• 05-19-2005, 05:58 PM
    hershon
    When Widescreen DVD's don't fill your Widescreen TV
    I just rented the Aviaitor (my DVD store gets movies a week early for some reason), a pretty good movie, surprisingly Leonardo deCaprio was very good and I thought he was miscast before I saw it, and while my DVD was the widescreen edition, it was kind of a slightly letterbox widescreen- it did not fill the full screen even though it was widescreen. This is probably a matter of personal taste but if you have a widescreen TV are you best in these situations expanding the picture or just leaving it in its retarded letterbox style?
  • 05-20-2005, 11:05 AM
    Woochifer
    Hersh, how many times are you going to keep repeating these widescreen questions? They've been answered many times before on this board.

    Here's a basic primer on how all the various aspect ratios fit together:

    standard TV aspect ratio and pre-1950 film standard= 1.33:1 (4X3)
    HDTV aspect ratio = 1.77:1 (16X9)
    standard "Academy flat" 35mm film aspect ratio = 1.85:1
    35mm film aspect ratio with anamorphic (Panavision and Cinemascope) lens = about 2.35:1

    Those blackbars are in place because movies are not filmed exactly at the 1.77:1 aspect ratio used with HDTV. What you get on your HDTV when viewing any widescreen DVD is the full image frame exactly how the director intended. Whether or not you get black bars on the screen depends on how the movie was originally framed and lensed. It's up to the director and cinematographer whether they want to go with the Academy flat aspect ratio or go with an anamorphic scope aspect ratio. If they use the 1.85:1 aspect ratio, you'll get minimal black bars on a HDTV, with a 2.35:1 aspect ratio movie, you will get more noticeable black bars. It's that simple.

    Either way, it's up to you whether or not you want to chop off some of the side image to fill the full image on a widescreen TV. This link should tell you all you need to know.

    http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...reenorama.html
  • 05-20-2005, 01:09 PM
    hershon
    Got it Thanks What Do You Do?
    Got the concept thanks. What do you yourself do?

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Woochifer
    Hersh, how many times are you going to keep repeating these widescreen questions? They've been answered many times before on this board.

    Here's a basic primer on how all the various aspect ratios fit together:

    standard TV aspect ratio and pre-1950 film standard= 1.33:1 (4X3)
    HDTV aspect ratio = 1.77:1 (16X9)
    standard "Academy flat" 35mm film aspect ratio = 1.85:1
    35mm film aspect ratio with anamorphic (Panavision and Cinemascope) lens = about 2.35:1

    Those blackbars are in place because movies are not filmed exactly at the 1.77:1 aspect ratio used with HDTV. What you get on your HDTV when viewing any widescreen DVD is the full image frame exactly how the director intended. Whether or not you get black bars on the screen depends on how the movie was originally framed and lensed. It's up to the director and cinematographer whether they want to go with the Academy flat aspect ratio or go with an anamorphic scope aspect ratio. If they use the 1.85:1 aspect ratio, you'll get minimal black bars on a HDTV, with a 2.35:1 aspect ratio movie, you will get more noticeable black bars. It's that simple.

    Either way, it's up to you whether or not you want to chop off some of the side image to fill the full image on a widescreen TV. This link should tell you all you need to know.

    http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...reenorama.html

  • 05-20-2005, 01:51 PM
    eisforelectronic
    The point of the television manufacturer including format and picture size controls is to give you, the consumer, some control over what you see on your screen. Those black bars really bother some people, other don't care, some only want to see the picture exactly as was intended. This is your personal decision, I think we generally don't answer this question because it's completely subjective.
  • 05-20-2005, 02:38 PM
    kexodusc
    I let the DVD run in full mode...whatever the aspect ratio is suppose to be, it becomes...if that means minimal, or somewhat large black bars so be it...the TV is big enough, and it beats streched corners or sides IMO, no distortion.
    Don't sweat the small stuff, I say...
  • 05-20-2005, 06:49 PM
    hershon
    Thanks for a Straight Answer Kexodusc
    Thanks for a straight answer. Right now I'm doing as you say and show widescreen DVD's on my standard picture mode. I still hate these ahole filmakers who if the DVD is widescreen can't have it fill out the screen without bars, etc. I don't have any problem if something is in a 4:3 format & I then have to expand the picture but it just ticks me off that if its available in widescreen its not a full widescreen.
  • 05-20-2005, 07:42 PM
    nick250
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hershon
    I still hate these ahole filmakers who if the DVD is widescreen can't have it fill out the screen without bars, etc. I don't have any problem if something is in a 4:3 format & I then have to expand the picture but it just ticks me off that if its available in widescreen its not a full widescreen.

