Anyone with a converter being "denied" letterboxed output? - Page 5 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #121 of 182 Old 07-20-2009, 05:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nickdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,426
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
ABC, CW and CBS appear to not change their programming at all, regardless of what's on. ABC's The Bachelor was windowbox, the CW's commercials were windowbox and CBS appeared the same.

FOX is far better than NBC. Coming in from commercial, I didn't even see anything change. The show just "appeared" in letterbox. All the commercials were 4:3, which is better than NBC's stupid constant changing. Who really gives a ratsass about commercials anyway? I already watch them the "proper" way: on MUTE! Since local commercials come in windowbox, Crop is still the best way to view it.
nickdawg is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #122 of 182 Old 07-21-2009, 12:05 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
No need to defend your preferences. 95% of the 4:3, TV watchers just want to see their screens filled at all times like that (because that's how they always saw things on their 4:3 TV's OTA up 'till now).

No one can really expect much from a government subsidized program. These boxes were really only meant for one thing - to replace the 4:3 signals that we had been getting in analog up 'till this time.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #123 of 182 Old 07-21-2009, 12:07 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nickdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,426
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski View Post

No need to defend your preferences. 95% of the 4:3, TV watchers just want to see their screens filled at all times like that (because that's how they always saw things on their 4:3 TV's OTA up 'till now).

You really can't expect much from a government subsidized program. These boxes were really only meant for one thing - to replace the 4:3 signals that we had been getting in analog up 'till this time. (Nothing wrong with "wishing", but to really expect more would mean an inflated sense of entitlement. You want Home Theater grade gear - you go out and pay the prices, like everyone else had to do for years leading up to this.)

The only legitimate beef these people might have IMO are losing some of their channel reception.

When it comes to the Zenith box, I'm actually surprised at how good it is. It's better than I was expecting. It has superior channel add features: manual and rescan that doesn't wipe out your current list. It has program titles and descriptions as well as a simple guide that shows whats currently on and next on other channels. It allows whatever output you want on all HD channels. It comes with V L/R cables and even the RF output looks great---better than SD Cable!!

Surprisingly my reception is BETTER in digital. Every channel in analog I had horrible fuzz and static on. With digital I get every channel I'm supposed to and even a low power 5kW VHF station! The almost free CECB tuner is far superior to my HDTV set. The Zenith really is better with multipath as two channels I cannot watch on the HDTV work fine on the converter box.
nickdawg is offline  
 
post #124 of 182 Old 07-21-2009, 12:14 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Yep.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #125 of 182 Old 07-21-2009, 05:32 AM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski View Post

95% of the 4:3, TV watchers just want to see their screens filled at all times like that (because that's how they always saw things on their 4:3 TV's OTA up 'till now).

I know. That's because 95% of the general TV viewing population are simple minded, technological idiots who can't grasp the concept of 16:9, different aspect ratios etc (it's not like it's difficult - these same people go to the movies) and just go "Errr DUUUUUHHHH, the picture isn't filling up the whole screen, duhhhh, why I got them black bars there duhhhhhh, half the picture is black, DUHHHHH, I'm getting less picture DUHHHHHHHHH." But these are also the same people who would complain about movies letterboxed on VHS tapes and DVD's, and wanted everything transferred in pan and scan, and couldn't grasp why that was a horrible thing that actually ruined movies.

I have no tolerance for those people. I just don't. That's me. They irritate the **** out of me.
NYCLA* is offline  
post #126 of 182 Old 07-21-2009, 05:39 AM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickdawg View Post

When it comes to the Zenith box.....

If the Zenith had the EPG and a couple other features the Pal+ had, it would be the superior box on the market. I bought the Pal+ for the EPG (not knowing about the lack of AFD override). When I DO have the television on, I use the EPG all the time, and the Pal+ has the best EPG out there, and the picture quality is great (I've heard people complain but they are using it on large sets - I'm only using it on a 13" set). And yes, Digital Television beats the hell out of Analog TV. Analog should have been dumped YEARS ago (and could have been).
NYCLA* is offline  
post #127 of 182 Old 07-21-2009, 10:55 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCLA* View Post

If the Zenith had the EPG and a couple other features the Pal+ had, it would be the superior box on the market.

Many people here that have compared different boxes head-to-head (outside of the dedicated Pal threads) don't really seem to agree:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1#post13864771.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #128 of 182 Old 07-21-2009, 11:10 AM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski View Post

Many people here that have compared different boxes head-to-head (outside of the dedicated Pal threads), don't really seem to agree:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1#post13864771.

