1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

4:3 Lcd???

Discussion in 'LCD & LED LCD TVs' started by MKD, Feb 10, 2005.

  1. MKD

    MKD
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hi to everyone,

    I know most of the LCD TV's are widescreen.Is there any 4:3 format LCD.Most of the programs I watch are 4:3.So,the other question would be how good is the 4:3 zoom on the widescreen TV's?I dopn't want to buy an expensive LCD TV and all I get is stretched programs and enjoy it only when watching DVD's.
    Please help me in this metter.Any ideas?
    Thanks a lot.
     
  2. benmiles

    benmiles
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Messages:
    47
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    There are loads :)

    What kind of size are you after?
     
  3. MKD

    MKD
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    29",32",but quality is important
     
  4. colinbarber

    colinbarber
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Just watch 4:3 transmissions in their native format so you don't get a stretched image, just black bars either side of the picture.

    More and more programmes are being transmitted in WS, I think you would regret getting a 4:3 TV in years to come.
     
  5. MKD

    MKD
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I know that but I hate those black bars,plus that is not good for the screen at all.I wanted to know how good is the zoom mode.Most of the WS TV's have 4:3 zoom,but I need to know how bad is the picture.
    Thanks a lot.
     
  6. ianh64

    ianh64
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,233
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    SW London/Surrey borders
    Ratings:
    +63
    Why isn't it good for the screen? LCD's don't suffer burn-in etc like other types of technology. I agree that 4:3 wuld be a backward step, especially since they are now talking of starting the analogue turn off in only a few years. Once you get onto digital TV, 16:9 is the inherent format. If a 4:3 programme is transmitted over digital, it is often broadcast in 16:9 but with its own side bars (or some other pattern) so a 4:3 zoom is not required.

    -Ian
     
  7. cornelis

    cornelis
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    LCDs don't suffer permanent 'burn in' but they can exhibit a temporary image retention. Which is why the Hitachi LCD I have defaults to mid-grey bars rather than black ones - to minimise the effect.
     
  8. Rob1698

    Rob1698
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    What kind of digital TV are you talking about here?
    The kind of digital TV I receive (DVB) is still 90% 4:3 image and transmitted as such.
    In fact, when the content is widescreen it is quite often transmitted 4:3 letterboxed.

    Material from the UK (I can watch BBC and ITV3) is a positive exception, and NLD1/2/3 are now starting to transmit 16:9 a bit more frequently, but the vast majority of digital TV on satellite remains 4:3 for now.
     
  9. Rob1698

    Rob1698
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    This is a matter of personal preference. There is no "good" zoom IMHO, any zoom is terrible.
    Others seem to live with horizontally-stretched pictures, or even worse: non-linear stretching.
    To me it looks like a defective set.

    So, you will have to watch for yourself.
     
  10. MKD

    MKD
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0


    I hate to spend 1500-2000$ for something that I will not be able to enjoy completely.
    So maybe my best option for now is a CRT,at least until things concerning digital change.
    Thanks Rob
     
  11. ianh64

    ianh64
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,233
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    SW London/Surrey borders
    Ratings:
    +63
    Its obviously a British thing. Freeview, our DVB service, is inherently 16:9. Most new programme material is shot in 16:9 format. Some, such a s sport may still be in 4:3, but it is often transmitted in 16:9 with the sidebars added by the broadcaster. Obviously this is not the case in the Netherlands, not sure about Macedonia. Didn't realise the original post was not UK based.

    As for scaling, its not the nasty that people make it out to be. It can be sone well and even be beneficial for moving video. Agreed that for still pictures it often not ideal and scaling artifacts cab sometime be seen, but for moving pictures thiese are unnoticable. The side effect of scaling is that the picture becomes slightly less sharp (not the same as being blurred), but this can actually be advantageous if there is noise in the original picture.

    But the long and short of it is that everything now, even analogue TV is digital at some point in the chain - often CRT's are even digitally processed internally. But a decent CRT will provide you with a better PQ. But a decent LCD will not be poor quality.

    -Ian
     
  12. Rob1698

    Rob1698
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    There is of course no relation between the 16:9 vs 4:3 situation and CRT vs LCD and analog vs digital.

    16:9 is just a gimmick invented to let people buy new sets. for every example where 16:9 is a better aspect ratio there is a counterexample where 4:3 is better.