    Two points here. One, you "hate" the entire film industry because they do not conform to a format which pleases you in DVD playback. You need to talk to your shrink about this. Two, while you say you understand Woochifer's explanation, clearly you don't otherwise you would not have made the above post.
  • 05-20-2005, 08:17 PM
    hershon
    Give it Up Nick
    I fully understand what Woochiver says- you're another know it all who tells people they don't hear what they hear or understand what they understand. The point being is they should still give people the option to watch widescreen on a full screen without have to mess with your TV picture format just like most DVD's give you the option to watch in DTS as well as Dolby Digital but these aholes don't.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nick250
    Two points here. One, you "hate" the entire film industry because they do not conform to a format which pleases you in DVD playback. You need to talk to your shrink about this. Two, while you say you understand Woochifer's explanation, clearly you don't otherwise you would not have made the above post.

  • 05-20-2005, 08:47 PM
    cam
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hershon
    I fully understand what Woochiver says- you're another know it all who tells people they don't hear what they hear or understand what they understand. The point being is they should still give people the option to watch widescreen on a full screen without have to mess with your TV picture format just like most DVD's give you the option to watch in DTS as well as Dolby Digital but these aholes don't.

    "The option to watch widescreen on a full screen", your quote, I do believe I saw a picture of your system when you posted a while back. I do believe you have a widescreen tv from what I saw from your previous posted pictures. If you own a widescreen tv, why would you want to watch a widescreen formatted dvd in full screen. You are the biggest moron to hit these forums since Lexmark 3200. If you are watching a widescreen dvd on a full screen tv, simply just zoom in and that widescreen movie now becomes a fullscreen movie. Dink.
  • 05-20-2005, 08:59 PM
    hershon
    Cam You Are Really Not Very Smart
    Let's see I own a widescreen HD TV and you don't understand that in general widescreen 16:9 DVD's or HD TV broadcasts are meant to fill up the full widescreen TV. You are in my opinion the stupidist human being on this planet. Obviously amoebabrain, if I expand a DVD picture it (slightly) distorts the picture. Read books and increase your IQ from I'm estimating 70 to 75!
  • 05-20-2005, 09:27 PM
    cam
    If the program being viewed does not fill your widescreen tv from top to bottom, side to side, it means only one thing, the program being viewed was shot at a wider aspect ratio then your widescreen tv, dink.
  • 05-20-2005, 09:53 PM
    N. Abstentia
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hershon
    Thanks for a straight answer. Right now I'm doing as you say and show widescreen DVD's on my standard picture mode. I still hate these ahole filmakers who if the DVD is widescreen can't have it fill out the screen without bars, etc. I don't have any problem if something is in a 4:3 format & I then have to expand the picture but it just ticks me off that if its available in widescreen its not a full widescreen.

    This coming from the guy who buys a stereo CD then runs it through a 6 channel DSP multi channel processor used to 'make up' the other 4 channels.

    I think 'the way the director intended' is not your priority :)
  • 05-20-2005, 10:15 PM
    Woochifer
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hershon
    Thanks for a straight answer. Right now I'm doing as you say and show widescreen DVD's on my standard picture mode. I still hate these ahole filmakers who if the DVD is widescreen can't have it fill out the screen without bars, etc. I don't have any problem if something is in a 4:3 format & I then have to expand the picture but it just ticks me off that if its available in widescreen its not a full widescreen.

    Like I said, if you want to watch the film the way that the director intended (which is with the full image width visible), then put up with the black bars and stop complaining. If you take such issue with it, then by all means stretch the image to fit your preferences, no one's stopping you.