The Zenith loses in my book because of the lame EPG: "Now" and "Next". Yeah, that really helps me Zenith - NOT. So does *any other* box that doesn't feature a comprehensive EPG. Then of course we all know my beef with the Pal+.
NYCLA* is offline  
post #129 of 182 Old 07-21-2009, 11:23 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,223
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
No box is "best" at everything.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #130 of 182 Old 07-21-2009, 11:25 AM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski View Post

No box is "best" at everything.

Yeah, that's why they all suck.
NYCLA* is offline  
post #131 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 08:01 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Beeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 1,713
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCLA* View Post

I'm only using it on a 13" set.

Are you serious? A 13" set? Why would anyone possibly complain about not getting 16:9 or 2.35:1 on a 13" set?

16:9 on a 13" 4:3 set would be an 11.9" diagonal and 5.85" tall. That would be like watching an ant farm.

Viewing distance would have to be 18" to 3 feet. Don't you bang your head on the person next to you that is watching?

Did I ask if you are serious?

Disclaimer: I don't endorse any particular brand. Purchasing electronics is a compromise.
Brand selection may not be a main consideration.
Beeper is offline  
post #132 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 08:14 AM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeper View Post

Are you serious? A 13" set?

Why would anyone possibly complain about not getting 16:9 or 2.35:1 on a 13" set?

16:9 on a 13" set would be a 11.9" diagonal and 5.85" tall. That would be like watching an ant farm.

Viewing distance would have to be 18" to 3 feet. Don't you bang your head on the person next to you that is watching?

Did I ask if you are serious?

Why wouldn't I want 16:9 on a 13" set? You don't know how I watch tv. I watch TV lying on the hard wood floors, right in front of my set, my head propped up on a pillow, resting against the coffee table, relaxing, or I sit on my sofa, which isn't that far away. Hell I even watch it from the other side of the room, say, while I'm on the net. It's fine for me. Remember, I'm NOT a "home theatre" enthusiast and even a 40" LCD is pretty much too big for my taste. I quit watching 4:3 YEARS ago. As soon as New York television stations started broadcasting in 16:9 HD, I quit watching 4:3 television. Here in NY (on cable, when I had cable), the 4:3 analog signals were broadcast on 2,4,7, etc., but the Digital 16:9 HD signal was broadcast on 702, 704, 707, etc., and from that day forward I quit watching 2,4,7 etc and only watched 702,704,707 etc. I've always hated 4:3. I went to film school and prefer widescreen. Human beings naturally see in widescreen with our peripheral vision. 4:3 (also known as the "Academy Ratio") blows chunks. If it was shot in 16:9, I WANT TO SEE IT IN 16:9, NO EXCUSES. I've watched movies on my iPod in 16:9 (or wider), and I wouldn't have it any other way.
NYCLA* is offline  
post #133 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 08:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
TalkingRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,196
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeper View Post

Are you serious? A 13" set? Why would anyone possibly complain about not getting 16:9 or 2.35:1 on a 13" set?

16:9 on a 13" 4:3 set would be an 11.9" diagonal and 5.85" tall. That would be like watching an ant farm.

Viewing distance would have to be 18" to 3 feet. Don't you bang your head on the person next to you that is watching?

Did I ask if you are serious?


The ant farm analogy.
TalkingRat is offline  
post #134 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 12:45 PM
Member
 
rperlberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCLA* View Post

They did this during a specific skit where the character was showing other characters parts of a VHS tape on a 4:3 television. Thank you, I would get the joke WITHOUT you forcing a 4:3 zoom.

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."

I don't think they intentionally "zoomed" the VHS shots. The AFD code is embedded in the video. (It's carried on line 11.) The tape with the "VHS" material probably had the AFD code in it and the engineers didn't think to filter it out.

I saw something similar to this many years ago when I first got a TV with Closed Captioning. I was watching The MacLaughlin Group. The show itself was not Closed Captioned, but whenever they showed any news footage (with MacLaughlin's own voice-over commentary) the Closed Captions displayed the original news commentary that had been aired with that footage. They didn't think to filter it out of the footage.

