Not Zoom or Lens but just an aspect radio choice? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 10:42 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Hampton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 6,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Hi,

I have a question about something that confuses me.

I have a projector that is natively 16:9 (Sony VPL VW60) and I use home-made masks to view Scope movies (2:35:1... or whatever.)

So,... this isn't the anamorphic lens method and not the zoom method either...

Now, my question is do any new projectors just let you use a scope ratio and scale everything else to fit without distortion?...

I realize this would be throwing away resolution on everything that isn't scope ratio but most of what I watch is scope ratio... so I would be willing to let the 16:9 and other ratios suffer.

I think video processors can do this... But some new projectors I have been looking at claim to have processing so that you can do scope ratio without lens or zooming ... is it true, that this simple feature has been added or ... not really?

=Brian
Brian Hampton is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 10:44 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Hampton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 6,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 60
In case it's confusing ... Right now my Pj can display every ratio and fit it on the 16:9 screen... what I'm looking for is using a 2:35:1 screen and having everything fit on that without lenses or zooming ... Just make the other ratios fit... similarly to the way 4:3 is made to fit on my current 16:9 screen....

Usually displays have like 5 choices for managing aspect ratios and they are almost all useless (if you don't want geometric distortion or clipping.) How hard would it be to have a useful one?
Brian Hampton is online now  
post #3 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 11:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 50
What you are asking about is a projector with a 2.35:1 native panel (or 21:9). I haven't seen a mainstream projector embrace this (even though they should). I believe there are some high priced boutique units that may do this, but again nothing in the mainstream consumer space. So the answer to your question is, no. There is not a readily available projector that is native 21:9.

To break it down for you using 1080 as the image height:

16:9 = 1920x1080 (your projectors panel resolution)
4:3 = 1440x1080
2.37:1 (21:9)= 2560x1080

So 4:3 is not compromised because the ratio fits within the resolution of the 16:9 panel. Scope does not.

What I think you are missing is that neither zooming nor using a lens involves throwing out information or compromising the image. They do this while making the scope image the largest and most impacting picture on your setup. Which is the directors intention and how it is in most cinemas. As long as your room is able to accommodate the extra width without compromising on height there is no negative impact on other content (16:9 content is just as large as it is on a 16:9 screen of the same height). A constant image width setup, like yours, emphasizes 16:9 and 4:3 content over scope. Which isn't necessarily bad if you prefer it that way. However having lived with a 16:9 screen for years and then recently switching to a 2.35:1 screen I can tell you that the experience of seeing films like Raiders of the Lost Ark, Lord of the Rings, etc is simply amazing.

To utilize the zooming feature on my current projector involves pressing a button and waiting about 20 seconds for the lens to reposition itself. Not as elegant as a native 21:9 projector would be, but it's extremely easy to use.

jeahrens is offline  
post #4 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 12:36 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Hampton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 6,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Nope... That's not what I'm asking about. Sorry it's confusing.

My pj is 16:9 native. I watch a lot of 2:35:1 movies and mask the screen down to 2:35:1 ... no image manipulation is done ... with me so far...

What I think would be nice is an Aspect Ratio choice that puts the 16:9 stuff into this 2:35:1 screen... It would have to throw out some of the data, so it's not the BEST choice but most of what I watch is 2:35:1 and there seems to be a nice amount of pixels available for that and so on.

For example... there already is an aspect ratio choice that displays the native 16:9 material correctly and puts the 4:3 stuff correctly into the 16:9 frame... same idea.

I think it's simple but I don't know if anyone will understand.
Brian Hampton is online now  
post #5 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 01:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hampton View Post

Nope... That's not what I'm asking about. Sorry it's confusing.

My pj is 16:9 native. I watch a lot of 2:35:1 movies and mask the screen down to 2:35:1 ... no image manipulation is done ... with me so far...

What I think would be nice is an Aspect Ratio choice that puts the 16:9 stuff into this 2:35:1 screen... It would have to throw out some of the data, so it's not the BEST choice but most of what I watch is 2:35:1 and there seems to be a nice amount of pixels available for that and so on.