    4:3 LCD sets exist, but mainly in smaller sizes. you probably would not want a 32" 4:3 set, the 32" (real size) screen is a good replacement for an old 26" (picture tube size; actual visible area is less) 4:3 CRT set. These provide approximately the same picture height and thus the same picture size for nonstretched 4:3 content.
     
  13. ianh64

    ianh64
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,233
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    SW London/Surrey borders
    Ratings:
    +63
    I suspect that this is total rubbish on Hitachi's part. There is probably a great deal of shared components and software between the 5200 series LCD's and Plasma's. The pages in the manuals of both LCD and Plasma covering this functionality are word for word identical. So called however image retention would behave very differently between the two display technologies so would have to be tackled differently rather in an identical manner.

    For plasma, the display fades over time depending on the luminence of the picture. So putting a grey border around the screen will make the border age at a similar rate to the picture.

    This makes absolutely no sense with LCD's. Even if image retention was an issue, which it is not, and I have never seen even momentarily retention in for panels manufacturered in the last 6 years, the putting a grey border would be completely the opposite of what you would want to do since the grey border would be retained - if it was black there would be no retention at all.

    I just think that Hitachi have not bothered to take out functionality designed specifically for a plasma technology.
     
  14. Rob1698

    Rob1698
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    What I notice on BBC (mainly BBC News 24) is that 4:3 material is expanded a bit, similar to what my set does when I put it in 14:9 mode. The sidebars are less than with pure 4:3 but an area at the top and bottom are lost.
    This method is used mainly when a clip of 4:3 content is to be shown in a 16:9 format programme, as often happens on news shows.
    This is not so bad (at least when the original picture composition allows it).

    When a longer programme is shown that is in 4:3 format I notice that BBC and ITV switch back to 4:3 mode, at least on satellite. This provides a better picture quality as the side areas are not lost to black bars, but the black bars are generated locally.
    This is also what NLD1/2/3 are doing, but here 16:9 is the exception while in the UK 4:3 is.

    What I really dislike is the "superzoom" thing in the TV where 4:3 content is non-linearly stretched. This is especially annoying with moving pictures, as the moving object deforms when it moves through the nonlinear stretch area. Material with lots of panning, like sports matches, is unwatchable in this mode.
    Fortunately broadcasters have not yet started to use this at their end...
     
  15. mike7

    mike7
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,597
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Norwich
    Ratings:
    +503
    Why all this discussion about 'black bars' ?. If a 4:3 programme is shown on a 16:9 screen then there is not enough picture to fill the screen...end of story. You are simply watching the format that the programme was made in. Until digital transmissions came along either by satellite,cable or Freeview that was how it was. Most widescreen CRT tv's could fake it, if that was what the viewer wanted. My trusty 24" Hitachi can stretch the picture sideways (16:9),stretch it slightly (14:9) or display 'panoramic mode' which leaves the centre part of the picture intact and pulls out the sides. Some sets will 'zoom', which gradually diminishes the definition. The UK Channel 4 when showing a 'letterboxed' film on terrestial analogue will still trigger my set to a zoom in automatically. The trouble is that the average consumer seems to want to 'fill the screen'. Obviously this distorts the image. The less knowledgeable often say they do not like widescreen because 'it makes everyone look fat'. This is how so many widescreen sets are displayed in shops. There also seems to be limited knowledge about re-setting set-top boxes (DVB and SKY) to 16:9 mode when they are connected to a widescreen tv. People continue to watch distorted pictures,I've had to re-set quite a few.

    I'm surprised that true 16:9 programmes are so rarely available in the Netherlands. After all it is the home of Philips!! What our overseas friends might not know is that almost all of our tv is now 16:9 and transmitted as such on all digital sources. The compromise for analogue terrestial viewers is that the picture now goes out as 14:9, thus leaving small gaps at the top and bottom of the screen. This means that not quite so much of the original picture is chopped off at the sides. The worst case senario seems to be with Sky transmissions viewed on 4:3 sets where they meet the public need to 'fill the screen' and zoom in a bit, thus chopping out quite a lot of the original picture. Watching some programmes you get people talking someone who does not appear to be there because they are on the far edge of the camera shot!