This probably explains most of the "strange" zoom transitions we've been seeing, especially the "zoomed black" and the phenomena that was reported during the Michael Jackson coverage. It's not like there's a guy pulling a switch to make the picture change. It's just the opposite. The code is in the video and the video is coming from different sources. The problem is that there isn't anyone monitoring the broadcast in such a way as to see what the effect is on a box that's honoring AFD. Sorry to say, I don't think there ever will be. The networks would prefer that you just go out and buy a new TV and be done with it. This problem mostly affects Grandma and Grandpa who are outside of the preferred 18 to 34 demographic anyway.
rperlberg is offline  
post #135 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 12:48 PM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by rperlberg View Post

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."

I don't think they intentionally "zoomed" the VHS shots. The AFD code is embedded in the video. (It's carried on line 11.) The tape with the "VHS" material probably had the AFD code in it and the engineers didn't think to filter it out.

I saw something similar to this many years ago when I first got a TV with Closed Captioning. I was watching The MacLaughlin Group. The show itself was not Closed Captioned, but whenever they showed any news footage (with MacLaughlin's own voice-over commentary) the Closed Captions displayed the original news commentary that had been aired with that footage. They didn't think to filter it out of the footage.

This probably explains most of the "strange" zoom transitions we've been seeing, especially the "zoomed black" and the phenomena that was reported during the Michael Jackson coverage. It's not like there's a guy pulling a switch to make the picture change. It's just the opposite. The code is in the video and the video is coming from different sources. The problem is that there isn't anyone monitoring the broadcast in such a way as to see what the effect is on a box that's honoring AFD. Sorry to say, I don't think there ever will be. The networks would prefer that you just go out and buy a new TV and be done with it. This problem mostly affects Grandma and Grandpa who are outside of the preferred 18 to 34 demographic anyway.


Well that makes sense, but that particular episode was a repeat and I remember that the first time I saw it, the "VHS Tape" scenes showed up Window Boxed in the episodes first original run, so the AFD code must have been injected later. So my complaint is, why'd they have to inject any AFD code in there at all???
NYCLA* is offline  
post #136 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 02:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nickdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,426
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCLA* View Post

Why wouldn't I want 16:9 on a 13" set?

Why would I want to WASTE a good portion of my already small TV? I have a 19 inc set in the bedroom and I refuse to waste at least 4 inches of it on static black bars. So I don't get to see the extra tree on the left or the extra person on the right. BFD. At least I don't have my already pathetically small TV made any smaller.

Quote:


You don't know how I watch tv. I watch TV lying on the hard wood floors, right in front of my set, my head propped up on a pillow, resting against the coffee table, relaxing, or I sit on my sofa, which isn't that far away.

"Don't sit so close to the TV. It's not healthy."
(Imagining mom or grandma saying that)

Quote:


As soon as New York television stations started broadcasting in 16:9 HD, I quit watching 4:3 television. Here in NY (on cable, when I had cable), the 4:3 analog signals were broadcast on 2,4,7, etc., but the Digital 16:9 HD signal was broadcast on 702, 704, 707, etc., and from that day forward I quit watching 2,4,7 etc and only watched 702,704,707 etc.

I made the mistake of getting a HD box for the TV in my bedroom. I was expecting that the TWC box would behave like a DTV converter where I could crop/zoom HD channels so I could have the better quality picture. That's not the case. The TWC box FORCES letterbox, so I'm back to watching 3, 4, 5, 8 again. At least my $10(after coupon) converter lets ME choose how to watch MY TV.

Quote:


I've always hated 4:3. I went to film school and prefer widescreen. Human beings naturally see in widescreen with our peripheral vision. 4:3 (also known as the "Academy Ratio") blows chunks. If it was shot in 16:9, I WANT TO SEE IT IN 16:9, NO EXCUSES. I've watched movies on my iPod in 16:9 (or wider), and I wouldn't have it any other way.

I should've known. The same film snobs who invaded NBC around 2004 and started deciding that they should waste a good portion of my screen so I could see "more". I already knew and understood aspect ratios, and I still didn't like it. Not one show was improved by seeing "more" of it. That tiny bit of extra picture did not make an unfunny sitcom funny and it did not make a lame drama not lame. However CBS continues to produce quality programming and they let me use all of my screen. CSI: Miami isn't any worse because I cannot see the tiny bit of material on the left and right.

Really, you like everything in 16:9, even if it's on a 4:3 screen? How about a local or network news broadcast where there is tons of empty space on the left and right of the person talking so an OTS graphic can be inserted? Or what about 4:3 source B roll shown with patterned wings? Some news show was doing that on PBS and it looked incredibly stupid to have 4:3 material shown windowbox on a 4:3 screen.