For example... there already is an aspect ratio choice that displays the native 16:9 material correctly and puts the 4:3 stuff correctly into the 16:9 frame... same idea.

I think it's simple but I don't know if anyone will understand.

I understand what you are asking. With a 16:9 panel it can't be done without some sort of zooming or lens, which you don't want to do. If you use a lumagen or other video scalar to make all active video sources fit in a 2.35:1 video window (essentially 1920x800) you would still have to zoom the projector out to fill the scope screen. You wouldn't have to rezoom/focus it, but it would have to be zoomed and focused as the same as you would using if you were zooming for CIH. Or, if you have an anamorphic lens a lot of projectors have modes that will scale 4:3 and 16:9 content to allow you to leave the lens in place.

I guess the closest answer would be to use something like the Lumagen to scale all active video into a 2.35:1 window. You would have to zoom the projector (once) and perhaps move it.

jeahrens is offline  
post #6 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 01:11 PM
Senior Member
 
ch1sox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 363
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
You basically are going to need something like a Lumagen. I have a 2.35 screen and with the Lumagen you can use NLS (Non Linear Stretch) which basically makes the 16:9 image fit onto the entire 2.35 screen. Lumagen uses a method to fill the screen so it still looks legit when watching 16:9 material (fills entire 2.35 screen). Here's a video explaining how to do it if you decide to get a Lumagen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwF7nYe-YzM This one shows examples: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9Stq_2lWYM
ch1sox is offline  
post #7 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 01:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post


To utilize the zooming feature on my current projector involves pressing a button and waiting about 20 seconds for the lens to reposition itself. Not as elegant as a native 21:9 projector would be, but it's extremely easy to use.

I use both the zoom method (lens memories) and an Anamorphic lens on an automated sled (remote controlled, all into my universal remote system). I find both systems work well and don't find anything
less elegant about the lens memory zoom method. (And mine works quite quickly too). FWIW.
R Harkness is offline  
post #8 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 01:19 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Hampton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 6,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Jeahrens,.. Honestly I don't think you do understand what I'm saying ... I don't suggest that's your fault, it's mine for not being able to explain it.

I will try one more time but don't worry if it's something you can't ever figure out...

I have a 16:9 pj and a 16:9 screen and I tend to set it all up easy like that.

When I watch a 4:3 movie, it's side boxed in the 16:9 frame so that it's not distorted.

When I watch a 2:35:1 movie it's letterboxed in the frame so it's not distorted. (Nevermind it's actually a 16:9 image that is letterboxed from the start.)

So, when I watch a scope movie there is no zooming, ... no lens manipulation.

Now,... hopefully you're still with me... When I watch such a scope movie I mask the black bars effectively making a temporary scope screen.

What I would like is an apsect ratio that would put all other content into that scope shape... no extra lenses so zooming ....

This may be impossible to explain though and I'm certainly giving up at this point.


Most likely, my next projector will work with the zoom method and that's fine... no problem... game over.
biggrin.gif
Brian Hampton is online now  
post #9 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 01:31 PM
Advanced Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hampton View Post

Jeahrens,.. Honestly I don't think you do understand what I'm saying ... I don't suggest that's your fault, it's mine for not being able to explain it.

I will try one more time but don't worry if it's something you can't ever figure out...

I have a 16:9 pj and a 16:9 screen and I tend to set it all up easy like that.

When I watch a 4:3 movie, it's side boxed in the 16:9 frame so that it's not distorted.

When I watch a 2:35:1 movie it's letterboxed in the frame so it's not distorted. (Nevermind it's actually a 16:9 image that is letterboxed from the start.)

So, when I watch a scope movie there is no zooming, ... no lens manipulation.

Now,... hopefully you're still with me... When I watch such a scope movie I mask the black bars effectively making a temporary scope screen.

What I would like is an apsect ratio that would put all other content into that scope shape... no extra lenses so zooming ....

This may be impossible to explain though and I'm certainly giving up at this point.


