Anamorphic lens and HD DVD questions - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 22 Old 06-15-2005, 07:56 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Scopeboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 274
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Simple question I hope. When HD DVD does arrive in whatever format, will 2.35:1 movies still have wasted pixels encoded in the black bars on the dvd? From reading about standard dvd's, it would seem that there is wasted pixel information encoded in the top and bottom bars. Would someone please explain what improvement if any HD DVD will bring to actual resolution for our display devices? I'm wondering if anamorphic lenses will even be needed, or am I wrong in that assumption?
Scopeboy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 22 Old 06-16-2005, 01:05 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21,174
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 54
The anamorphic lenses are really for using more projector resolution and not really for source resolution. Basically just a way to use a full 16:9 panel for 2.35:1 material (or a 4:3 panel for 16:9 material). I don't think these new disks will be doing anamorphic 2.35:1, but either way people can still get use out of anamorphic lenses for projectors. Even a 1080p projector could use one to get more pixels per square inch, but there is a tradeoff at some point where most won't use an anamorphic lens when they have high resolution. And with the codecs used I doubt that the bars are going to be taking up much encoding space.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is online now  
post #3 of 22 Old 06-16-2005, 10:25 AM
Senior Member
 
Craig F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Winter Haven, FL
Posts: 413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The answer is, No. On standard DVD, the widescreen enhanced (anamorphic) discs are possible because the widescreen aspect ratio for HD DVD was defined prior to the release of DVD. With the HD DVD formats, they are already widescreen (16:9). There is no standard TV format wider than 16:9.

With standard DVD any aspect ratio larger than 4:3 (1.33:1) can take advantage of anamorphic discs to get more vertical resolution on a 16:9 TV as the frame size is limited to 4:3. With the HiDef formats, the frame is already 16:9, no squish necessary.
Craig F is offline  
post #4 of 22 Old 06-16-2005, 11:19 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Scopeboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 274
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Darin and Craig, thanks for chiming in. So, since the resolution is higher with HD DVD, 1920x1080 will be exactly what is encoded within the framing for HD 1.78:1 movies. But how will that resolution transition to scope films? I guess Im a little confused. What will the physical resolution be within the frame? Will the black bars be evident even in HD DVD? I guess no matter what is encoded on the disc, you'll still have black bars with scope films, unless you have an anamorphic lens. Correct? I understand that anamorphic lenses don't really help out with source material and their resolution, but more for the physical panel limitation. I just don't see why you would need one once HD DVD arrives, unless one is wanting to get rid of the black bars...........I guess that would be the reason for just about anybody with a constant height setup.
Scopeboy is offline  
post #5 of 22 Old 06-18-2005, 12:52 AM
Member
 
slehman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 110
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scopeboy
I understand that anamorphic lenses don't really help out with source material and their resolution, but more for the physical panel limitation. I just don't see why you would need one once HD DVD arrives
Basically the same reason people use them now. You have 16:9 content, squeezed into a 4:3 projector, and need to "un-squeeze" so everything looks right on the screen. Anamorphic lenses are a way to utilize all the pixels in a 4:3 projector for a 16:9 picture.

However I'm not sure if those 4:3 projectors will take HD format signals and not letterbox it internally. If they will take an HD picture, squish/stretch it to use all the pixels, then the anamorphic lens is still useful and people can get more life out of their 4:3 projectors.

Scott
slehman is offline  
post #6 of 22 Old 06-18-2005, 09:53 AM
 
bills2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Marlton,NJ,USA
Posts: 1,083
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
From what I have read, Scopeboy, you will still need an anamorphic lens with HD-DVD and Blu Ray discs ONLY if you have a constant height set up. All PJs including the holy Qualia are native 16:9. Native 2:35.1 PJs are not in the horizon for now. If you are one who enjoys the cinemascope feeling of a movie theater at home, then you will still need an anamorphic lens for both HD-DVD and Blu Ray discs.
bills2k is offline  
post #7 of 22 Old 06-21-2005, 10:44 AM
Senior Member
 
Craig F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Winter Haven, FL
Posts: 413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
With 2.35:1, there will be black bars. I don't forsee any anamorphic squeeze on the source material as there is no display standard wider than 16:9. And I don't think the companies defining the new formats have enough forsight to allow for a future 2.35:1 display.
Craig F is offline  
post #8 of 22 Old 06-28-2005, 01:59 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Mark_H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,932
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 16
bills2k said it.

