AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 95 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
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
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,252 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by drjay71  /t/1526650/what-are-the-different-ways-to-stretch-16-9-content-to-fill-a-2-35-screen#post_24590353


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?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Discussion Starter #3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z  /t/1526650/what-are-the-different-ways-to-stretch-16-9-content-to-fill-a-2-35-screen#post_24592234


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
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,252 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by drjay71  /t/1526650/what-are-the-different-ways-to-stretch-16-9-content-to-fill-a-2-35-screen#post_24592385


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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frank714

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,494 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,252 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidHir  /t/1526650/what-are-the-different-ways-to-stretch-16-9-content-to-fill-a-2-35-screen#post_24593540


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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Discussion Starter #7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z  /t/1526650/what-are-the-different-ways-to-stretch-16-9-content-to-fill-a-2-35-screen#post_24595963


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?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,084 Posts
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 !





118" wide 2.35 screen in the back, 106" wide 16:9 screen in the front. The best of both worlds !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by drummermitchell  /t/1526650/what-are-the-different-ways-to-stretch-16-9-content-to-fill-a-2-35-screen#post_24816213


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. 
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,605 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I had asked this question over a year ago.

Now, I am going back to a 2.35 screen and a getting a JVC4910 projector. Are there any new processors, hopefully less expensive, besides the Lumagen than can do the NLS or "fill" a 2.35 screen when playing 16:9 content?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,958 Posts
Some program is framed with enough height to allow (scaling + optics) it to be projected onto a Scope screen. From a purest POV, you don't do it, yet sometimes, it just enhances the look of the program. AVATAR is IMO one example that looks stunning in Scope.

The issue with doing this for a sports game is that you may lose the score.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Some program is framed with enough height to allow (scaling + optics) it to be projected onto a Scope screen. From a purest POV, you don't do it, yet sometimes, it just enhances the look of the program. AVATAR is IMO one example that looks stunning in Scope.

The issue with doing this for a sports game is that you may lose the score.

Appreciate your reply. Basically, I just want my 2.35 screen filled when watching 16:9 content. I know this is blasphemy to some but I think I can tolerate the distortion over black bars. I know I could use masking but I think sports or other 16:9 content would look awesome if even a little distorted on a 2.35 screen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,130 Posts
Sports are one thing likely to look terrible with NLS. One of the things that makes non-linear-stretch most obvious/terrible is horizontal panning. And there's lots of that with sports.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,252 Posts
Sports are one thing likely to look terrible with NLS. One of the things that makes non-linear-stretch most obvious/terrible is horizontal panning. And there's lots of that with sports.
Agreed. Horizontal panning gives a really disturbing fish-eye effect during NLS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Note you don't need to use NLS mode to fill the 2.35 screen with 16:9 material, you can just use a linear stretch which would not have the horizontal panning artifacts -- just short, wide people.
That may be better than the NLS especially when watching sports. I assume I can do a linear stretch with the Lumagen. Any other less expensive ways of doing this?

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,142 Posts
That may be better than the NLS especially when watching sports. I assume I can do a linear stretch with the Lumagen. Any other less expensive ways of doing this?
Yes with the Lumagen you can have fine control over e.g. the fraction of the center slice of the 16:9 image that is linearly stretched (including the whole image). See the manual for the various parameters to NLS. I don't think the DVDO Duo would work for this but its the only other processor I'm vaguely familiar with.
 
1 - 20 of 95 Posts
Top