OAR 2.55:1 Anamorphic what in height can I expect I own a RCA F-38310?

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Mike Click, Feb 6, 2003.

  1. Mike Click

    Mike Click Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've got a lot of discs but none this high in anamorphic wide screen OAR. Dimensions of my HDTV *viewing* area are 18.5 inches high by 32.75 inches from a diaginol of 38 inches. Measure is *after* 1/4 inch subtraction on all 4 edges, phosphor start for RCA 'framing' of their 16 X 9 HDTV.

    Disc in question "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea", release May 13, 2003, I don't mind blackness as it's part of fitting picture in a 16 X 9. Any one know the 'height' of my viewing area? Thanks In Advance[​IMG]
     
  2. Randy A Salas

    Randy A Salas Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,348
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    All that matters is the width of your set since that equates to the proportional width of the image, 2.55.

    32.75
    -----
    x

    =

    2.55
    -----
    1

    x = 12.84

    So the height of the viewing area would be 12.84 inches, or about that depending on that 1/4-inch thing.

    Or is this too simple, and I've just a made a fool of myself?
     
  3. Robert Harris

    Robert Harris Archivist
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 1999
    Messages:
    10,061
    Likes Received:
    6,795
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Robert Harris
    You'll only be losing 2-3 horizontal scan lines from top and bottom, which means that unless you mark your screen, it will be difficult to tell he diffence.

    RAH
     
  4. Randy A Salas

    Randy A Salas Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,348
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  5. Robert Harris

    Robert Harris Archivist
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 1999
    Messages:
    10,061
    Likes Received:
    6,795
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Robert Harris
    At 2.40, it appears to be 4/10s of an inch top and bottom.
     
  6. Grant H

    Grant H Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If I'm reading your post correctly, Mike, and NONE of your DVD's fill the screen completely (or exceedingly close to completely) it sounds like something's wrong.
    You surely have at least one DVD that's 1.85:1, (not as wide as 2.35:1.)
    Are you sure you set your DVD player to 16:9 in the setup menu. If you don't I think everything will "overstretch" horizontally, and you'll get black bars on 1.85:1 when you should get none, and black bars that are too big on 2.35:1 material.
     
  7. Mike Click

    Mike Click Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Guys a 1.85:1 fills the screen minus 1/4 inch on all 4 sides, a 2.35:1 Anamorphic is about 2.5 inches down from top and 2.5 inches up from bottom. I have a Toshiba SD-4800 it's used to zoom up a notch to still have blackness cutting a bit off the sides of a non-2.35:1, icon is turned off.

    I will try the disc in the CX-875P changer
    but if height is not satisfactory, I will put disc into the Tosh and zoom it up a notch. I once had a 27 inch TV, I rented Blade Runner directors cut, it appeared to be 5 inches in height! I was so angry that the height would be so severly truncated.


    O/T I have a Region 1-6, progessive scan, fully modified and works great with Region 2 (UK) & 4 (AU). It has x, y, scaling on PAL discs (only) to raise to anamorphic thru scaling, instead of zooming. Thank you for your answers Gentlemen [​IMG]
     
  8. Grant H

    Grant H Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm sorry to say I'm a little confused.
    I have the same TV, so I thought I might understand, but I really don't.
    1.85:1 films should fill. 1/4 " black on all sides may just be the black vinyl seals showing on the glass?
    Oh, and if you zoom your 2.35: 1 you're going to chop off a LOT more of the sides than the little black seals do, and maybe some of the top and bottom too. I wouldn't do it. As long as your contrast isn't set too high, you shouldn't have to worry about the black bars burning the screen. I've had mine since October, and no problems with burn in. Any point around the halfway mark for contrast should be fine I'd think. Best to calibrate with a good disc like AVIA or Video Essentials which I'll admit I don't even have yet. I've been consistently turning down contrast since I got it whenever I see whites being obviously too bright to look natural. They should really call it white level and black level instead of "contrast" and "brightness". Actually the RCA does call it black level.
    Anyway, if everything's set up right, and you're getting actual black pixels all around, it could be the player output, or just that the overscan/underscan settings are set different than my tv is out of the box.
    If you're running a properly displayed anamorphic 1.66:1 film on the other hand you SHOULD have some black on the sides of the film image.
    May I ask when you got your set?
    Just wondered if they changed some things. I know mine overstretches vertically if you use the Fill mode to blow up non-anamorphic material or TV shows. Perhaps they "overcorrected" some gemoetry issues.
     
  9. Dan Rudolph

    Dan Rudolph Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    4,042
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    A lot of DVDs have overscan protection. If you have a display with no overscan, you'd see black bars all around.
     
  10. Mike Click

    Mike Click Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just as the Service Menu(testing) entrance is not in the product manual, some or most of us know how to get in. Odometer reading is 15,074 hours of operation, bought as F38310JX4 model on May 7, 2001. Wayne Snover of Parkway TV & Appliances Memorial Parkway (908-859-2232) in Phillipsburg, N. J. was the salesman and repairman he tweaked this set out for a floor model, playing when I came in to see it. I asked why their was a gap of about 1/4 inch on all sides, he said it was RCA/Thomson *framing* effect of normally 40 inch tube with 38 inch diagonal minus that 1/4 inch phosphor over clear glass start.

    I just had Vertical Limit which s a 1.85:1 Anamorphic yet since I sit 4 feet away from HDTV, I can clearly see the measured by a Luftin tape measure gap, between the inside cabinet and where the different grey/green color phosper starts. Since Wayne told me 'why' is was like, that I accepted my 15 year friends word!