HD sources will still have to display black bars for scope material - how could they not!

Mark

My cinema:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

My kit: 15' 2.35:1 Screen Research CP2 4-way mask, Sony vw1000es, Lumagen 2144, Meridian 861/621/7x5500/2xSW5500

Mark_H is offline  
post #9 of 22 Old 07-03-2005, 05:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tvted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 3,573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Ok,
Clarify for this besotted brain. (Please)
2.35 will *not* utilize the full 1920 x 1080 pixel space and let the displays remap?

1.78 will have more pixel data than 2.35?

Whaaa.
I want a flag.

ted
tvted is offline  
post #10 of 22 Old 07-03-2005, 07:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dialog_gvf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 4,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The next-gen discs will be letterboxed (as appropriate) but not anamorphic.

I'm with you. But both times I've brought it up on here people said that it would be useful to so few, and would add to the player costs. In actuality, you'd need the PLAYER to downconvert. No current display would know it was supposed to downconvert the frames.

Considering the debates between the two competing systems, it's ironic that this one particular feature that WOULD distinguish the adopter is shouted down by the keeners. An even better idea suggested on here is a fixed height (1080) variable width frame size. Don't squeeze, but rather expand the horizontal resolution as needed. :D

There were those upset about the calls for anamorphic DVDs because of how it lowered the quality to 4:3 (almost undoubtedly their) sets. Then the moment they bought widescreen, I'm sure the bit flipped.

Gary


- Don't trust sigs
dialog_gvf is offline  
post #11 of 22 Old 07-03-2005, 09:47 PM
Member
 
slehman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 110
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
In the case of standard DVDs, there were standardized, defined formats for both the 16:9 and 4:3 pictures. I don't think there is a defined format for any other aspect ratio. Would that have anything to do with why an anamorphic flag wasn't included in the hi-def DVD spec? (I wouldn't think it would be much of an issue, but maybe something about the hardware components?)

Even without an anamorphic/aspect ratio flag in the new standards, it would seem perfectly feasible that a 2.35:1 picture could be encoded using the full 1920x1080 resolution was used - a new "Super Pixel" brand of discs if you will. It would look squished/stretched on a regular HDTV display, but with an anamorphic lens in place, you get what you want.

But then the question is how much demand for 2.35:1 material does there have to be to create the market for discs encoded like that?

Scott
slehman is offline  
post #12 of 22 Old 07-03-2005, 10:58 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 45,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Fixed pixel displays have their drawbacks. I'd bet someone is working on a way to scrunch pixels for 2.35:1, or some such thing.

'Better Living Through Modern, Expensive, Electronic Devices'

Ken H is offline  
post #13 of 22 Old 07-04-2005, 05:28 AM
Member
 
am1001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 64
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So for HD-DVD and Bluray:

1920 x 1080 will have 1080 lines of information

2:35:1 will have 817 lines of information.

However, I recently downloaded a few movie captures (from satelite channels) which were in ts format and I noticed that when I played them in powerdvd - the mpeg2 captures were actually anamorphic! (when I unclicked 'keep aspect ratio', the 16:9 transfers filled my 4:3 screen, and for 2:35 transfer movies, the screen filled the 1:1.78 sixe). So is the mpeg2 format anamorphic but HD-DVD/bluray not?
am1001 is offline  
post #14 of 22 Old 07-04-2005, 06:00 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Mark_H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,932
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I see no reason why it shouldn't be. The player can downconvert if the display cannot handle the anamorphic image.

My cinema:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

My kit: 15' 2.35:1 Screen Research CP2 4-way mask, Sony vw1000es, Lumagen 2144, Meridian 861/621/7x5500/2xSW5500

Mark_H is offline  
post #15 of 22 Old 07-04-2005, 06:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dialog_gvf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 4,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by slehman
But then the question is how much demand for 2.35:1 material does there have to be to create the market for discs encoded like that?
The market comes from availability of content. As did widescreen in North America from DVD. Before DVD, there were only two widescreen sets sold in North America. Both RPTVs from Toshiba (42" and 65").

Support variable anamorphic encoding (always fill the video frame with visual pixels) and the equipment that supports it will come into being. The better FP units would assuredly support it, if only to sell you more stuff (lenses, automatic lenses, etc.)

With SED/FED/iFIRE it's possible that cheap wide panels could become a reality.

But, there is no point if the content isn't there.