Most likely, my next projector will work with the zoom method and that's fine... no problem... game over.
biggrin.gif

OK there's 2 possible scenarios you are going for. Both involve leaving the masking in place on your existing screen (essentially leaving the screen a 2.35:1 screen). The first is to cut off the top and bottom of all content to fit into the scope screen area. The second would be to scale 16:9 and 4:3 content to fit the scope screen area. In either case a video processor, like the Lumagen, should be able to do this. The second option would make the most sense. If you are already getting an image processor why throw away the information. Just let it rescale the image to fit in the masked screen area.

You would not need to refocus or move the projector. In my answer above I thought you would be getting a scope screen which would change the dimensions and would require zooming/focusing the projector to accommodate it (and you may have needed to move the projector).

jeahrens is offline  
post #10 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 01:36 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
Liked: 266
Wow, Brian, I believe I get what you are asking...but that's a weird one! It's one thing to already have a 2:35:1 screen and wish to re-scale the 16:9 images to fit the height, it's a new one on me to see someone with a 16:9 screen who wants to effectively throw away the extra screen real estate and mask it permanently to 2:35:1. A lot of people find 16:9 feels less immersive even their big 2:35:1 screens and you would effectively be making your 16:9 images far, far smaller. Postage-stamp territory, in terms of projection. I'm not sure what could motivate that idea (unless you are starting with a massive 16:9 screen to begin with). (And boy, you've really got to have a pretty strict scope-movie fetish to want to do that).

Be that as it may no projector I've ever heard of offers such re-scaling. You'd have to go for a suitable outboard scaler, or use the zoom method. If it were me I'd much prefer to use a projector with lens memories
in that case, so as not to lose resolution (and you don't need the extra expense of a scaler, anamorphic lens, etc)
R Harkness is offline  
post #11 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 01:44 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Hampton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 6,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Ok,... I think I was understood.... IT's the second option two posts above or the option listed in the post above.

Yeah well,... My screen is 81 inches when it's unmaksed. When it's masked to scope it's ..... smaller of course ... but for the size of my very small HT it's still fine....

You're right though... if you start throwing out video pixels when you get it down to 4:3 you likely threw out more than you kept....

Doesn't matter... All the really matters is I need a new Pj ... Mine's only 5 years old but I really need a new one...

Then I will get the scope screen and do the zoom ... I'm not sure I'll ever get a animophic lens but the proper zoom method should keep me happy for a long time.

biggrin.gif:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

(Wife told me I could buy a projector yesterday but I think she was just frustrated with me asking about it. wink.gif )
Brian Hampton is online now  
post #12 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 02:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
jeahrens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 865
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hampton View Post

Ok,... I think I was understood.... IT's the second option two posts above or the option listed in the post above.

Yeah well,... My screen is 81 inches when it's unmaksed. When it's masked to scope it's ..... smaller of course ... but for the size of my very small HT it's still fine....

You're right though... if you start throwing out video pixels when you get it down to 4:3 you likely threw out more than you kept....

Doesn't matter... All the really matters is I need a new Pj ... Mine's only 5 years old but I really need a new one...

Then I will get the scope screen and do the zoom ... I'm not sure I'll ever get a animophic lens but the proper zoom method should keep me happy for a long time.

biggrin.gif:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

(Wife told me I could buy a projector yesterday but I think she was just frustrated with me asking about it. wink.gif )

One thing to keep in mind, the cost for the scaler could be put into the screen and projector. Always good ammo for the wife. If you're on a tight budget I have been very pleased with my 1.0 gain 2.35:1 screen I picked up on Monoprice. It's probably cheaper than the scaler!
Brian Hampton likes this.

jeahrens is offline  
post #13 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 03:14 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Hampton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 6,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeahrens View Post

One thing to keep in mind, the cost for the scaler could be put into the screen and projector. Always good ammo for the wife. If you're on a tight budget I have been very pleased with my 1.0 gain 2.35:1 screen I picked up on Monoprice. It's probably cheaper than the scaler!

