-

Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Widescreen or not?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
50 replies to this topic

#21 of 51 DaViD Boulet

DaViD Boulet

    Lead Actor

  • 8,805 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 1999

Posted July 14 2003 - 04:49 AM

Joey,

Get a larger rear-projection display (16x9 WS of course) for the same or close price.

DO NOT GET THAT 4x3 DIRECT-VIEW.

Yes...it's got a great picture. But you also want a *big* picture with your WS movies and things have come a long way...the RP sets out there now are light-years ahead of what you had before and IMO most of them produce a BETTER picture than their direct-view counterparts.

Also, some of the digital RP sets like Sony's LCD 16x9 HD and Samsung's DLP don't have any CRT guns to "align" and look much more detailed/sharp to the eye than comparable CRT sets.

I know Sony was having a big discount of some of the LCD-based HD sets a while back. That might be something to consider too and though Samsung's build quality has been a hot-topic, if you get a decent warranty that DLP puts out a stunning picture for a very cheap price!!

BTW, take seriously comments to the effect of "make your WS movies bigger than your 4x3 TV". It really is cheezy (sorry folks, but it is) when you switch from cable TV to LOTR on DVD and you image shrinks. What gives? Why get a TV that pays homage to your 4x3 cable programming but gives 2nd seat to your WS DVD movies? What's more important?

The fact that there's "lots of 4x3 content" is irrelvent. Do I want to watch all that (low image quality) 4x3 cable content blown-up bigger than my high-qualty DVD movies? If you set your couch to get a decent picture with your 4x3 programing on a 4x3 set then you're getting an image that's too small when you switch to a WS movie. If you set up your seating for the WS movie then your cable looks aweful because it's too big.

A 16x9-shaped set does the best with all image content IMHO.

-dave
Be an Original Aspect Ratio Advocate

Supporter of 1080p24 video and lossless 24 bit audio.

#22 of 51 Levesque

Levesque

    Supporting Actor

  • 587 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 21 2002

Posted July 14 2003 - 08:35 AM

Quote:
DO NOT GET THAT 4x3 DIRECT-VIEW


David, you are a little bit extreme here. It's Joey's money, so maybe for him it's the good TV. My father-in-law listen to me and bought a 16:9 but exchange it after 2 weeks for a 4:3... No stretch mode was good for him. It,s personal taste here.

I just sold my Tosh 65HDX82 because the stretch mode were not good for me (and Tosh is known to have the best stretch mode out there...). Fat-looking hockey players are out for me. My Sony 40XBR800 does an awesome job with 4:3 NTSC, sports and the like. My 65HDX82 was not good enough for me. It's a PERSONAL taste here. So maybe you like to stretch everything, but some people simply don't like it.

I'm presently buying a 16:9 front projector with a 60' x 108' screen for HD and DVD. My Sony will do the 4:3 job, an extend the life span of my costly FP bulb. the Sony gives me a 16:9 picture around 36 inches for the occasionnal 16:9 viewing. No stretching for me. Personnal taste.

Joey. Go out there and look at those stretch modes before buying. Some poeple really don't like them. If you are feeling ok with fat looking football players, then go for it!

#23 of 51 DaViD Boulet

DaViD Boulet

    Lead Actor

  • 8,805 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 1999

Posted July 14 2003 - 08:46 AM

Personal taste?

Of course it's all about personal taste. Watching Pan and Scan is a matter of personal taste. The reason we have discussions like this is to discuss the merrits of different points of view. I feel very strongly about the merits of my point of view and expressed them. Naturally Joe can spend his money as he wishes.

regarding stretching...

I don't know what you're talking about Posted Image ... I've never watched a 1.33:1 program "stretched" on my 16x9 set and I never will. I think that's bastardizing the visual that was created by the producers. I watch my 1.33:1 programing (both TV and film) in 4x3 mode and am quite happy. To imply that someone has to be content with "stretched" 1.33:1 material if they want to go 16x9 is presumptuous. I watch all my material OAR on my 16x9 display. The only compromise is with 4x3 encoded 1.66:1 titles which I usually zoom to 1.78:1 which I think makes the most sense unless subtitling is a problem.

-dave Posted Image
Be an Original Aspect Ratio Advocate

Supporter of 1080p24 video and lossless 24 bit audio.

#24 of 51 Levesque

Levesque

    Supporting Actor

  • 587 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 21 2002

Posted July 14 2003 - 09:14 AM

Watching 4:3 on the Tosh with ugly grey bar on each side was not for me... personnal taste again.

Quote:
To imply that someone has to be content with "stretched" 1.33:1 material if they want to go 16x9 is presumptuous


You are right, they have the choice between fat-looking peoples or ugly grey bar on each sides...Posted Image

Nothing perfect my friend. Pros and cons for 16:9 and 4:3. Nothing perfect.

Whem everyone will broadcast ONLY in 16:9 (5 or 6 years? or more...) Then I will sell the 4:3 set and buy any hot new technology that will be out then. Why not be satisfied with both ratio NOW with both a 16:9 AND a 4:3 display?

