Widescreen TVs

[Desredandwhite]

Just a follow-up on my post a while ago having a good old whinge about DVDs that aren't widescreen.

Just took the plunge and dropped a whole bunch of money on a widescreen TV today.. Spent half the day connecting about 200 cables.. I now have 6 remote controls sitting on the table! Turned it all on...... Holy hell! My old TV didn't have a 16:9 mode, and I never really knew what I was missing out on - Monsters Inc is literally jaw-dropping.

Also got a Digital STB - can't wait for next season's footy to start so I can watch it in widescreen

Just interested, how many here have got a widescreen TV? (apart from you, JS).. I'm pretty much figuring it out trial and error as I go.

 

[prized bitch]

Yeah, but I don't see what all the fuss is about - a tv is a tv.

 

[Santos L Helper]

Good move Des.
The next toy for me is a wide screen digital tv. Now I just need to finish Uni.

What about some details? Model, size, audio etc?

 

[Desredandwhite]

Oh no, a TV ain't JUST a TV Though I suppose if it's not important to you, then it won't be. um. is. uhh.

Santos, I got a Metz Astral - 76cm Widescreen.

DVD via S-video to the TV
DVD Coax Digital Audio to the Receiver (Sony receiver - one of the "entry level" models)

Antenna to the Digital STB
Digital STB (DGTEC HDTV) via S-video to the TV
Digital STB audio via optical to the receiver
Antenna out goes to the Foxtel box, and then to the VCR which is connected to the TV via composite video.

Phew. Putting that together took about an hour (plus an hour of stuffing it up)

Darkened room, Anamorphic 16:9 DVD on the widescreen TV, Dolby Digital or DTS 5.1 Surround sound. Heck, I reckon you can get a better experience with a home theatre setup these days than at the cinema (though with the cost of the TV, DVD, Receiver, Speakers, etc etc, you could buy a LOT of movie tickets)

ARrgghhh toys... I will never own a house. Ah well.

 

[Santos L Helper]

What amp do you have? My tv and video run through a Yamaha V703 amp and DB speakers.
Around $2500 in audio but still through a regular Sony 69 cm tv and Sony stereo video. DVD and Plasma widescreen are my next toys.

ps. I also never expect to own a house but will have some very nice toys inside.......bring on my teaching job

 

[Lethal]

Damn I'm drooling at that setup now.
That's the last peice of the puzzle I need for my home entertainment system is a widescreen tv. Looking at one day getting myself a Loewe Xelos.

 

[dr nick]

i have a widescreen tv with all the audio setup and the works, except im not quite sure if its just stretching the picture to make it wider. a lot of DVD's still have the black bars, even old videotapes take up the whole screen (they'd have to be stretched)

i also think the tv picture is stretched, we havent got a set top box or anything yet the picture takes up the entire wide screen. comparing to the normal tv in my room, there is no extra picture on the sides

 

[Desredandwhite]

Santos, my amp is the Sony STR-K502P... Basic receiver. Does DD and DTS, so I'm happy. I got it as part of a HT package - Receiver + 5 satellite speakers + subwoofer. I've replaced the L+R speakers with the ones from my old Sharp stereo (a bit bigger and beefier as the old satellites, but just as dodgy ). Next step is to upgrade the centre speaker (and slowly do the rest). I've only really got audio going through it as it doesn't have s-video throughs, only composite.

Lethal, I did some research and looks like most people seem to recommend the Metz Atlantis/Astral or Loewe Xelos in that general ($3000) price range. Don't have many Loewe dealers near me so the decision was relatively easy! The only problem with the European sets is that everything goes through SCART.

Nicko - A lot of the TVs I saw have the picture stretched by default - if you have a look you can usually fix it up.. I'd rather see things in their proper aspect ratio than have them stretched. At first I forgot to set the DVD so that it sent a 16:9 signal to the TV (it still thought it was sending a signal to the 4:3 TV)

 

[Dan26]

Desredandwhite,

If you are watching normal TV on a widescreen TV, is the picture all "fattened out" to make it fit in the 16:9 ratio? Or are the top and bottoms chopped off, so it looks normal (i.e the picture isn't fattened out) but can still fit in the 16:9 screen.

I'm trying to visualise how it all works. And what happesn if you put a widescreen video cassette in? Are the black lines still there like they are on a normal TV? And what about DVD's?

 

[Desredandwhite]

Dan,

If you're watching normal 4:3 TV, you can set it up one of 3 ways:

1) stretched to fit the screen
2) chop the top and bottom off to fit the screen
3) leave it in the middle w/ black bars on either side.

I'm a fan of option (3) - At least I'm getting the proper ratio.

The tricky part is the scenario you mentioned, letterboxed programs (the picture is 16:9, but the full frame is 4:3). In that case, you can ZOOM IN so that it fills the screen - You DO lose resolution that way though. If you view it as per my option (3) above, you get black bars on ALL sides of the picture, if that makes sense.

What some TVs have is a type of stretching that isn't as bad - the stretching is more severe at either side, but is more "normal" in the middle. Most of them will have some sort of "auto" mode, or something - it will automatically try to work out what is on the screen and zoom in and out as needed - ie: on TV, sometimes the ads are 4:3, sometimes they're 4:3 letterboxed, and sometimes they're 16:9.

 

[Dan26]

Thanks des.

I don't suppose you know of the full widescreen 2.35:1 being introduced? This ratio is supposed to be perfect for viewing. It is the exact amount we use with our normal vision. Makes you wonder why TV wasn't designed that way (or 16:9) when it was introduced. If movie theatres can use it why didn't the inventor of TV think the same?