If she only knew all the other things the newer projector would do too... Like have a working Color Management System and better calibration controls.... It practically pays for itself I tells ya.... Ha ha ha..
Brian Hampton is online now  
post #14 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 07:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Skylinestar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 56
Brian, I know what you want.

I think you need to look at Mitsubishi projectors, example HC4000, 7800, 7900, etc. They provide the easiest way of maintaining 2.35 and 1.78 ratio. 2.35 displayed with top-bottom letterbox. 16:9 displayed with top-bottom letterbox & left-right pillarbox. No manual zooming or A-lens required. Just simple remote control button click.

Unfortunately, Mitsubishi has left the projector business.
Skylinestar is online now  
post #15 of 28 Old 03-25-2014, 07:24 PM
Senior Member
 
ch1sox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 363
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hampton View Post

Jeahrens,.. Honestly I don't think you do understand what I'm saying ... I don't suggest that's your fault, it's mine for not being able to explain it.

I will try one more time but don't worry if it's something you can't ever figure out...

I have a 16:9 pj and a 16:9 screen and I tend to set it all up easy like that.

When I watch a 4:3 movie, it's side boxed in the 16:9 frame so that it's not distorted.

When I watch a 2:35:1 movie it's letterboxed in the frame so it's not distorted. (Nevermind it's actually a 16:9 image that is letterboxed from the start.)

So, when I watch a scope movie there is no zooming, ... no lens manipulation.

Now,... hopefully you're still with me... When I watch such a scope movie I mask the black bars effectively making a temporary scope screen.

What I would like is an apsect ratio that would put all other content into that scope shape... no extra lenses so zooming ....

This may be impossible to explain though and I'm certainly giving up at this point.


Most likely, my next projector will work with the zoom method and that's fine... no problem... game over.
biggrin.gif

So you want to permanently leave the masks up and keep the screen in scope, right? Do you want 16:9 content to fill the entire scope screen or do you want the side bars? If you want side bars, just get a projector with zoom and lens memory. If you want the 16:9 image to fill the entire scope screen then you'll also need a Lumagen.
ch1sox is offline  
post #16 of 28 Old 03-26-2014, 02:57 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Hampton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 6,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Right,... It's the zoom memory that I want.... I guess I was thinking I didn't need to zoom just downsample the image... that would still work but that idea won't interest most people.
Brian Hampton is online now  
post #17 of 28 Old 05-15-2014, 09:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lindahl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylinestar View Post

Brian, I know what you want.

I think you need to look at Mitsubishi projectors, example HC4000, 7800, 7900, etc. They provide the easiest way of maintaining 2.35 and 1.78 ratio. 2.35 displayed with top-bottom letterbox. 16:9 displayed with top-bottom letterbox & left-right pillarbox. No manual zooming or A-lens required. Just simple remote control button click.

Unfortunately, Mitsubishi has left the projector business.

Do any other lowish-priced projectors out there do this? Seems silly to have to add a video scalar just to do some simple aspect ratio scaling (something that ALL projectors can do anyway).

You think the projector manufacturers would just let you pick your screen aspect ratio, and then source aspect ratio, and then figure out what needs to be done. When you pick 2.35, you just pick the type of setup you want (automated zoom lens, anamorphic lens scaling, or shrinking 16:9). Crazy how complicated these manufacturers make it. Give me 8 hours with their software development environment and their source code, and I could add this to just about any projector on the market.
Lindahl is offline  
post #18 of 28 Old 05-16-2014, 11:50 AM
Advanced Member
 
Ftoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 561
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Keep in mind that scope content is still limited by the same 1920 horizontal resolution as 16:9 and so are the projectors, so 2.37 content is slightly LOWER resolution than standard 16:9 1080p HD. Any non 4K PJ using a wider panel resolution will actually be losing resolution from scaling, and full 4K stuff will still have the same horizontal limit for 2.37 as it does for 16:9..meaning 2.37 will still just be cropping off top/bottom pixels.