    Directors and cinematographers frame their films to their artistic preferences. If you don't like movies filmed in Cinemascope or Panavision, then I guess the "ahole filmakers [sp]" would include the likes of George Lucas, David Lean, Stanley Kubrick, Ridley Scott, Peter Jackson, Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, and every other director who's ever used the 2.35:1 aspect ratio in their movies. They make movies to be seen in movie theaters, not for the gratification of HDTV owners who have an aversion to black bars. A Panavision scoped movie will look fine on the big screen. Don't want black bars? Go to the theater and watch a movie there.
  • 05-20-2005, 10:26 PM
    hershon
    I got no beef with you Wooch
    As I said, dsepite others telling me I don't, I fully grasp what you are saying. However, the directors could still put the original DVD in a full no bars widescreen format too, that's my source with this aggravation. On alot of DVD's you have the option of 2 channel stereo sound, dolby digital sound, DTS sound, etc. I'm sure the director originally shot the movie in one particular sound mode but when they made the DVD they made it possible for people to listen to it on different sound modes. They can do the same thing with letterboxed widescreen DVD's too if they wished.


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Woochifer
    Like I said, if you want to watch the film the way that the director intended (which is with the full image width visible), then put up with the black bars and stop complaining. If you take such issue with it, then by all means stretch the image to fit your preferences, no one's stopping you.

    Directors and cinematographers frame their films to their artistic preferences. If you don't like movies filmed in Cinemascope or Panavision, then I guess the "ahole filmakers [sp]" would include the likes of George Lucas, David Lean, Stanley Kubrick, Ridley Scott, Peter Jackson, Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, and every other director who's ever used the 2.35:1 aspect ratio in their movies. They make movies to be seen in movie theaters, not for the gratification of HDTV owners who have an aversion to black bars. A Panavision scoped movie will look fine on the big screen. Don't want black bars? Go to the theater and watch a movie there.

  • 05-20-2005, 10:30 PM
    hershon
    NAbstentia- Screw the Director
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by N. Abstentia
    This coming from the guy who buys a stereo CD then runs it through a 6 channel DSP multi channel processor used to 'make up' the other 4 channels.I think 'the way the director intended' is not your priority :)

    Screw the director. Again, if you're using your philosophy if God wanted us to fly we would have had wings not planes. Under your philosophy, the War in Iraq is good because president Bush tells us it is just.
  • 05-20-2005, 11:00 PM
    Woochifer
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hershon
    As I said, dsepite others telling me I don't, I fully grasp what you are saying. However, the directors could still put the original DVD in a full no bars widescreen format too, that's my source with this aggravation. On alot of DVD's you have the option of 2 channel stereo sound, dolby digital sound, DTS sound, etc. I'm sure the director originally shot the movie in one particular sound mode but when they made the DVD they made it possible for people to listen to it on different sound modes. They can do the same thing with letterboxed widescreen DVD's too if they wished.

    Now you're making no sense whatsoever. Widescreen DVDs are already enhanced for 16x9 TVs, and you're proposing that studios put out two different widescreen versions of it, one panned and scanned to 1.77:1 and the other with the letterboxed 1.85:1 or 2:35:1 frame, plus whatever release also come out in the pan & scan 1.33:1 aspect ratio? That's three different versions -- good luck selling the studios on this idea. If these black bars aggravate you, then use the zoom mode and be done with it. I just don't see it as an issue.

    Your assumptions about sound are wrong -- totally different from the issue with the aspect ratio. The format that the sound was originally recorded and the format that is used on the DVD soundtrack are totally different. Films are not originally recorded in DD or DTS because those are compressed audio formats, designed to squeeze into the limited space available on a DVD after the video data is included.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hershon
    Screw the director. Again, if you're using your philosophy if God wanted us to fly we would have had wings not planes. Under your philosophy, the War in Iraq is good because president Bush tells us it is just.

    Where the hell did this come from? Leave the politics and personal presumptions out of this forum. If you want to go off-topic, post it there.