Oh, you mention the "Academy Ratio", so how do you feel about films like The Wizard of Oz and Gone With The Wind, both of which are OAR 4:3 and were shown that way on TNT?
nickdawg is offline  
post #137 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 03:02 PM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickdawg View Post

Why would I want to WASTE a good portion of my already small TV? I have a 19 inc set in the bedroom and I refuse to waste at least 4 inches of it on static black bars.

Hey, Einstein, if you don't like it, you know what you can do? You can exercise your little index finger and hit the ZOOM button.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickdawg View Post

I should've known. The same film snobs who invaded NBC around 2004 and started deciding that they should waste a good portion of my screen so I could see "more".

God you're one of those.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickdawg View Post

Oh, you mention the "Academy Ratio", so how do you feel about films like The Wizard of Oz and Gone With The Wind, both of which are OAR 4:3 and were shown that way on TNT?

Those movies were made that way in the beginning. TV's original aspect ratio was chosen to match the "Academy Ratio". Ironcially, as soon as TV reared it's head, Cinema switched to widescreen, which was more natural and aesthetically pleasing.
NYCLA* is offline  
post #138 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 03:09 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nickdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,426
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCLA* View Post

Well that makes sense, but that particular episode was a repeat and I remember that the first time I saw it, the "VHS Tape" scenes showed up Window Boxed in the episodes first original run, so the AFD code must have been injected later. So my complaint is, why'd they have to inject any AFD code in there at all???

I think I remember that one. I've watched SNL on my SDTV, through the local NBC's analog channel. Since they were using the NBC analog feed, it was controlled by the network and 4:3 material like the TV Funhouse cartoons were shown full screen 4:3, with the smaller bug that was inside the bars still on screen. I've experimented with the "set by program" setting and NBC is very sloppy with their changing. I'm surprised they would change just for a few minutes of 4:3 video.

If you use "Set By Program" during one of those SNL "Best Of" shows, I'd imagine that would be a nightmare going from 4:3 to 16:9 skits.
nickdawg is offline  
post #139 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 03:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nickdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,426
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCLA* View Post

Hey, Einstein, if you don't like it, you know what you can do? You can exercise your little index finger and hit the ZOOM button.

I did. And I haven't touched it since. Even the two stations that utilize the "set by program" option in primetime default back to windowbox in local time.

Quote:


God you're one of those.

One of what? Like I said before, I understand the aspect ratios and have made an informed decision.

Quote:


Those movies were made that way in the beginning. TV's original aspect ratio was chosen to match the "Academy Ratio". Ironcially, as soon as TV reared it's head, Cinema switched to widescreen, which was more natural and aesthetically pleasing.

And made it easier to fit more seats in the room once the screen was widened for 1.78 or 2.35.
nickdawg is offline  
post #140 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 03:20 PM
TRT
AVS Forum Special Member
 
TRT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Do those converters really work? I'm curious: Are the transmissions in wide-screen format? Do they require a power supply? If not, I may get one for my hurricane, battery operated emergency TV.
TRT is offline  
post #141 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 03:23 PM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRT View Post

Do those converters really work? I'm curious: Are the transmissions in wide-screen format? Do they require a power supply? If not, I may get one for my hurricane, battery operated emergency TV.

Well, the broadcasts are in 16:9, that's part of the ATSC standard. However, my box, the Pal+ does not allow the user to override the AFD flag, which can force display of 4:3.
NYCLA* is offline  
post #142 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 03:31 PM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickdawg View Post


Really, you like everything in 16:9, even if it's on a 4:3 screen? How about a local or network news broadcast where there is tons of empty space on the left and right of the person talking so an OTS graphic can be inserted? Or what about 4:3 source B roll shown with patterned wings? Some news show was doing that on PBS and it looked incredibly stupid to have 4:3 material shown windowbox on a 4:3 screen.