I know this doesn't apply to OP who mainly watches 2.37 and realizes the resolution being given up and then given up again to further crop 16:9, but someone else was mentioning a constant hight system as if horizontal resolution grew beyond 1920, which it does NOT.

As for OP, if you are able to use a PC/HTPC, that should give you digital zoom-out/cropping options regardless of your projector.

Simple <$250 dedicated black-fabric theater room, build in a day, takedown in an hour.
Ftoast is offline  
post #19 of 28 Old 05-16-2014, 12:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 126
You can do this easily via an HTPC, just create a custom resolution of 1920x810 and run that. Everything will be crisp and you will get what you want. If you use other sources, then yes, you probably need something like a Lumagen but those processors are usually doing the opposite : taking 16:9 scope content and stretching it vertically. I'm not sure if you can do it the other way, I don't own a Lumagen.

What your processor would have to do is take 1920x1080 material and squeeze it down preserving the aspect ratio, so that it fits within the 810 height. So basically you lose 33% of your resolution. Much better to run 1920x810 from an HTPC and do it that way so you can keep 1:1 pixel aspect ratio
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #20 of 28 Old 05-16-2014, 02:01 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 19,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 150 Post(s)
Liked: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post

What your processor would have to do is take 1920x1080 material and squeeze it down preserving the aspect ratio, so that it fits within the 810 height. So basically you lose 33% of your resolution. Much better to run 1920x810 from an HTPC and do it that way so you can keep 1:1 pixel aspect ratio

What you're proposing would require cropping off the top and bottom of the 16:9 picture to maintain the 1920x810 resolution, which is 2.37:1 in shape.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #21 of 28 Old 05-16-2014, 02:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
Ftoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 561
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

What you're proposing would require cropping off the top and bottom of the 16:9 picture to maintain the 1920x810 resolution, which is 2.37:1 in shape.
I think they mean to force rescaling of 16:9 content to fit the 810pixel hight of 2.37 content (leaving black side bars..like OP wanted), and they may not realize that using a PC to do it (instead of the PJ or processor) still involves rescaling for 16:9 content and is definitely NOT 1:1..though 2.37 will be 1:1 if it's stretched to fill.

Simple <$250 dedicated black-fabric theater room, build in a day, takedown in an hour.
Ftoast is offline  
post #22 of 28 Old 05-17-2014, 04:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
srauly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: W Simsbury, CT, USA
Posts: 1,529
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
If you're willing to give up resolution, then rescaling isn't an awful idea to keep things a bit simpler. I personally use the manual zoom method, and it's quick and easy for me, so I've never fully explored the options for rescaling. But as someone else mentioned, if you're using an HTPC you can do this by setting a custom desktop resolution. XBMC supposedly allows for you to rescale things on a movie-by-movie basis, but I've never bothered to test this out. If you need to rescale other sources, something like the Lumagen would be needed. But if you want to go that route and budget is a concern, try emailing DVDO to see if their DVDO Edge Green can do it. That box costs $280 and the manual / spec sheet suggests that it *MIGHT* have the capability to do this, but it's not 100% clear.

Scott R
--------------
I'd much rather watch a great movie in B&W at 240 lines of resolution than a lousy movie in 1080p with lossless audio.
srauly is offline  
post #23 of 28 Old 05-17-2014, 07:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Lindahl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Can an HTPC do this for discs without ripping? I mostly rent movies. XBMC is for hard drive content and streaming only, isn't it?
Lindahl is offline  
post #24 of 28 Old 05-17-2014, 06:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Don't do scaling like this, invest in a motorized masking system instead. Or build one yourself. It's a fun project, from what I gather, over in the DIY section of this forum there are numerous inspiring examples!
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #25 of 28 Old 05-17-2014, 06:33 PM
Advanced Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ftoast View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

What you're proposing would require cropping off the top and bottom of the 16:9 picture to maintain the 1920x810 resolution, which is 2.37:1 in shape.
I think they mean to force rescaling of 16:9 content to fit the 810pixel hight of 2.37 content (leaving black side bars..like OP wanted), and they may not realize that using a PC to do it (instead of the PJ or processor) still involves rescaling for 16:9 content and is definitely NOT 1:1..though 2.37 will be 1:1 if it's stretched to fill.

