Originally Posted by movieguy163201
Yea I meant AR, sorry......you mean length and width correct?....
Yeah I meant width and height, sorry bout the typo.
so if the screen is just about 16x9, whats stopping you from putting a 16x9 res. on their from like a computer....and it not looking like a champ, is this just not possible??
Yes, actually its very possible. Its just that you won't get a 1:1 pixel mapping. This can lead to poor picture, but it need not. For example if you fed the TV I mention above a 1024x576 resolution, it would look quite good. The problem there is that this is not a standard resolution, and not very much screen real estate either.
But outside of PC use, the non-square pixel issue is really not important. TV and movies have few static images in them, and you won't be watching those at 1:1 resolution to begin with, so there will always be stretching.
Why would they make a 16x9 TV thats native res is 4x3 or 5x4?.....thats strange to me
If the screen itself is 16x9, why not have a native 16x9 res?
I guess thats stupidity on the manufacters part?? This is very weird to me that they would do such a thing
Its limitation of the technology. Plasma technology is only just now to the point where they can make pixels small enough to fit more than 1024 of them across a 42" screen. Now, regarding using 768 lines instead of 720, thats a legacy issue. Plasmas were originally sold as Kiosks and boardroom displays, typically to be fed by a PC. So, in order to avoid losing some lines, they made them 768 instead of 720.