What are the different ways to stretch 16:9 content to fill a 2.35 screen? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 11 Old 04-09-2014, 08:03 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
drjay71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Sorry for the noob question. I know an anamorphic lens will do the stretch and so would a device like the Lumagen. Are there any other options?

Thanks
drjay71 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 11 Old 04-10-2014, 09:59 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 19,911
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by drjay71 View Post

Sorry for the noob question. I know an anamorphic lens will do the stretch and so would a device like the Lumagen. Are there any other options?

What is it you're looking to do, exactly? The geometry is what it is. 16:9 is not the same shape as 2.35:1. You can either pillarbox it in the center of the screen with black bars on the sides, or you can stretch it to make it fill the screen, at the cost of the picture looking weird and distorted.

What are you trying to watch, and what result do you want to see on your screen?

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 #3 of 11 Old 04-10-2014, 10:33 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
drjay71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

What is it you're looking to do, exactly? The geometry is what it is. 16:9 is not the same shape as 2.35:1. You can either pillarbox it in the center of the screen with black bars on the sides, or you can stretch it to make it fill the screen, at the cost of the picture looking weird and distorted.

What are you trying to watch, and what result do you want to see on your screen?

Yes, I understand. I want the 16:9 image (NFL let's say) to fill the screen at the cost of distortion which I hear is not too bad with a non linear stretch

Thanks
drjay71 is offline  
post #4 of 11 Old 04-10-2014, 11:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 19,911
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by drjay71 View Post

Yes, I understand. I want the 16:9 image (NFL let's say) to fill the screen at the cost of distortion which I hear is not too bad with a non linear stretch

That's a matter of personal opinion. Generally, a non-linear stretch may look OK on a still frame. However, when the picture is in motion, it creates a severe "fish eye" effect whenever objects cross from the center of the frame to the sides or vice versa. IMO, this would be very distracting, possibly even nauseating, when watching sports that are photographed on a horizontal plane with the action constantly moving from side to side. Your mileage may vary.

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 #5 of 11 Old 04-10-2014, 03:41 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
DavidHir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
Liked: 391
If you want 16:9 content to "fill" a 2:35:1 screen more, you're much better off overscanning the image than anything else. You won't be able to fill the rest of the screen without the light spilling onto the walls. However, if the walls are very dark and you have some sort of velvet border (or even background) this will catch most of that spill light. Maybe do partial overscan as a compromise to minimize light spill although you will still have some visible vertical black bars on the screen. I just cannot understand geometrically distorting an image, nor am I crazy about overscanning - but that is still a better option if it has to be one or the other IMO.

DavidHir is offline  
post #6 of 11 Old 04-11-2014, 09:37 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 19,911
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Liked: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir View Post

If you want 16:9 content to "fill" a 2:35:1 screen more, you're much better off overscanning the image than anything else. You won't be able to fill the rest of the screen without the light spilling onto the walls. However, if the walls are very dark and you have some sort of velvet border (or even background) this will catch most of that spill light. Maybe do partial overscan as a compromise to minimize light spill although you will still have some visible vertical black bars on the screen. I just cannot understand geometrically distorting an image, nor am I crazy about overscanning - but that is still a better option if it has to be one or the other IMO.

The problem with overscanning in his situation is that, if he wants to watch sports, he'll lose the score and stats and other info displayed at the top and bottom of the frame.

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 #7 of 11 Old 04-11-2014, 10:08 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
drjay71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

The problem with overscanning in his situation is that, if he wants to watch sports, he'll lose the score and stats and other info displayed at the top and bottom of the frame.

Exactly. I don't want to overscan and potentially lose important information like scores, etc. I would rather have the image a little distorted using NLS. I also understand that the image with fast panning could be a problem. Is there a way to see what it would look like before diving in an purchasing the Lumagen?
drjay71 is offline  
post #8 of 11 Old 06-10-2014, 01:15 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: 4,751
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 195
Why not buy a 2nd 16:9 screen - electric, to drop in front of your 2.35:1 screen, when you watch sports and other 16:9 content? Distorting the picture to fit a 2.35:1 screen - well, there's wrong, and there's wrong, and then there's that !

16:9 and 2.35:1 screens - no aspect ratio compromise either way !


118" wide 2.35 screen in the back, 106" wide 16:9 screen in the front. The best of both worlds !! 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 online now  
post #9 of 11 Old 06-10-2014, 05:37 PM
Member
 
drummermitchell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
There is a member here(forgot his user name)but he demonstrates using a Lumagen mini 3D for doing exactly what you ask.
He has demos on youtube as well.
drummermitchell is offline  
post #10 of 11 Old 06-11-2014, 06:01 AM
Member
 
Romans828's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Naboo
Posts: 115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by drummermitchell View Post

There is a member here(forgot his user name)but he demonstrates using a Lumagen mini 3D for doing exactly what you ask.
He has demos on youtube as well.

It is BrolicBeast. His YouTube video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwF7nYe-YzM. The negative, as I understand it, is that you are both zoomed and scaled in that scenario. However, he did say that you could still see the score etc. (Football) when using the non-linear stretch. 

Romans828 is online now  
post #11 of 11 Old 06-15-2014, 02:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
hometheaterguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Rexburg, ID, USA
Posts: 5,622
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by hometheaterguy View Post
Buy my Stewart screen, it crops from 16.9 to 2.35...
Does anyone need a 12' Stewart, adjustable aspect ration, (2:35:1), motorized, key-padded, micro-perfed screen?

A veteran is someone who, wrote a blank check Made Payable to 'The USA, ' for an amount of 'up to and including their life.'
hometheaterguy 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