    Screw the director? They're the ones who make the movies in the first place. If you don't care for their artistic wishes, then no one's forcing you to watch their movies. If all you care about is filling your TV and avoiding black bars, then forget about HDTV and stick with 4:3 and VHS.
  • 05-20-2005, 11:08 PM
    hershon
    Kiss My But
    Again, I'll like what I want to like and I don't need you or anyone else here to dictate my tastes. Just because someone directed a movie and I don't respect his artistic vision or him doesn't mean I'm not allowed to see the movie. When after everything is said and done, I don't really care what the director intended, just that I was entertained by the movie. I'd be more entertained if I could watch a lousy widescreen DVD that wasn't in a letterbox format. Expanding the TV picture format is not a satisfactory solution to me, it distorts the picture.
    It would not cost these companies superbig bucks to also offer a full sized nonletterboxed
    movie as a picture option. There are plenty of nonwidescreen DVD's that I know of that give one the option to watch the movie in letterbox or full screen format.
  • 05-21-2005, 02:21 AM
    kexodusc
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hershon
    Thanks for a straight answer. Right now I'm doing as you say and show widescreen DVD's on my standard picture mode. I still hate these ahole filmakers who if the DVD is widescreen can't have it fill out the screen without bars, etc. I don't have any problem if something is in a 4:3 format & I then have to expand the picture but it just ticks me off that if its available in widescreen its not a full widescreen.

    Hershon, it's just about impossible for directors to do what you want. Best to just accept it and worry about more important things.
  • 05-21-2005, 04:40 AM
    LEAFS264
    Wow
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hershon
    Again, I'll like what I want to like and I don't need you or anyone else here to dictate my tastes. Just because someone directed a movie and I don't respect his artistic vision or him doesn't mean I'm not allowed to see the movie. When after everything is said and done, I don't really care what the director intended, just that I was entertained by the movie. I'd be more entertained if I could watch a lousy widescreen DVD that wasn't in a letterbox format. Expanding the TV picture format is not a satisfactory solution to me, it distorts the picture.
    It would not cost these companies superbig bucks to also offer a full sized nonletterboxed
    movie as a picture option. There are plenty of nonwidescreen DVD's that I know of that give one the option to watch the movie in letterbox or full screen format.


    Hershon. You are snapping at one of the most Knowledgeable people on this site. If wooch is kind enough to reply to ANY of your posts,brother. You'd be smart to listen. He has forgotten more about AV than you will ever know!! He has helped more people on this form that I can count. And all you do is piss people off who try and help you.
    Wake up.....get your head out of the sand.
  • 05-21-2005, 04:52 AM
    edtyct
    Hershon,

    I raise these points in earnest. Why would anyone ask so many questions about every little detail of HT and then object when people try to provide answers that might change his (mistaken) outlook? Why would anyone think that an entire industry should bow to one person's wishes that go against the grain of every serious film buff who ever had the privilege to watch movies in the correct aspect ratio in his/her own home? Who would refuse to zoom nonanamorphinc movies to fit a 1:78/1 screen because of the "distortion" that it creates and yet ask the film industry to distort their movies as shot to fit his uninformed preferences (showing nonanamorphic film anamorphically creates geometrical distortion; zooming letterbox material to fill a screen reallocates pixels--big difference).

    Monkeying with aspect ratios at the telecine stage is generally a bad idea. Most people who have been exposed to the difference between movies altered by pan and scan and the originals on which they are based are amazed at the difference in picture content, which can have profound effect on the storyline. Martin Scorcese went to big trouble a few years back to launch a campaign about this subject, using Ben Hur's chariot race as his example. Anyone who thinks that Ben Hur mutilated provides a better viewing experience is on the wrong track.

    Widescreen tvs were meant to be a compromise; if they were manufactured to cinemascope scale, black bars would have been the widescreen rule rather than exception. People with a pathological aversion to black bars can always save up for a front projector and screen, which they can frame manually according to the aspect ratio on display. In fact, a resourceful person could also create an adustable frame for an RPTV that would be largely invisible under darkened viewing conditions.

    But I wouldn't be surprised if much of the complaint about black bars were a psychological reaction to something new rather than an aesthetic issue. After all, why don't the bezel and case of the TV, which also aren't part of the picture, cause offense--or the the room beyond it? The picture's got to end somewhere. Under ordinary conditions, the willing suspension of disbelief should be based on the entertainment, not the physical enviroment.

    Ed
  • 05-21-2005, 05:17 AM
    shokhead
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by N. Abstentia
    This coming from the guy who buys a stereo CD then runs it through a 6 channel DSP multi channel processor used to 'make up' the other 4 channels.