A lot of things happen in 5 or 6 years... So Joey can buy a 4:3 set now AND buy a new 16:9 in 5 or 6 years...

#25 of 51 DaViD Boulet

DaViD Boulet

    Lead Actor

  • 8,805 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 1999

Posted July 14 2003 - 09:28 AM

Granted, my 16x9 direct-view doesn't have "ugly grey bars"...they are jet black.

DLP and LCD digital displays are capable of producing black masking w/out risk of burn-in. One of the reasons I prefer digital vs CRT.

BTW, your last post is right on the money. Hopefully *everyone* is saving for their HD-front projector and only viewing their "TV" as a get-me-there purchase Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image
Be an Original Aspect Ratio Advocate

Supporter of 1080p24 video and lossless 24 bit audio.

#26 of 51 Rick Anderson

Rick Anderson

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 71 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 2003

Posted July 14 2003 - 02:31 PM

I find the wide-zoom on the Sony or the Panorama setting on the Samsung to be easy on the eyes as far as stretch modes. I keep the TVs set to them for normal viewing.

#27 of 51 Joey

Joey

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 55 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2000

Posted July 15 2003 - 03:14 AM

Quote:
So Joey can buy a 4:3 set now AND buy a new 16:9 in 5 or 6 years...


Actually, that is what I was intitially thinking - and may still go that route. The 46" Sony 16:9 RPTV was really nice, though - and they were showing HDNet and the picture was gorgeous. However, I'm thinking that the 36" XBR set may do well for now, and then when I do move (which will probably be within a year or so) - I can move the 36" to the bedroom or something and look for a 16:9. But as it stands now, though - I think it's going to be between the Sony KV36XBR800 or KP46WT500 (or KP46WT510 - which is on Sony's site, but I have no idea what's the difference)... But like I said for the 16:9 - 43" width is a bit wide in space considerations for me for the time being...

#28 of 51 DaViD Boulet

DaViD Boulet

    Lead Actor

  • 8,805 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 1999

Posted July 15 2003 - 03:30 AM

Of course...you could always move that 46" 16x9 HD set to the bedroom... Posted Image
Be an Original Aspect Ratio Advocate

Supporter of 1080p24 video and lossless 24 bit audio.

#29 of 51 JoeFish

JoeFish

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 67 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 2003

Posted July 15 2003 - 05:02 AM

Quote:
So Joey can buy a 4:3 set now AND buy a new 16:9 in 5 or 6 years...


After some research, that became my plan, and is exactly what I did. I've had my KV-32HS510 for about 2 weeks now, and I'm tickled pink with it. Since it's my general purpose cable/PlayStation/DVD tv, and only 32 inches (space limitation), I decided the 4:3 would just be better. When I get a new house with a bigger theater area, then I'll get a big widescreen dedicated for movies, and save the 4:3 for gaming/rec-room use.

Don't take that to mean movies don't look awesome on this set. I watched Gladiator last night from my new prog scan DVD player, and was blown away. It looked just like I remember in the theater, but a little smaller Posted Image

-Joe

#30 of 51 Joey

Joey

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 55 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2000

Posted July 15 2003 - 01:07 PM

Don't think that the 16:9 going into the bedroom hasn't crossed my mind, either. LOL...

Hey JoeFish, and you started this thread - but this Joey took it beyond because I'm going through basically what you went through... Same here - I have space considerations right now as well and am thinking down the road. Good to hear that your KV-32HS510 is doing you good. This will be the first television I buy in a loooong time.

Yet, I'm no closer to my decision. Posted Image

#31 of 51 Patrick Larkin

Patrick Larkin

    Screenwriter

  • 1,761 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2001

Posted July 15 2003 - 02:05 PM

I'm in the market for a new TV. I'd say I'm 95% sure I want a 16:9 set. While I'd love one of those 60" Samsung DLP sets, I can't spend that much. It was my very limited understanding that DLP and LCD RPTV's don't suffer burn in and don't need to be calibrated.

I'm wondering how one watches 4x3 material on a 16x9 set. I would prefer to watch cable with bars on the sides. Doesn't this risk damaging the set?

I'm hoping the DLP prices plummet (wishful thinking) because I love the footprint of them.

#32 of 51 DaViD Boulet

DaViD Boulet

    Lead Actor

  • 8,805 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 1999

Posted July 16 2003 - 12:41 AM

Hey Patrick,

That's the cool thing about what most digital TVs (non CRT TVs)...they don't get "burn in" so you watch them for long periods of time with graphics and masking (like watching a 4x3 iamge with the vertical bars on the L/R) with no problem.

BTW, Plamsas *are* prone to burn-in bcs they have phosphers that glow just like CRT tubes. But almost everything else (LCD, DLP, LCOS) has no burn in issues at all.

-dave
Be an Original Aspect Ratio Advocate

Supporter of 1080p24 video and lossless 24 bit audio.