 

[M29]

Des, have you tried hooking it up with the CVO instead of S-Video?

 

[GFC MAD!]

Originally posted by Desredandwhite
Just a follow-up on my post a while ago having a good old whinge about DVDs that aren't widescreen.

Just took the plunge and dropped a whole bunch of money on a widescreen TV today.. Spent half the day connecting about 200 cables.. I now have 6 remote controls sitting on the table! Turned it all on...... Holy hell! My old TV didn't have a 16:9 mode, and I never really knew what I was missing out on - Monsters Inc is literally jaw-dropping.

Also got a Digital STB - can't wait for next season's footy to start so I can watch it in widescreen

Just interested, how many here have got a widescreen TV? (apart from you, JS).. I'm pretty much figuring it out trial and error as I go.

I have a widescreen TV and it rocks!!!

The only problem is that if you watching DVD's with subtitles, sometimes the subtitles are written on the black bars, and that means that it is off-screen on a widescreen TV

This happens on 'The Mummy' DVD - as when the mummy talks, you cant see what he's saying!!

Also, if anyone has the 'Back To The Future' DVD's, the option in which you can get little anecdotes on the screen is unable to be seen unless you zoom right out

Anyone else have this problem??

Except for this - widescreen is definately the way to go. The screen is filled on most films with the black bars [16:9], but on some other movies you do still get black bars [like star wars] - but they are smaller than on regular TV's. There are many different widescreen aspects.

Also, I have a set-top box and watch widescreen digital - so if anyone has any questions about it, feel free to ask

 

[Desredandwhite]

Ahhh.. I wish I could hook it up with component out.

Unfortunately, the DVD player has component outs. The TV accepts RGB ins. It no play so good together (but just wait till I can afford a player with RGB SCART out )

 

[Harry Bosch]

Originally posted by Dan26
Thanks des.

I don't suppose you know of the full widescreen 2.35:1 being introduced? This ratio is supposed to be perfect for viewing. It is the exact amount we use with our normal vision. Makes you wonder why TV wasn't designed that way (or 16:9) when it was introduced. If movie theatres can use it why didn't the inventor of TV think the same?

I could be wrong about this but i think before Tv most movies had an AR of 4:3 or similar. So when TV was introduced obviously movie people were worried about losing business to tv so wider ARs were introduced in films as a gimmick or something different to attract people to see films in the cinema. ie Cinemascope etc. Like i said i could be wrong but i am sure i read about this somewhere a while back.

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by Harry Bosch
I could be wrong about this but i think before Tv most movies had an AR of 4:3 or similar. So when TV was introduced obviously movie people were worried about losing business to tv so wider ARs were introduced in films as a gimmick or something different to attract people to see films in the cinema. ie Cinemascope etc. Like i said i could be wrong but i am sure i read about this somewhere a while back.

This is the case, yes

 

[sandeano]

Originally posted by Harry Bosch


I could be wrong about this but i think before Tv most movies had an AR of 4:3 or similar. So when TV was introduced obviously movie people were worried about losing business to tv so wider ARs were introduced in films as a gimmick or something different to attract people to see films in the cinema. ie Cinemascope etc. Like i said i could be wrong but i am sure i read about this somewhere a while back.

The television standard was based on what was closest to the cinema screen standard - 1.33:1 (or 4:3). The primary reason for this was that viewers were accustomed to viewing a screen of these dimensions and it would be convenient for transmissions of cinema movies on TV. Now as TV took hold and cinema numbers dwindled it was decided to ressurect the esxperimental widescreen process that had been tested to mixed results many times, as early as the mid 1930s.

Interestingly, the very first Cinemascope (2.35:1) film was to be a version of "William Tell" starring Errol Flynn. 30 minutes of footage were shot in 1952, but financing fell through and the project was abandonded.

You can now pick up on DVD the first completed Cinemascope feature - "The Robe" (1953), a rather laboured historical epic. Cinemascope cornered the widescreen market and the rights to the process were owned by Fox Studios. However to avoid paying the high fees charged by Fox the other studios soon had their own versions such as Vistavision, Regalscope, Technirama and Superscope. By 1955 38% of Hollywood releases were in the widescreen format and 1957 saw the greatest number ever (still) of films released in that style (102 - 32%).

Now some films just don't adapt to the format, yet in the rush to make everything 'bigger' certain concepts about space and suitability were lost. Take for example the first British film in widescreen - 1955's "The Deep Blue Sea" which was actaully a small, intimate stage drama, the subtlety of which was lost on the massive screen. So filmmakers came to adapt and left the 'scope process for when it was best required, often preferring the mid-range format of 1.85:1.

Now bear in mind that many theatres did not survive the transformation to the widescreen - for the old screen had to be ripped out, seats removed and the screen brought forward from the original proscenium. This was a very costly installation, plus it often came with new, stereophonic sound to be built in too. Considering that theatres were under the pump anyway already incurring huge losses, many that could not afford the transformation either shut or struggled on for a few years before dying a natural death.

If you want to see a good example of a surviving transformation, take a peak at the Westgarth theatre in Northcote, which was built in 1921, had a foyer makeover in the 1930s and also has the changed interior design from the 1950s widescreen installation. A mish-mash of styles that works really well.

An interesting point is that the only surviving 4:3 ratio screen still in operation in Melbourne is at the Crazyhorse theatre that opened as a newsreel cinema in 1952 (as The Star Newsreel) and never needed to change. Newsreels in the 1950s-1960s, horror flicks in the 1960s and sex films from then on don't actually require much on the way of bigscreen projection.