    I think 'the way the director intended' is not your priority :)

    And you dont approve of this so that makes it wrong? There seems to be a few to many that have the opinion that if you do something i dont like,its wrong. If i want black bars on the side of my 50",then thats what i want. If i like RBCD in 5 channal stereo,then you know what,its ok. Hershon doesnt always get it at first but theres plenty of others who asks the same questions or the wrong question and they dont seem to get jumped on as he does. I think he's learning this stuff just as i am but some of you need a tad more patience. We know your heads are exploding with info on the "right way" but some of us are a bit thicker{me for sure} so bit the tongue,smile,explain and move on. We told hershon to put some on his ignore list,that works both ways if he upsets some of you so much. Me,i'll just pm him with some links that explains thing that he can read rather then being to smart or mean.
  • 05-21-2005, 05:24 AM
    shokhead
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by kexodusc
    Hershon, it's just about impossible for directors to do what you want. Best to just accept it and worry about more important things.

    Thats the best answer and advice and you didnt even say anything mean or nasty. I just slap the DVD in the player and whatever shows up,i'll watch it that way. Now if you have a widescreen,between the different screen modes,cant you almost watch it anyway you want,almost?
  • 05-21-2005, 06:00 AM
    N. Abstentia
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by shokhead
    And you dont approve of this so that makes it wrong? .

    I didn't say it was WRONG, if you like it then fine. Point is, it wasn't intended to be played that way.

    And agreeing with the guy who says "screw the director, what does he know" is not helping your case.
  • 05-21-2005, 06:01 AM
    LEAFS264
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by shokhead
    And you dont approve of this so that makes it wrong? There seems to be a few to many that have the opinion that if you do something i dont like,its wrong. If i want black bars on the side of my 50",then thats what i want. If i like RBCD in 5 channal stereo,then you know what,its ok. Hershon doesnt always get it at first but theres plenty of others who asks the same questions or the wrong question and they dont seem to get jumped on as he does. I think he's learning this stuff just as i am but some of you need a tad more patience. We know your heads are exploding with info on the "right way" but some of us are a bit thicker{me for sure} so bit the tongue,smile,explain and move on. We told hershon to put some on his ignore list,that works both ways if he upsets some of you so much. Me,i'll just pm him with some links that explains thing that he can read rather then being to smart or mean.




    Read Hershon posts # 8,10,15,17. Don't you dare make us out to be the bad guy here. Hershon brings on his own problems. We all give him advice. And when Hershon doesn't like the answer......he gets lippy and gives the attitude. I know you guys are friends, but come on.......
  • 05-21-2005, 06:33 AM
    hershon
    Again I'm suppose to smile and say thanks for insulting me
    It's not the "advice" I'm objecting too, its the personal direct insult to me given along with the advice. All I asked was a simple question that if you have a widescreen HD TV player and the widescreen DVD you rent is letterbox format, do you prefer to expand your TV picture or not? That isn't rocket science or asking someone to reveal personal sensitive secrets! I just got one straight answer from Kexodusk and a bunch of crap from everyone else personally criticising me for asking such a question. You people think I should smile & be greatful when someone offers "advice" and then says words to the effect "you are an idiot, moron" et all. Sorry, that's not acceptable to me. And I don't care if someone is Mother Therasa if they treat me like a chump, I'll respond in kind. That's how I was raised in the hood.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by edtyct
    Hershon,

    I raise these points in earnest. Why would anyone ask so many questions about every little detail of HT and then object when people try to provide answers that might change his (mistaken) outlook? Why would anyone think that an entire industry should bow to one person's wishes that go against the grain of every serious film buff who ever had the privilege to watch movies in the correct aspect ratio in his/her own home? Who would refuse to zoom nonanamorphinc movies to fit a 1:78/1 screen because of the "distortion" that it creates and yet ask the film industry to distort their movies as shot to fit his uninformed preferences (showing nonanamorphic film anamorphically creates geometrical distortion; zooming letterbox material to fill a screen reallocates pixels--big difference).

    Monkeying with aspect ratios at the telecine stage is generally a bad idea. Most people who have been exposed to the difference between movies altered by pan and scan and the originals on which they are based are amazed at the difference in picture content, which can have profound effect on the storyline. Martin Scorcese went to big trouble a few years back to launch a campaign about this subject, using Ben Hur's chariot race as his example. Anyone who thinks that Ben Hur mutilated provides a better viewing experience is on the wrong track.

