Just why is widescreen not accepted in the U.S.? (1 Viewer)

[Inspector Hammer!]

Steve,
absolutly the percentage of OAR films on HV today is MUCH higher than ever before, however I also feel that we must keep our guard up and keep pressing forward until P&S is no longer a threat to OAR, and sadly at this point in time, it is still a formidable threat.

We also have to let the studios know in no uncertain terms that we aren't going anywhere, and when they screw up, like Warner almost did, we're going to make our voices heard that full screen and P&S only releases will no longer be tolerated as they were in the 80's and the better part of the 90's. P&S is an outdated concept that needs to join the dinosaurs ASAP.

 

[John_Berger]

On the other hand budding film-school auteurs might make a film with the serious intent of duplicating the achievements of Kubrick or Wells, and produce something everyone thinks is rubbish.

Agreed. I'm sure many of us remember a few high-profile "art" exhibits from a few years ago that many vehemently considered to be disgusting and insulting to those of a certain religious belief, while others just-as-vehemently backed up the artist claiming that it's just as much art as is a Picasso.
The final piece in and of itself is not necessarily a piece of art, but the talents and creativity that were used to bring that forth most certainly are and art form in and of themselves -- IMHO, of course.

 

[Josh Lowe]

Perhaps someone will start a pro-P&S forum sponsored by Cliff's Notes.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Ken, I've seen direct comparisons of HDTV alongside PAL and NTSC. Trust me, from a normal viewing position, the PAL-HDTV difference is marginal, the PAL-NTSC difference considerable.

Just looking at the specs, that's highly improbable:

Current NTSC: 720 x 480 = 345,600 pixels
Current PAL: 720 x 576 = 414,720 pixels
Current HDTV: 1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixels

PAL offers a 120% improvement over NTSC.

HDTV offers a 500% improvement over PAL.

Using those numbers, I'd say that HDTV offers a siginificant improvement over PAL. And comparatively speaking, PAL offers a far less significant improvement over NTSC.

Are you sure the HDTV you saw wasn't downconverted in anyway?

 

[steve jaros]

Adam, those pixelization stats are informative, but of course there's a relevant distinction to be made between technical differences in audio/video formats and practical ones (i.e., ones that can actually be detected by typical human senses).

In this case - i happen to agree with you. When i've seen "true" HDTV, the difference in picture quality has been rather obvious as compared to regular DVD.

Still, it hasn't, IMO, been "500%" better, meaning that for me at least, perhaps there are some diminishing returns kicking in with respect to practical significance...

 

[Lars Vermundsberget]

Quote: "Current NTSC: 720 x 480 = 345,600 pixels
Current PAL: 720 x 576 = 414,720 pixels
Current HDTV: 1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixels

PAL offers a 120% improvement over NTSC.

HDTV offers a 500% improvement over PAL."



That would be 20% and 400%, not 120 and 500. I guess your point still stands, though.