (wrong labels)? Are 2.35/2.4:1 films REALLY 1080p?

JediFonger · 05-11-2006, 12:20 PM

just curious. if you goto www.quicktime.com you can d/l a lot of 1080p/720p HD trailers. for films in 16:9, 1920x1080 pixels are fully fired. but for wider scope films like the recent superman returns trailer w/2.35 or 2.4:1, it is more like 816p and NOT 1080p.

do/will HD-DVD/BR movies be using an aspect ratio tag like SD-DVD for 1.33, 1.78, 2.4, etc?

can people will HD-DVD's check on that? i think that's an issue that might've slipped through our collective cracks (that didn't come out sounding right =)?

ChristopherDAC · 05-11-2006, 01:15 PM

For wide aspect ratio films, only a portion of the 1080 lines of vertical resolution will be used. For narrow aspect ratio films, only a portion of the 1920 lines of horizontal resolution will be used. The pixel matrix, however, will remain fixed at 1080×1920 — just as it remains fixed at 480 [or 576] ×720 on standard DVD — and the aspect ratio will remain fixed at 16:9 — unlike standard DVD, which can be flagged for 4:3 or 16:9. In any case, the "black bands" will probably be stored as data structures using very little space, as they are with DVD.
The practice of encoding computer video files at resolutions which just fit the image does not carry over to consumer video players in any way : the latter use fixed pixel matrices.

Paul McElligott · 05-11-2006, 02:24 PM

The signal form the play is 1080p, irregardless of its content.

JediFonger · 05-11-2006, 03:06 PM

hm...

this is interesting, though the signal is 1080p, a 2.35 pic will only use 816 or so of that. =). i thought i read somewhere that HD discs will have flags. can anyone link to confirmations of this?

i think if these wider scope films were to scale to utilize ALL of 1080p, then the vertical resolution would have to break spec (~2541x1080p instead of 1920x816p).

no one else is noticing this?

Aaron_Brez · 05-11-2006, 05:38 PM

I'm not sure what you think we're not noticing. That 2.35:1 films will be letterboxed?

According to sources, there will be data on the disk which specifies the pixel area used, though not the ratio. In other words, there's supposedly an "xheight" and "yheight" measurement which will, in the case of 2.35:1 films, say something like "816" and "1920".

**HTF Ads**

Lew Crippen · 05-12-2006, 09:28 AM

I’ve read your posts several times and I’m not really sure of the point, YiFeng.

After all widescreen TVs have a width to height ratio of 16:9. This of course works out to 1.78:1—not a ratio commonly used in movies.

It follows that movies made at 1.33:1, 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 will not fit exactly on a 1.78:1 screen (assuming no overscan).

This means that there are almost no movies that will use all of the available pixels on a 16:9 display.

Ed St. Clair · 05-12-2006, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lew Crippen

After all widescreen TVs have a width to height ratio of 16:9.

Not true, unfortunatly. Widescreen displays that were not 16:9 where sold as well. If I remember right, it was from about 2002 to 2004. Sure feel bad for those that got ripped off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lew Crippen

This of course works out to 1.78:1—not a ratio commonly used in movies.
This means that there are almost no movies that will use all of the available pixels on a 16:9 display.

Lew,
I would like to rewrite your, correct, statement to;
This means that only 1.78:1 movies will use all of the available pixels on a 16:9 display.
Mostly a few new modern animation films.
If the 16:9 widescreen display has no overscan, luckily you, then you can achieve prefect pixel to pixel reproduction with a 1.78:1 source!

ChristopherDAC · 05-12-2006, 02:43 PM

There are 16:10 computer monitors on the market, for some obscure reason. Pioneer used to make semi-widescreen CRT rear-projectors with an aspect ratio of 3:2. A few older Japanese HDTV sets have a 5:3 aspect ratio. In general, however, high-definition televisions have an aspect ratio of 16:9, which is the standard — the exceptions are rare enough now as to make no difference.

JediFonger · 05-12-2006, 03:15 PM

aaron+lew,

the point i'm trying to make is that "1080p" is NOT truly 1080p. that most epic-wide films post 50s/60s will be more like 816p. that's my main point.