    Widescreen tvs were meant to be a compromise; if they were manufactured to cinemascope scale, black bars would have been the widescreen rule rather than exception. People with a pathological aversion to black bars can always save up for a front projector and screen, which they can frame manually according to the aspect ratio on display. In fact, a resourceful person could also create an adustable frame for an RPTV that would be largely invisible under darkened viewing conditions.

    But I wouldn't be surprised if much of the complaint about black bars were a psychological reaction to something new rather than an aesthetic issue. After all, why don't the bezel and case of the TV, which also aren't part of the picture, cause offense--or the the room beyond it? The picture's got to end somewhere. Under ordinary conditions, the willing suspension of disbelief should be based on the entertainment, not the physical enviroment.

    Ed

  • 05-21-2005, 07:26 AM
    shokhead
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by LEAFS264
    Read Hershon posts # 8,10,15,17. Don't you dare make us out to be the bad guy here. Hershon brings on his own problems. We all give him advice. And when Hershon doesn't like the answer......he gets lippy and gives the attitude. I know you guys are friends, but come on.......

    Wouldnt know him if he sat next to me,i'm just trying to help him out here and there. Besides,i want to be your friend. :D
  • 05-21-2005, 08:10 AM
    edtyct
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hershon
    It's not the "advice" I'm objecting too, its the personal direct insult to me given along with the advice. All I asked was a simple question that if you have a widescreen HD TV player and the widescreen DVD you rent is letterbox format, do you prefer to expand your TV picture or not? That isn't rocket science or asking someone to reveal personal sensitive secrets! I just got one straight answer from Kexodusk and a bunch of crap from everyone else personally criticising me for asking such a question. You people think I should smile & be greatful when someone offers "advice" and then says words to the effect "you are an idiot, moron" et all. Sorry, that's not acceptable to me. And I don't care if someone is Mother Therasa if they treat me like a chump, I'll respond in kind. That's how I was raised in the hood.

    Well, Hershon ol' boy, I'd vote for smiling, leaving the hood behind, and not making everybody else responsible for your woes. After all, peace has to start somewhere, and all we should do here is discuss A/V and be civil. I'll bet there's a lot of information in this thread that you didn't have before you began it. No offense intended; none taken I hope.

    Ed
  • 05-21-2005, 08:28 AM
    LEAFS264
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by shokhead
    Wouldnt know him if he sat next to me,i'm just trying to help him out here and there. Besides,i want to be your friend. :D


    We are friends!! :p
  • 05-21-2005, 09:38 AM
    Woochifer
    Kiss your "but"? Thanx for the invite, but I think I'll decline. :D

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hershon
    Again, I'll like what I want to like and I don't need you or anyone else here to dictate my tastes. Just because someone directed a movie and I don't respect his artistic vision or him doesn't mean I'm not allowed to see the movie. When after everything is said and done, I don't really care what the director intended, just that I was entertained by the movie. I'd be more entertained if I could watch a lousy widescreen DVD that wasn't in a letterbox format. Expanding the TV picture format is not a satisfactory solution to me, it distorts the picture.

    If you want that to happen and the issue means that much to you, then go ahead and start your letterwriting campaign to the studio heads and the directors' and cinematographers' guilds. If enough likeminded viewers agree with you, then they'll have no choice but to respond to that demand. If your issue is viewed as an isolated crackpot idea, then they'll respond accordingly in that case as well.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hershon
    It would not cost these companies superbig bucks to also offer a full sized nonletterboxed
    movie as a picture option. There are plenty of nonwidescreen DVD's that I know of that give one the option to watch the movie in letterbox or full screen format.

    And how many of those DVDs have you seen lately? Aside from a few kiddie pics, not many have come out recently. Only with early non-anamorphic releases did you see a lot of those combination DVDs, and most of them are one by one getting replaced by higher quality anamorphically enhanced versions with no pan & scan option (just this week, the new release of The Mask replaced the previous two-format release). Nowadays, the studios are only putting out pan & scan versions because they know that it's a temporary stopgap measure until the market transitions over to 16x9 TVs. Once demand for 4x3 pan & scan dries up, I doubt they'll turn right around and start doing dual 16x9 versions. I just don't see the demand for that.
  • 05-21-2005, 03:59 PM
    Lexmark3200
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cam
    "The option to watch widescreen on a full screen", your quote, I do believe I saw a picture of your system when you posted a while back. I do believe you have a widescreen tv from what I saw from your previous posted pictures. If you own a widescreen tv, why would you want to watch a widescreen formatted dvd in full screen. You are the biggest moron to hit these forums since Lexmark 3200. If you are watching a widescreen dvd on a full screen tv, simply just zoom in and that widescreen movie now becomes a fullscreen movie. Dink.