Oh by the way, all of the major local newscasts here in New York are shot in 16:9, that's why NBC/WNBC (and here they are one and the same) putting a 4:3 AFD flag on during the local news is annoying. There's no reaosn for them to be doing it. "Access Hollywood" okay, it's produced in 4:3, but our news isn't. And WNBC is the ONLY station doing this. CBS, ABC, Fox all produce and broadcast their local news in 16:9 without forcing 4:3 AFD flags down anybody's throats.
NYCLA* is offline  
post #143 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 03:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Youngsville, NC USA
Posts: 5,019
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCLA* View Post

Why wouldn't I want 16:9 on a 13" set? You don't know how I watch tv. I watch TV lying on the hard wood floors, right in front of my set, my head propped up on a pillow, resting against the coffee table, relaxing, or I sit on my sofa, which isn't that far away. Hell I even watch it from the other side of the room, say, while I'm on the net. It's fine for me. Remember, I'm NOT a "home theatre" enthusiast and even a 40" LCD is pretty much too big for my taste. I quit watching 4:3 YEARS ago. As soon as New York television stations started broadcasting in 16:9 HD, I quit watching 4:3 television. Here in NY (on cable, when I had cable), the 4:3 analog signals were broadcast on 2,4,7, etc., but the Digital 16:9 HD signal was broadcast on 702, 704, 707, etc., and from that day forward I quit watching 2,4,7 etc and only watched 702,704,707 etc. I've always hated 4:3. I went to film school and prefer widescreen. Human beings naturally see in widescreen with our peripheral vision. 4:3 (also known as the "Academy Ratio") blows chunks. If it was shot in 16:9, I WANT TO SEE IT IN 16:9, NO EXCUSES. I've watched movies on my iPod in 16:9 (or wider), and I wouldn't have it any other way.


Then you would LOVE to see this in a fullscreen 16:9 HD display. I'm not talking about a 40 inch either - I think you would like a 19-25 inch 16:9 HDTV.

I had my own reasons for sticking to "only" a 32inch 16:9 TV, but I certainly appreciate seeing full screen 16:9 HD.

You CAN put antennas on your owned and/or controlled property...
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html

Being A Beacon of Knowledge in the darkness of FUD
Scooper is offline  
post #144 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 03:42 PM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooper View Post

Then you would LOVE to see this in a fullscreen 16:9 HD display. I'm not talking about a 40 inch either - I think you would like a 19-25 inch 16:9 HDTV.

I had my own reasons for sticking to "only" a 32inch 16:9 TV, but I certainly appreciate seeing full screen 16:9 HD.

OH I would, I want a 16:9 television it's just not in the budget cards right now. My ideal size is 37" but it's difficult to find 37" LCD's with 1080i. Most manufacturers are doing 37" and under at 720p. There are a few out there, that are 37"/1080p though, but it seems all 40" and up are 1080i so I just may have to go for the 40 eventually, but no bigger, I wouldn't like that.
NYCLA* is offline  
post #145 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 04:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nickdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,426
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCLA* View Post

Oh by the way, all of the major local newscasts here in New York are shot in 16:9, that's why NBC/WNBC (and here they are one and the same) putting a 4:3 AFD flag on during the local news is annoying. There's no reaosn for them to be doing it. "Access Hollywood" okay, it's produced in 4:3, but our news isn't. And WNBC is the ONLY station doing this. CBS, ABC, Fox all produce and broadcast their local news in 16:9 without forcing 4:3 AFD flags down anybody's throats.

Are you saying they even AFD flag the local news? Here in Cleveland all of the local news broadcasts are HD. The SD channel was always shown 4:3. Now with the DTV converter, "Set By Program" gives you a letterbox picture all the time, even commercials. ABC, CBS, CW MNTV do not use it at all, local NBC and FOX only in network programming. I find that absurd that it is used in a local newscast. Especially if it's like mine where we switch between 4:3 and 16:9 content quickly. That's exactly why news programming is presented as it is(not like WNBC), to provide consistency between different video sources.

I knew NBC had a letterbox fetish, but WNBC is taking it too far!!
nickdawg is offline  
post #146 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 04:25 PM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickdawg View Post

Are you saying they even AFD flag the local news? Here in Cleveland all of the local news broadcasts are HD. The SD channel was always shown 4:3. Now with the DTV converter, "Set By Program" gives you a letterbox picture all the time, even commercials. ABC, CBS, CW MNTV do not use it at all, local NBC and FOX only in network programming. I find that absurd that it is used in a local newscast. Especially if it's like mine where we switch between 4:3 and 16:9 content quickly. That's exactly why news programming is presented as it is(not like WNBC), to provide consistency between different video sources.

I knew NBC had a letterbox fetish, but WNBC is taking it too far!!

