4:3 HDTV's (1 Viewer)

[Mark Jany]

Just a comment as a sideline observer of the screen dimension and other tv issues (i.e. still undecided about what to get). It seems to me that altough 4:3 will be here for quite a bit longer the manufacturers are phasing out 4:3 sets already, especially at the high end. Consumer reports ( I know, I know...) just did a report on RPTV's and very few 4:3 models were listed. It seems newer models are only coming out in 16:9 - e.g. non-tube RPTV's. I think the availability issue will determine choices long before 4:3 programming disappears or even becomes the minority of on-air material.

Mark

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Mark,

When I checked a few months ago (model listings at TWICE.com), there were more 4:3 HDTVs on the market than ever. Yes, Mits and Pioneer aren't making 4:3 RPTVs any more, but there are more sets on the market than ever and a lot are 4:3.

Also, Wal-Mart is adding HDTV at many locations (including RPTV), and they announced that they would be starting with 4:3 models.

Also, Sony's 4:3 HD RPTV sets were amoung the best sellers in a top 10 digital RPTV list at MSNBC.COM a few months ago.

I suspect 4:3 sets will be around for some time.

 

[Eugene Esterly]

I also have a 4:3 27" HDTV. I purchased it because it is cheap & my home theater cabinet doesn't accept anythingh higher than 27" (I have a small bedroom so I can't put a big screen tv in the room). I did my research before buying the set. I own the Samsung 27" HDTV Model # #TXM 2797HF. This TV supports both 4:3 & 16:9 modes (this HDTV also comes with 3:2 pulldown.

This HDTV does what I need it to do. I support OAR so owning an HDTV that is 4:3 (also has 16:9 mode) doesn't bother me.

 

[Doug_B]

Just one of the reasons I went digital front projection recently in my media room. There's very little TV viewing on it, but whatever the aspect ratio, it's handled quite well and without burn in issues. As for the rest of the house, I'll likely stick with analog TV for quite a while, probably even if I need a replacement due to failure. Guess it's nice to have a separate room for home theater viewing .
Doug

 

[Brent Hutto]

There is no doubt in my mind that what Jan describes will eventually become the norm for 4:3 material. For the same stupid reasons as panned-and-scanned widescreen movies exist today. As it was, is and ever shall be. Bah!

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Yep, I've been saying for a while that if anything 4:3 is out on DVD and you like it, don't wait for a HD version. Buy the DVD version now!

 

[Jan Strnad]

Oh God, Michael and I agree on something. The end must be near. The center cannot hold! The apocalypse is upon us! REPENT NOW, YE SINNERS!

Jan

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

LOL!

Yes, I think you guys are right that 4x3 content will all get cropped to 16x9 on TV broadcasts soon enough. Basically, if you care about OAR, you'll always be concerned w/ such issues since the masses and thus the broadcasters are not OAR-friendly.

Even now, if you watch the HD channels, plenty of shows are getting cropped to varying degrees. I guess in some cases it's debatable whether the shows are composed ideally for 16x9, instead of 4x3, or something in between (or both).

BTW, Michael, your old post indicated lack of interest in 16x9 from Fox and ESPN. Looks like that's changing now. I'm not a car racing fan, but I noticed that Fox broadcasted the Daytona 500 in 16x9 (w/ some 4x3 perspectives) over the weekend. Of course, they also did that for the NFC playoffs. No HD, but still 16x9. ESPN, of course, announced their upcoming HD channel, which will presumably be 16x9. Yeah, there's still a long way to go, but it's getting there. But of course, there will always be the tons of pre-existing 4x3 content...

_Man_

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Man-Fai,
16 months later and some things are starting to change. But virtually all my F1 and CART races and Cincinnati Reds games will be 4:3 for the forseeable future. ESPN HD is going to do about 100 sporting events a year; there are a couple thousand or so baseball games on every year...mostly stranded on low-budget local sports nets.
Hey, I wish everything sports-wise was going to be in HD (or at least widescreen) real soon. But it's going to take years. And some of us replace our TV every 4-5 years.
ps Fox's line-doubled 480i -> 480p is crap!

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I know what you mean. I wish they'd get to baseball in HD already. For me, it's the YES network for the Yanks. And if most baseball broadcasts go HD, I'd get the MLB Extra Innings package too. Hmmm... I wonder if CBS will do their short list of Yankee games in HD--probably not.
And Fox's 480p broadcasts do look like crap although in 16x9.
_Man_

 

[Greg Lovern]

I just picked up a 1-year-old used 4:3 HDTV -- a Philips 60PP9601. If cost were no object, I'd probably choose a 16:9, but 4:3 HDTV is more bang for buck than 16:9. This seems to be especially so in the used market, where 4:3 HDTVs seem to be harder to sell than 16:9 (and I don't plan to sell mine anytime soon).

Anyway, since Buster Keaton's classics are in 4:3, I'm glad to have a large 4:3 image.

The 60PP9601 looks great with the progressive-scan Toshiba SD-4700 I got used on eBay for $102. Now I just need to get an iScan for Laserdisc, broadcast TV, etc. And of course an HDTV tuner.

Greg