    Widescreen is the way to go and I have noticed that newer American tv programmes (Star Trek etc )are also 16:9, probably thanks to the growth of HDTV there. As for it being a 'gimmick' I seem to recall that cinemas went widescreen in the mid-fifties, and they were very wide at that time.

    Please, no more talk about 'black bars' or if you have some makes of LCD 'grey bars' or even sky blue pink bars! , ....there ain't nuthin there, right !
     
  16. Rob1698

    Rob1698
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Philips does not control the TV system here. It may have been like this in the past, but not anymore.
    We have public TV and commercial TV, not unlike the situation in the UK.
    The public system (NLD1/2/3) transmits occasional 16:9 material but still mostly 4:3. When 16:9 is transmitted the digital channels (terrestrial, cable and satellite) transmit anamorphic widescreen like in the UK, but the analog terrestrial and cable send 16:9 letterboxed.

    The commercial stations send only 4:3, never any true 16:9, only some letterboxed 16:9 (and even then, usually with logo and subtitling in the black bars).

    The commercial stations are only after viewer counts, quality is not of interest to them (this is what they state when asked). They will not make any effort when it costs them a dime and does not yield extra viewers. They don't provide subtitling for the deaf, for the same reasons.
     
  17. MKD

    MKD
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Thanks for the posts!
    I will still go for 4:3,since it is going to be the most I'll be watching on the TV,at least for the next few years.
    Thanks again!
     
  18. PinkPig

    PinkPig
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Messages:
    98
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    This is the point where government restrictions, public service quotas, the license fee and the BBC suddenly seem a much better idea. It's a shame that commercial stations don't realise that they can also improve customer satisfaction and viewer counts by showing a better quality picture - and giving subtitles is much the same. Sounds like a very backward company that still claims that it can ignore these issues.
     
  19. Rob1698

    Rob1698
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    They probably do market research on this, asking people what they watch and what they value when making the decision what to watch.
    They then guess the number of viewers they can gain by changing something (like adding subtitles for the deaf, or transmitting movies in 16:9, or making their own productions in 16:9) and find out what it costs
    They also calculate how much more money they can ask from their advertisers with the increased viewer count.

    Whenever the cost is more than the gain in advertisement money they don't do it. period.
    Probably the nunber of viewers that value a good picture quality is not enough, or else the number of viewers that value it high enough to switch to their station is not enough. (their content is usually more in the 'plain amusement' category and it may well be that people who like good quality picture also like good quality programmes!)

    This may sound harsh but they are only in the business to make money, not to please viewers. Of course they want to please their customers but their customers are not the viewers, their customers are the advertisers.

    There are some regulations here as well, but they don't cover such things, apparently. There has been some discussion about the subtitling a few years ago and the outcome was it did not happen. Even before that, there was the issue about sending VPS or similar video-recorder control signals, and the outcome was the same: it will cost us money so we won't do it. I am not aware of a 16:9 discussion.

    We have several more or less independent commercial broadcasters in this country, but on issues like this they all behave the same. I know that commercial TV exists much longer in the UK so maybe those companies have different business ethics...?
     
  20. loz

    loz
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2001
    Messages:
    13,058
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,796
    FYI, the prime commercial stations in the UK (ITV, C4, Five) all transmit in 16:9 on digital, and usually 14:9 on analog (the convention now in the UK)
     
  21. mike7

    mike7
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,597
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Norwich
    Ratings:
    +503
    It is now a requirement in the UK that all adverts are 16:9 format.
     
  22. alscds

    alscds
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    if you wach the ads on a 4:3 set you will see the amount of times the picture changes so not all ads are 4:3 also it looks like everyones missed the bit on the size you require or maybe after a few cans ive missed heir response but you did ask for 4:3 in quite a large size and in uk ive not seen any 4:3 over 20" or it could be the beer talkin ?
     
  23. alscds

    alscds
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    ok maybe the sony 21" then
     
  24. Alan D

    Alan D
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Widescreen TV is a compromise solution, sitting almost exactly between tradtional 4:3 and "cinematic" 2.35:1. If you object to black bars at the sides, why not fit some curtains to the edges of the TV and vary the width of the visible picture, like they do at the movies?
    Sorry, I've had a busy week.... I'll get me coat.
     

Share This Page

Loading...