YES. They flag the ****ing local news! Even though it is shot in 16:9 HD they flag it for 4:3. They do this also to the NBC Nightly News, The Today Show, and Conan O'Brien and Jimmy Fallon too! This is why I HATE THEM! They are MORONS!!! Letterbox fetish? No, if they had that, they'd not be flagging these shows! But by the way, when something IS shown in Letterbox, it's because it was shot and framed that way, because, like I said, 16:9 is the new standard aspect ratio for ATSC HD broadcasting. And you probably didn't know this, but CBS has been shooting and framing ALL of its shows, sitcoms, in widescreen 16:9 since the late 1990's.
NYCLA* is offline  
post #147 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 04:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nickdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,426
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCLA* View Post

YES. They flag the ****ing local news! Even though it is shot in 16:9 HD they flag it for 4:3. They do this also to the NBC Nightly News, The Today Show, and Conan O'Brien and Jimmy Fallon too! This is why I HATE THEM! They are MORONS!!! Letterbox fetish? No, if they had that, they'd not be flagging these shows! But by the way, when something IS shown in Letterbox, it's because it was shot and framed that way, because, like I said, 16:9 is the new standard aspect ratio for ATSC HD broadcasting. And you probably didn't know this, but CBS has been shooting and framing ALL of its shows, sitcoms, in widescreen 16:9 since the late 1990's.

That actually makes sense. The local news was shown in 4:3 before, so it makes sense to show it that way now. I don't understand why anyone would want to watch the NEWS in letterbox. The graphics on screen would be smaller, the text would be smaller. You know what that leads to: the old people calling and complaining they cannot read the text on screen. Plus as I pointed out before, 4:3 B roll and network news video(like the ABC News business report in the AM) is shown with sidebars(which means windowbox!). As for the network programming, that's your equipment's fault, not NBC's.

Dude, you really need a 16:9 TV. What you want you would get perfectly with a 16:9 HDTV set.

And I know about CBS. Most of their programming, including sitcoms have been HD since around 1999. And they have also been shown in 4:3 on SDTV too.
nickdawg is offline  
post #148 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 04:59 PM
TRT
AVS Forum Special Member
 
TRT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 15
I find it funny when people refuse to step up to the newest technology(16:9) TV's, and whine about the lack of technology in the converter boxes in the same sentence! Converter boxes (a.k.a. digital to analog converters) are a temporary solution that's not unlike taking ground beef and reconstructing a cow.
TRT is offline  
post #149 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 05:20 PM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickdawg View Post

That actually makes sense. The local news was shown in 4:3 before, so it makes sense to show it that way now. I don't understand why anyone would want to watch the NEWS in letterbox. The graphics on screen would be smaller, the text would be smaller. You know what that leads to: the old people calling and complaining they cannot read the text on screen. Plus as I pointed out before, 4:3 B roll and network news video(like the ABC News business report in the AM) is shown with sidebars(which means windowbox!). As for the network programming, that's your equipment's fault, not NBC's.

Dude, you really need a 16:9 TV. What you want you would get perfectly with a 16:9 HDTV set.

And I know about CBS. Most of their programming, including sitcoms have been HD since around 1999. And they have also been shown in 4:3 on SDTV too.

Our news has been in 16:9 for several YEARS now. And the B-Roll is mostly shot in 16:9 too (when it's shown with Side Bars, that's called PILLARBOX, FYI.) But they are FLAGGING it to show in 4:3 on 4:3 receivers, same with NBC Nightly News. It's only my boxes fault in that it doesn't allow me to override the AFD. In fact, sometimes they switch to 16:9 for certain news stories, before going back to 4:3. There is NO EXCUSE FOR THEM TO BE SHOWING ANYTHING SHOT IN 16:9 IN ANYTHING OTHER THAN 16:9, and that includes the entire broadcast. Throw 4:3 in the DUMPSTER OF DINOSAUR TECH, PLEASE!

YES, I need a 16:9 TV, I said that waaaay back nearer to the beginning of this thread.
NYCLA* is offline  
post #150 of 182 Old 07-22-2009, 05:21 PM
 
NYCLA*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRT View Post

I find it funny when people refuse to step up to the newest technology(16:9) TV's, and whine about the lack of technology in the converter boxes in the same sentence! Converter boxes (a.k.a. digital to analog converters) are a temporary solution that's not unlike taking ground beef and reconstructing a cow.

Dear person who can't read: I said that a 16:9 TV is not in my budget cards at this time. It's AFD I'm bitching about (and the fact that the Pal+ left out the override). Go back and read the entire thread first, before you make comments which show you don't know what you are talking about.
NYCLA* is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Coupon Eligible Converter Box (CECB)

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