With the impending change from analog to digital - I can never remember if it's 2008 or 2009 - does the ability of a set to zoom up a digitally transmitted signal become important?
Today when a letterboxed program is shown in 4:3 format on an analog channel, I can zoom the picture to fill my 16:9 panel. If the same image is transmitted on a digital channel, one of my sets will blow up the image, the other will not.
The ability to blow up a digital image seems to be a high end feature today, which, based on the above, will become more important in the future.
In choosing a future proof display should we require the digital zoom feature? From now on, I will not buy a display without this ability.
I suppose eventually stations will revert to all widescreen transmissions, but that seems to be several years away, if ever.
???? The opposite is true. No serious Home Theater enthusiast would EVER zoom their picture. Original Aspect Ratio is always going to be the desire.
Zooming a picture to fill a screen is an abomination to any serious videophile. You will get virtually no support for this position on AVS.
zooming 4:3 to fill 16:9 is horrid. On a big screen its no bug deal for side bars.
If the image is a 16:9 image and is on a 4:3 channel and therefore is letterboxed on all 4 sides, nothing wrong with that as long as the image stays OAR.
To answer the OP, by 2009 most sets and cable set top boxes should be able to zoom.
sievers
02-22-07, 02:38 PM
???? The opposite is true. No serious Home Theater enthusiast would EVER zoom their picture. Original Aspect Ratio is always going to be the desire.
Zooming a picture to fill a screen is an abomination to any serious videophile. You will get virtually no support for this position on AVS.
I think you missed his point. OP is talking about zooming a letterboxed 4:3 feed on his 16:9 screen. This is not going to crop the picture, OAR is maintained. If you didn't zoom in this case, you'd have a little picture in the middle of the screen surrounded by black bars on ALL sides.
To me, yes that would be an important feature to have. Glad I already have it!
Norde,
You are quite right. Never buy a TV that lacks a zoom feature, and forget about the endless drivel from the self-appointed "videophiles". You and I know that one sees more of the movie when the all of the television pixels are contributing to the picture, and that this is much more important than the little bit that gets clipped off from the right and left extents when fitting 2.35:1 to 16:9.
Even my DVD player has a zoom button. It is a great feature as I hate 2.35 :1 images with a passion!
DelJ
....
The ability to blow up a digital image seems to be a high end feature today, which, based on the above, will become more important in the future.
In choosing a future proof display should we require the digital zoom feature? From now on, I will not buy a display without this ability.
.
Norde,
You and I know that one sees more of the movie when the all of the television pixels are contributing to the picture, and that this is much more important than the little bit that gets clipped off from the right and left extents when fitting 2.35:1 to 16:9.
DelJ
And everybody knows that garlic keeps vampires away, Bigfoot lives, UFOs are from other dimensions and OJ is innocent!
Watching a zoomed letterbox from a 4:3 source is futile. The actual image resolution is now only a laughable 272h x 640w pixels, assuming that the 4:3 source was an optimal 480h x 640w feed.
DelJ
I think you missed his point. OP is talking about zooming a letterboxed 4:3 feed on his 16:9 screen. This is not going to crop the picture, OAR is maintained. If you didn't zoom in this case, you'd have a little picture in the middle of the screen surrounded by black bars on ALL sides.
To me, yes that would be an important feature to have. Glad I already have it!