Yes, it's much better this way since HTPCs can downscale non-scope material better than most external processors can.

I ran my HTPC in 1920x810 for a while, but then realized I prefer a big 16:9 image using all the pixels of my projector. But 16:9 material will look really sharp, just a bunch smaller. That may be fine depending on your ideal viewing distance and size, but realize you're only ever taking advantage of at most 75% of the pixels and brightness of your projector this way, and that's in scope mode. If you're not watching a scope movie, it's more like 9 / 16ths of your projector, or slightly more than 1/2. Of course windows desktop is pretty cool this way.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #26 of 28 Old 05-17-2014, 07:24 PM
Advanced Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ftoast View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

What you're proposing would require cropping off the top and bottom of the 16:9 picture to maintain the 1920x810 resolution, which is 2.37:1 in shape.
I think they mean to force rescaling of 16:9 content to fit the 810pixel hight of 2.37 content (leaving black side bars..like OP wanted), and they may not realize that using a PC to do it (instead of the PJ or processor) still involves rescaling for 16:9 content and is definitely NOT 1:1..though 2.37 will be 1:1 if it's stretched to fill.

Yeah, that's what I meant. So 2.37 : 1 content is 1:1 (or as much as 1:1 means anything on a projector, which is a different point. My boss doesn't like projectors for this reason, but it's a silly restriction considering the size and the "free" antialising).

There is no cropping of anything in terms of aspect ratio, it just means that 16:9 movies will be 75% their maximum size (and thus resolution) compared to the ideal scenario which is a desktop resolution of 1920x1080. 1920x810 won't crop anything, just leave your MPC-HC to auto-fill and you're done. This is how widescreen gamers operate with a CIH setup using anamorphic lenses anyway. There is another way to do it apparently, which is having non-square pixels which I think you can do in the GPU as well. So you set the desktop aspect ratio to 2.37 : 1 but have it render as 1920x1080, aka built-in anamorphic. Which you then can only correct optically, via horizontal expansion and an anamorphic lens. (or vertical contraction, which I'm personally looking into, since I'm width bound in my setup).

It's too bad OpenGL is out of favor in games, because you used to be able to set not only the x, y resolution, but also the aspect ratio via "fov" (field of view). I wonder if DirectX has such a setting or if any of the videocard manufacturers have seen fit to implement it. Most game engines would only really be able to take advantage of it with a patch, so that's not likely to happen. The best chance to do it is just to be able to override the resolution the game renders at to 1920x810 and have the projector to the vertical stretching.

Keep in mind, that I don't think the BenQ can do vertical stretching with frame-packed 3D, only SBS or Top/Bottom
Ftoast likes this.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #27 of 28 Old 05-21-2014, 02:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Craig Peer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my home theater ( when I'm not rock climbing, cycling or kayaking ) - Sacramento CA area
Posts: 4,786
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 69 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Brian, you need a new JVC RS4910 with power zoom, focus, and lens memory. smile.gif

Craig Peer, AV Science Sales. Direct Line - 585-671-2972
I'm available 8:30am - 4:30pm PST, Monday - Friday Email me at craig@avscience.com
http://shop.avscience.com/
Yes, we sell Home Theater gear right here at AVS !!
JVC, Sony, Epson, DPI, SV Sound, Martin Logan, RBH, Klipsch, and many more!
Craig Peer is offline  
post #28 of 28 Old 05-22-2014, 04:44 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post

Yeah, that's what I meant. So 2.37 : 1 content is 1:1 (or as much as 1:1 means anything on a projector, which is a different point. My boss doesn't like projectors for this reason, but it's a silly restriction considering the size and the "free" antialising).

I'm not sure what you mean by that, it's quite easy to get 1:1 mapping with a projector.

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is offline  
Reply 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off