Perhaps the BDA should consider this a possible distinguishing feature. They still have time to spec it.

Gary


- Don't trust sigs
dialog_gvf is offline  
post #16 of 22 Old 07-04-2005, 09:00 PM
Member
 
slehman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 110
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dialog_gvf
The market comes from availability of content. As did widescreen in North America from DVD. Before DVD, there were only two widescreen sets sold in North America. Both RPTVs from Toshiba (42" and 65").
Chicken or egg? Take your pick ;)

Even without anamorphic capabilities in the next-gen DVDs, I don't think all is lost yet. As I understand it, you'd need an anamorphic lens to get what you want no matter what. You just wouldn't be able to get a single disc that would look right on all displays. If there's enough of a market for the content like that, I think it could still come, just without all the other people on standard displays to subsidize it :(

Scott
slehman is offline  
post #17 of 22 Old 07-05-2005, 12:16 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Mark_H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,932
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by slehman
Chicken or egg? Take your pick ;)

You just wouldn't be able to get a single disc that would look right on all displays.
So how is it that current anamorphic DVDs look correct on all displays? :rolleyes:

Mark

My cinema:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

My kit: 15' 2.35:1 Screen Research CP2 4-way mask, Sony vw1000es, Lumagen 2144, Meridian 861/621/7x5500/2xSW5500

Mark_H is offline  
post #18 of 22 Old 07-05-2005, 04:31 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
amillians's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Bloom County
Posts: 4,822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_H
So how is it that current anamorphic DVDs look correct on all displays?
Because 16:9 displays were a coming reality, it was in the original DVD spec and thus all DVD players have to be able to sort out a 4:3 letterboxed image from a 16:9 encoded source.

And by "look correct," even today, there's still a lot of performance variation between players on this issue...some produce a soft image, some a pixelly one, etc. This reality was a core reason why directors like James Cameron originally refused to do anamorphic on hits like Titanic...he didn't want to suboptimize the viewing experience of the majority (4:3 displays) for the minority (16:9 capable displays).

Anamorphic isn't in either spec for the next gen disc that I am aware of...as has been alluded to, there's practically zero market for it, and like it or not, this format *has* to appeal to the mainstream crowd, and it will do so at the expense of the "high end" crowd (read us) if need be. A few thousand people with anamorphic lenses and a few thousand high end Runco owners isn't a market that a billion dollar format needs to chase.

Alex doesn't live here anymore
amillians is offline  
post #19 of 22 Old 07-05-2005, 07:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dialog_gvf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 4,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
And where is that mainstream HDMI/1080p/lossless audio crowd?

If you build it, they will come.

Gary


- Don't trust sigs
dialog_gvf is offline  
post #20 of 22 Old 07-05-2005, 09:42 AM
Member
 
slehman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 110
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_H
So how is it that current anamorphic DVDs look correct on all displays? :rolleyes:
I was referring to a hypothetical solution to have all pixels used for image data despite the lack of anamorphic processing in hi-def DVD players.

The anamorphic aspect of the DVD spec was all about making it work well on all displays, not providing the best picture (reducing the encoded pixels used for black bars was not the goal). The installed base was 4:3, but 16:9 was coming. Companies wanted to make a lot of money, so they wanted to make their players/content work with all displays.

With hi-def DVDs, companies just may not see the demand for doing it it or a way to enough additional money to justify doing it (perhaps influenced by the desire to hurry and become the dominant format). They can still sell the products to anyone with a hi-def display. They'll work fine. They just don't provide all the features everyone wants.

I don't mean to argue that the right thing is happening, just that it's the effect of the market. Everyone wants the best picture, but not everyone can be accommodated.

Scott
slehman is offline  
post #21 of 22 Old 07-05-2005, 09:50 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Mark_H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,932
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 16
My comment is also hypothetical - if they wanted to do anamorphic hi-def there is absolutely no reason why the could not - they would just have to update the players or display to handle the discs' output.

Mark

My cinema:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

My kit: 15' 2.35:1 Screen Research CP2 4-way mask, Sony vw1000es, Lumagen 2144, Meridian 861/621/7x5500/2xSW5500

Mark_H is offline  
post #22 of 22 Old 07-06-2005, 10:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tvted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 3,573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I believe that David Boulet has pointed out that MPEG2 provides for a 20:9 encoding spec. Not quite the c. 21:9 needed but its something. Why not start there?

ted
tvted is offline  
Closed Thread HD DVD Players

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