    Well, well, well......just a matter of time until someone mentioned my name again eh, Cam? If I am the biggest moron to hit this forum since this guy posting, YOU have to be the world's biggest **** wad-----and I mean this from the bottom of my heart. Sons of *****es like you who prey on people who come in here to ask questions regarding aspect ratios, audio geometries and whatever rhetoric they would like to speak about should be chained to the back of a Long Island Rail Road train face down and left to die.....but, my darling Cam, thats MY opinion and I still challenge you and love ya for all the attention you give me! YOU, my friend, are the moron, plain and simple.

    Lets get back to this widscreen aspect ratio issue because I have been sharing some thoughts on it on other sites and in other publications I write for; the set I am using now (and this is directed not to the ****-off known as Cam but to the original poster of this thread) is a Mitsubishi 55" widescreen, and I too had issues with widescreen DVDs not playing back "correctly" or so I thought when I first used the set....the facts of the matter are these: if set at STANDARD mode, which my Mitsu calls it, DVDs that are ANAMORPHICALLY ENHANCED for 16X9 sets will play back with more or less black space according to their ratio sizes; those like 1:78 or 1:85 will not show any black areas (or SHOULD NOT show any black areas if your set "overscans" like mine does) and the DVD image will fill the entire widescreen. The wider scope films like 2:35:1 play back on widescreen sets with small letterboxing to the top and bottom of the image; this is 100 percent normal. You can use a zoom feature of a widescreen TV to fill in the black areas of a 2:35 DVD, but that just causes you to lose characters to the left and right of a scene if the DVD is widescreen; I confirmed this using a chapter of Episode II: Attack of the Clones.

    Now, IF a DVD is NOT ANAMORPHICALLY ENHANCED for 16X9 TVs, then in STANDARD mode (or whatever your TV calls it), the image will appear with MASSIVE black areas to the top and bottom, and the movie will appear very, very thin and unwatchable; this is because it has NOT been enhanced for 16X9 sets, something that is a CRIME in today's technology (only a handful of mainly Disney/Buena Vista early releases like Con Air, Armageddon and Crimson Tide come non-anamorphic). To compensate for this, we need to go into the TV's zoom controls, and use some mode to make the black letterboxing reduced and increase the size of the movie image; on my Mitsubishi, its called EXPAND MODE, and this is the ONLY way I can watch non-anamorphic widescreen DVDs.

    One more thing......**** you, Cam.
    Love ya, babe!
  • 05-21-2005, 05:22 PM
    kexodusc
    Ahem...moderators
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lexmark3200
    Well, well, well......just a matter of time until someone mentioned my name again eh, Cam? If I am the biggest moron to hit this forum since this guy posting, YOU have to be the world's biggest **** wad-----and I mean this from the bottom of my heart. Sons of *****es like you ....

    One more thing......**** you, Cam.
    Love ya, babe!

    I know you guys are busy driving away ar.com members by moving (god forbid) off-topic threads in the Rave-Recs forum that contained no malicious content, only good spirited conversation between a close-knit community...but perhaps you could find the time to end this type of degenerative posting too?
  • 05-21-2005, 05:25 PM
    Lexmark3200
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by kexodusc
    I know you guys are busy driving away ar.com members by moving (god forbid) off-topic threads in the Rave-Recs forum that contained no malicious content, only good spirited conversation between a close-knit community...but perhaps you could find the time to end this type of degenerative thread too?

    Well, Kexo, I guess it was perfectly fine for Cam to call me a "moron".......that was alright? And I cannot defend myself, is that the way it works? It was perfectly fine to say to Hershon ".....you are one of the biggest morons ever to tour this thread since Lexmark....." and that was perfectly acceptable, is that it? THAT was not degenerative? AT ALL?
  • 05-21-2005, 05:34 PM
    kexodusc
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lexmark3200
    Well, Kexo, I guess it was perfectly fine for Cam to call me a "moron".......that was alright? And I cannot defend myself, is that the way it works? It was perfectly fine to say to Hershon ".....you are one of the biggest morons ever to tour this thread since Lexmark....." and that was perfectly acceptable, is that it? THAT was not degenerative? AT ALL?