#33 of 51 JoeFish

JoeFish

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 67 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 2003

Posted July 16 2003 - 01:34 AM

Patrick,

To expand on what David said, when you watch 4:3 material on a 16:9 CRT TV, the right and left bars are filled with what looks like grayish bars. These are supposed to be an average color that prevents burn-in.

Also, you have the choice (at least on the Samsung I saw) of ways to fill up the spaces. You can:

1. Stretch the whole image. Not good for most things.

2. Stretch the edges of the image more than the center. This is a pretty cool option, since much of the action happens towards the center, the stretching isn't as noticeable. It's still, of course, not perfect.

-Joe

#34 of 51 Rob Tomlin

Rob Tomlin

    Producer

  • 4,507 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 08 2000

Posted July 16 2003 - 12:06 PM

As stated, much of this comes down to personal taste.

That being said, I really can't imagine why anyone would purchase a Digital set (with the ability to show HDTV) and not get the Widescreen model.

All true High Def signals will be in the 16:9 format.

And for watching DVD's, the 16:9 set will fit much better than a 4:3 set (for most movies made from the 1950's and later).

For ordinary men, it's a burning, fiery furnace.

#35 of 51 Joey

Joey

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 55 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2000

Posted July 17 2003 - 02:37 AM

I think one of the reasons why I am leaning toward the 36XBR800 (funny, though, how my last message was a choice between two sets that were not even mentioned in my initial message in this thread) is because that this isn't going to be my "end-all" set, but something that seems to fit in well now until I have the space to concentrate on a larger 16:9. The 46" Sony 16:9 I mentioned about looked so fantastic, but I am thinking maybe something like that would be better off in a few years or sooner depending on when I move. I only have about 300 DVDs to begin with and I am thinking that I may view 4:3 programming more often right now. Well, that's my thinking at this point. This set is going to be purchased within the next 3 weeks, so, I had better decide soon. Posted Image

#36 of 51 Patrick Larkin

Patrick Larkin

    Screenwriter

  • 1,761 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2001

Posted July 17 2003 - 04:33 AM

What about the other RPTV's that are not DLP, LCOS, and LCD. Is it not advisable to watch 4x3 images on them with the gray/black ars on the sides?

The problem with my limited shopping around so far is that these places are ill equipped to demonstrate basic cable in 4x3 mode vs DVD in 16:9 mode.

#37 of 51 Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor

  • 6,529 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted July 17 2003 - 05:23 AM

I have a 16x9 CRT RPTV. It is well over 2 years old. I have watched 4:3 DVD's, 2.35:1 DVD's, 1.85:1 DVD's and (stretched) cable TV on it approximately 35-40 hours a week. It shows absolutely no burnin whatsoever, none, zip, nada. I've said it before and I'll say it again - anyone who experiences burnin on an RPTV did one of the following:

Did not calibrate it and left it on "torch mode".

Calbrated it but did not leave it that way - "weel, I didn't like the picture when the sun was coming through the window, so I just turned the contrast up a little, itty, bitty bit"

Left a video game on pause and forgot it.

Did not vary their viewing habits.

#38 of 51 Joey

Joey

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 55 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2000

Posted July 21 2003 - 03:23 PM

Speaking of the Sony KV-36XBR800 - does anyone know a good place to pick up the SU-36XBR8 matching stand for a good price? Posted Image

#39 of 51 Captain Spaulding

Captain Spaulding

    Second Unit

  • 415 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969
  • Real Name:Jay
  • LocationOH

Posted July 25 2003 - 11:21 AM

For what its worth, here's my story: I had purchased an Sony 34XBR800 widescreen TV. The HD and DVD video was excellent! But we watch a lot of classic movies and TV shows on DVD, as well as quite a bit of 4:3 material from satellite. We did not like the stretch modes, and viewing in 4:3 with bars on the sides got is a picture too small for our liking. So, off it went, and we replaced it with the Sony 40" XBR. WE'VE FOUND THE PERFECT SET FOR US! We prefer a CRT tube TV for its sharpness and clarity; the 40 inch 4:3 picture is the perfect size for the room the TV is in, and when watching HD or widescreen DVD, the 40XBR800 provides a widescreen picture a couple of inches bigger than the 34XBR800. In the service mode I was able to successfully adjust overscan to 4% or less all around and adjusted the geometry a bit. In fact, I was shocked at how good the geometry is on this big screen. I expected it to be worse than on smaller Sony sets that I have owned, but it is very close to perfect! I think we got lucky with the set we bought! As you can tell, we could not be happier with the perfect combination of features that this Sony brings us.

#40 of 51 JoeFish

JoeFish

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 67 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 2003

Posted July 25 2003 - 03:13 PM

Jay,

Glad to hear I'm not the only one who bought a 4:3 recently. I love my Wega Posted Image

-Joe


Back to Display Devices (TVs/Projectors/Screens)



Forum Nav Content I Follow