    I bought this off of my local dealer not CC or BB, for $2999. I got a RCA6000P DVD player as my rebate! Like the blackness it doesn't bother me a bit. Loewe Aconda of Germany has the same size tube yet some 'tout' it's being a 40 inch, true but not all is visible and by my answering this we are getting a bit off of the subject.

    I guess if I sat 6 or 7 feet away I wouldn't see this, I merely entered it for you to get the correct mathematical size of the height of this particular HDTV.

    O/T I didn't look at any other TV for my homework was a digital look of a 'tube' with 1280 X 1080=1,382,400 pixel display. OTOH you don't get as many pixels with a plasma 13## x 768 doesn't make it IMHO. [​IMG]
     
  11. Mike Click

    Mike Click Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Guys I have put this question to 3 other forums I should be getting some answers tomorrow. 1 is in the USA and 2 are from across the pond in the UK. [​IMG]
     
  12. Matt DeVillier

    Matt DeVillier Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 1999
    Messages:
    773
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    approx 12.9", not including overscan factors

    the full height of your set is used with an anamorphic film with an AR of 1.78:1. Since you are interested in the height of an anamorphic 2.55:1 AR film, divide 1.78 by 2.55 and multiply by the set's viewable height (18.5).
     
  13. Mike Click

    Mike Click Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Matt thank you for your obserservation, I guess we'll all find out how the filmed in cinemascope 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea turns out May 13, when a number of us receive it. Watching anamorphic 2.35:1 on a RCA F-38310, I get a 2.0 inches from the top and 2.0 inches from the bottom view, giving me a height of '15' inches.

    A anamorphic 1.85:1 it fills the 16 X 9 envelope it doesn't over fill as there are *no* too tall or fat faces to be seen. I would think that the view would be less than 15 inches in height. I have seen animation how they fit the different aspect ratios in the 16 X 9 window.[​IMG]
     
  14. Mike Click

    Mike Click Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    http://www.cavecreations.com/tv2.cgi My good friend Phil Wheeler gave me this response of 13.1. I would like to add the above URL for a future newbies URL that ask for help like I did.

    Phil used this one on a figure of 33.1 Let's hear it for a good job, including all the members that responded to this post, plus a friend from another forum. thank you one and all.[​IMG]

    P.S. Now bring on those aligator eyes with Captain Nemo and Nautiless, coming out My 13 finally.
     
  15. Grant H

    Grant H Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mine's the F38310YX5 bought new in October 2002 at Circuit City for about $1500. Stand was extra though.
    It doesn't do any "overstretching" for anamorphic DVD's. Those are viewed in Full mode.
    It's when I try to use "Fill" for a non-anamorphic WS DVD that I get some minor overstretching in the vertical axis.
     
  16. Mike Click

    Mike Click Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Grant I use my Tosh SD-4800 to raise my pic from flat non-anamorphic, up a notch to get a higher zoomed pic then I turn my zoom icon off. I leave my JX4 in full all the time to avoid a burn in from being on 4:3 WebTV all the time. I know of one other owner that burned in a 4:3 image, he had a JX4 like mine.

    Grant I must be doing something right as I have 15,754 hours on the odometer just accessed SM odometer, from buying a 'floor' model in May of 2001. Date of manufacture April 30, 2001, I bought a 5 year warranty. Grant I love this HDTV, I use PQ cables and a good switcher. I can't wait for 20,000 Leagues to be on my screen
    [​IMG]
     
  17. MarkHastings

    MarkHastings Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    Messages:
    12,013
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As others have posted:

    The height of a 2.55:1 image on a 38" WS tv will be approx. 12.9"

    The height of a 2.35:1 image on the same tv will be approx. 14"

    Here's a side by side comparison:
    [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  18. Mike Click

    Mike Click Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I just found out my my 38 inch diaginol is 39 inches and my height is 19 9/16 inches and my width is 34 1/8 inches. I can't friggin believe it, I always went with the model as stated. RCA said it was a 38 inch diaginol, now I finally measured the thing with a tape measure.

    I am *flabbergasted* I remeasured it using 1 inch instead of the 'start' of the of professional tape meausure, but all was the same the second and third times. I know my friend of 15 years had told me I had one of the first bug free models, that *he* brought the crate up by the company truck from the Port in New Jersey, but he never told me that it wasn't the 38 inch diaginol model. I am/was stating JX4 but I never seen the numbered plate. Wayne filled out the warranty card and register
    slip with a zeroxed duplicate register slip, that was needed to get my free rebate RCA RC6000P DVD player. Wayne after delivery and set up installed my component and S-Video cables, that I had 'bought' PQ cables

    All this time I thought it was a 38 inch diaginol, no wonder my anamorphics are so high. Yes I had my reading glasses on for this measurement, for those who would ask.
    I don't move over 200+ pound monsters around, with my luck I would be crushed like Captain Nemo (Herbert Lom) in that "Mysterious Island" disc.

    I still can't believe it, I took another tape measure that I had and I got the same results! Could there be such a animal? :embarassed: with a capital E.
     
  19. MarkHastings

    MarkHastings Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2003
    Messages:
    12,013
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mike, sorry if I'm insulting you, but are you measuring the actual image area or the actual tv (including the case around the image area)?
     
  20. Mike Click

    Mike Click Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mark no insult at all, yes I am measuring the inside of the viewing area glass only. I am seeing the glass that I measured then about 1/4 inch of metal, then the speakers begin on both sides. I am sitting in the middle of the HDTV that I had to correct by using the tilt on prefrences.

    That has nothing to do with measuring the glass though, I am *red* from tip to toe. I had been telling people that I had a 38 inch diaginol, man am I ever *totally* embarassed!
     

Share This Page