    Sorry Lex...Nothing personal.
    It was just easier to use your post (it was the last one)...

    Er...please don't call me a ****wad :D
  • 05-21-2005, 05:40 PM
    noddin0ff
    Morons! All of you!
    Yes, you too!

    :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
  • 05-21-2005, 05:56 PM
    shokhead
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lexmark3200
    Well, Kexo, I guess it was perfectly fine for Cam to call me a "moron".......that was alright? And I cannot defend myself, is that the way it works? It was perfectly fine to say to Hershon ".....you are one of the biggest morons ever to tour this thread since Lexmark....." and that was perfectly acceptable, is that it? THAT was not degenerative? AT ALL?

    Now your getting it. Some feel they have the right to do it but by god you better not do it back.
  • 05-21-2005, 06:03 PM
    Lexmark3200
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by kexodusc
    Sorry Lex...Nothing personal.
    It was just easier to use your post (it was the last one)...

    Er...please don't call me a ****wad :D


    No, Kexo.....you would never be considered a **** wad, my good friend!
  • 05-21-2005, 06:04 PM
    Lexmark3200
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by shokhead
    Now your getting it. Some feel they have the right to do it but by god you better not do it back.

    Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight..........
  • 05-21-2005, 06:27 PM
    cam
    OK, sorry to talk behind your back, but this whole aspect ratio talk just smacked back to when you just couldn't get a grip on aspect ratios. I mean you were hopeless. We had many members go through it with you from all different angles imaginable and you (hopefully you know a little about aspect ratios Lexmark) have indeed figured it out now. In general you are not a moron and I do appologize, but you were a hopeless moron on that whole aspect ratio thread many moons ago. Actually, I'm kinda glad your back, at least your funny. Hey Lex, I know you got accused of having multiple names (and personalities) before, but it seems kinda wierd that all of a sudden you have popped back up. Your not hershon also are you?
  • 05-21-2005, 06:34 PM
    Lexmark3200
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cam
    OK, sorry to talk behind your back, but this whole aspect ratio talk just smacked back to when you just couldn't get a grip on aspect ratios. I mean you were hopeless. We had many members go through it with you from all different angles imaginable and you (hopefully you know a little about aspect ratios Lexmark) have indeed figured it out now. In general you are not a moron and I do appologize, but you were a hopeless moron on that whole aspect ratio thread many moons ago. Actually, I'm kinda glad your back, at least your funny. Hey Lex, I know you got accused of having multiple names (and personalities) before, but it seems kinda wierd that all of a sudden you have popped back up. Your not hershon also are you?

    You are so full of ****, its not even funny......yes I am back and willing to dish back to you WHATEVER you give to me; and let the fun and games begin!

    You are completely full of **** regarding what you were trying to "make me" understand, though, thats whats funny.....

    And no, I am not Hershon, but it seems again you need to bully some poor soul from behind your computer screen with online harassment; nothing ever changes, is what they say.....and dickheads like Cam prove it all the time. THIS is cause for laughs, dude. Just keep pickin on Hershon because he asked a question and tried to voice an opinion to those who think they are God almighty himself in here.....such a pity.....

    Still love ya though!
  • 05-21-2005, 06:42 PM
    cam
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lexmark3200
    You are so full of ****, its not even funny......yes I am back and willing to dish back to you WHATEVER you give to me; and let the fun and games begin!

    You are completely full of **** regarding what you were trying to "make me" understand, though, thats whats funny.....

    And no, I am not Hershon, but it seems again you need to bully some poor soul from behind your computer screen with online harassment; nothing ever changes, is what they say.....and dickheads like Cam prove it all the time. THIS is cause for laughs, dude. Just keep pickin on Hershon because he asked a question and tried to voice an opinion to those who think they are God almighty himself in here.....such a pity.....

    Still love ya though!

    At least your funny, a little angry too, but funny!

    Try to stick around more, maybe I'll need you to lay some smack on somebody for me.

    P.S. What's new?