Anamorphic DVDs On 4:3 TVs (1 Viewer)

[Angelo.M]

Interesting thread.

I'll throw myself into the 4:3 camp. When I purchased my RPTV 3 years ago, before the proliferation of 16:9 sets, I bought a 60-inch 4:3 set. This turned out to be a perfect solution, because I can watch DVDs in letterboxed format, and have a viewing area that's as large or larger than most of the 16:9 sets out there (I think it's comparable to a 53-inch 16:9 set; there's a website out there somewhere that does the mathematics, but I can't find it).

The vast majority of my viewing is still programming intended for 4:3, including most sports programming (at least 50% of my total TV viewing). Until high-def broadcasts become the rule and not the exception, I'll stick with my very large 4:3 set. My prediction is that at least another decade will pass before high-def and 16:9 broadcasts are the mainstay in the U.S.

 

[MancusoB]

What do broadcast television shows like ER shown in "widescreen" look like on a widescreen television?

Do you still have the black bars on top and bottom as with a 4:3 set?

 

[Richard Burzynski]

I'm going to answer the original question from the point of view if an individual already owns a TV (not shopping for one) and that TV is a typical household 4:3 ("regular") model - meaning no "squeeze" feature.
Letterbox or widescreen (non-ananmorphic) DVD's can look sharper on a regular TV, due to less "downconversion" processing as mentioned earlier. These types of discs are not as common as when DVD first rolled out, I believe?
Anamorphic DVD's (more common nowadays) may look "softer", but this is a function of your DVD player. Sony DVD players were notorious for making anamorphic DVD's look soft on 4:3 TV's. Other brands would provide sharper playback.
That said, I'll take it one further. I personally agree with Angelo's philosophy: if you watch lots of 4:3 material in your house, get a 4:3 TV (as large as you can/feel confortable with) and you will get nice 4:3 images (cable/satellite programming) and a fairly big 16:9-sized image as well for your DVD watching; you just won't get extra anamorphic resolution, unless you buy a 4:3 set with "16:9 mode squeeze" feature.
Toshiba makes a nice basic analog DVD player for $99. It provides for a nice sharp picture for 4:3 TV's, regardless of the type of DVD you are using. AND the player offers a very useful zoom feature as well - but that's for another thread discussion.
Rich B.

 

[MarkHastings]

MancusoB,
Widescreen TV's have the ability to 'zoom' into the picture. What happens is, the 4x3 letterboxed broadcast gets stretched horizontally to fit the 16x9 screen (making the image look wide), then it stretches it vertically (making everything look correct), to which, the black bars are cropped off and your screen is completely filled with the 16x9 image.
---
DaViD Boulet,
You make a great point. I also have to throw in the psychological effect for me. Since a 4x3 tv will display 4x3 images larger than 16x9 images, every time I watched a DVD, it felt like the image was SO small because I was comparing it to the LARGE 4x3 image. With my 16x9 tv, my 4x3 images are smaller and when I watch a DVD, the image AMAZINGLY gets Bigger!
I realize it's all psychological, but that's the nature of humans. I'd rather have my DVD's suddenly look bigger than tv rather than having them look smaller. But that's my opinion.
---
Carl Johnson,
Most RPTV's say you shouldn't watch programming with static images (i.e. Black Bars) for more than 15% of your total viewing time. I've only had my tv for a little over a year and I'm already starting to notice a slight burn in on the Fox logo (Damn you Simpsons!)
True, most of the tv's I've seen (that have the uneven wear) are in the stores, but it just proves how dangerous it can be, especially if you're like me and watch a LOT of DVD's on a projection tv. But that's my experience.

 

[DeeF]

I guess I'm the exception here. I like to watch 4:3 material on my 16:9 television, I don't mind the black "pillars" on either side. For most television programming, I stretch the picture. But for movies made before 1953, I watch 'em with the bars.

Any widescreen programming on television fills my monitor beautifully - no black areas. Of course, all widescreen sources, like DVDs and HDTV, look spectacular on my 16:9 plasma, and I won't be going back to the other.

 

[Brent Hutto]

I don't have a lot more to add to the discussion at this point. In retrospect, I shouldn't have used the loaded word "punished" but DaViD Boulet and MarkHastings have now clarified why they want their 4:3 images smaller than widescreen ones even in addition to economics and practical constraints.

As for "impact", I have black-cardboard masks of various sizes that I use any time I'm watching non-4:3 DVD's on my 36XBR800. A lot of the loss of impact is due to the fact that the TV doesn't really produce black bars (even moreso for RPTV but true for my direct-view, as well). When I put my masks in place, hang blackout curtains over the doorways and start the movie, there's no way I could tell whether my TV is 16:9, 4:3 or any particular size at all.

I am sympathetic to the argument about how crappy some NTSC sources look on a big screen. I use Dish Network and the upconversion algorithms of my Sony make an already bad picture look even worse. The show "Enterprise" in particular is horrendous. At first, I experimented with sitting further than our usual seven feet or so from the screen, as well as shrinking the picture down using the PIP feature. The fact is, a smaller picture with swimmy compression artifacts is just as bad as a bigger picture. You can identify the swimmy parts better with the big picture but either way the scene just looks unclear. Once we got used to it, the big picture is still easier to watch and tell what's going on.

I'll make one more semi-gratuitous comment. There seem to be people who notice black bars and people who don't. I used to be one of the former but have gradually become the sort who gets immersed in the picture, whatever its size or aspect ratio, as long as it's clear enough to not be annoying. I think that is why I've not had any buyer's remorse over not getting something like a 34XBR800 instead of the 36" 4:3 model. Now if I could just get a decent NTSC feed of "Enterprise" every week.