1. Join Now

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

Aspect Ratio on 42" Plasma?

Discussion in 'Plasma TVs' started by RHCP, Sep 22, 2005.

  1. RHCP

    RHCP
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,313
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    Liverpool
    Ratings:
    +25
    Just about to order some dvd's for my new 42" plasma coming today!

    Question is i need to start buying widescreen dvd's right?

    Some of the dvd's i was looking at don't mention widescreen, just aspect ratio.

    http://www.choicesdirect.com/templates/product.asp?ProductGuid=76024

    I'm sure this is a wide screen as one of my other dvd's is 2.35:1 and is widescreen.

    Is this just a case of companies not bothering to write widescreen on there sites and just presuming that we all know about aspect ratios?

    Also will this fill my whole screen or will i have black borders?

    Sorry, this is all probably been talked about before but i need some answers now as i'm just about to order.

    Cheers :)
     
  2. RHCP

    RHCP
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,313
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    Liverpool
    Ratings:
    +25
  3. LV426

    LV426
    Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    12,754
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere in South Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +4,908
    According to the IMDB, this film was originally shot at 1.85:1. So that's probably how it is presented on the DVD you intend to buy.

    Assuming your equipment is adjusted and set correctly, this will almost exactly fit the shape of a "widescreen" TV.
     
  4. RHCP

    RHCP
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,313
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    Liverpool
    Ratings:
    +25
    Thank you LV426 for you quick reply!

    So do i look for 16:9 or 2.35:1 when buying dvd's?

    1.85:1 :eek: now i am confused :confused:

    Cheers :)
     
  5. Liam @ Prog AV

    Liam @ Prog AV
    Well-known Member AVForums Sponsor

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2002
    Messages:
    8,498
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +827
    You've got:

    - 4:3 which is normal (almost square shaped)
    - 16:9 which is also 1.78:1 which will exactly fill a widescreen TV/Plasma/Projector
    - widescreen 1.85:1 which will have tiny black borders at the top and bottom of the image for some reason
    - cinemascope which is 2.35:1 like a super-duper widescreen (ever noticed at the cinema when the curtains draw even further width when going from trailers to some movies - this is 2.35:1)
     
  6. MrNPG

    MrNPG
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    714
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Location:
    Poole, Dorset
    Ratings:
    +44
    There are various different ratios that are used for "widescreen" presentations, 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 are the most commonly used.

    On a 1.85:1 ratio DVD, the image will fill your 42" plasma screen, on a 2.35:1 ratio DVD, you will still have black bars at the top and bottom (unless you use the Zoom function on your TV but this is NOT recommended as it affects the quality of the image).

    HTH
     
  7. RHCP

    RHCP
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,313
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Location:
    Liverpool
    Ratings:
    +25
    Brilliant :thumbsup:

    Thanks all :)
     
  8. yellowpostit

    yellowpostit
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    177
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Ratings:
    +0
    This is something that's always bugged me. How a 1.85:1 ratio entirely fills a 1.78:1 (16:9) screen. Like Liam says, it should have small bars top and bottom, but at least all the CRT's I've seen display it as 1.78:1, leaving me thinking it's zoomed in, and I'm missing something off the sides.
     
  9. Liam @ Prog AV

    Liam @ Prog AV
    Well-known Member AVForums Sponsor

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2002
    Messages:
    8,498
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +827
    Most CRTs have quite a bit of overscan dialled in, usually more than the amount of space taken up by small black borders on a 1.85:1 signal letterboxed onto a 1.78:1 disc.
     
  10. yellowpostit

    yellowpostit
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    177
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Ratings:
    +0
    So will my 436 display the bars properly?
     
  11. manomano

    manomano
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2005
    Messages:
    66
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    Ratings:
    +3
    gotta say im perplexed by this 'overscan issue' - in my opinion - surely a 1.85:1 widescreen movie should not completely fill a 16:9 tv - there should be small black bars.

    How is this resolved - does this happen on all plasmas? is it just on anamorphic dvds?
     
  12. LV426

    LV426
    Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    12,754
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere in South Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +4,908
    Nothing to be perplexed about. For mainly historic reasons, all TVs have overscan. It's part of the TV system specification and should be no more than 5% all round. It is not wrong for part of the signal to be truncated by overscan on all TV types.

    In the case of a 1.85:1 film, in the vertical direction, the part of the video signal that's truncated includes the small black bars.

    It doesn't need resolving.
     
  13. yellowpostit

    yellowpostit
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    177
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Ratings:
    +0
    But aren't I missing something in the horizontal, ie the sides of the picture?
     
  14. LV426

    LV426
    Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    12,754
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere in South Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +4,908
    Yes. And it's intentional. Anything that matters in the image is contained within a safe area slightly smaller than the whole frame. Overscanning (by another name) occurs in cinemas, too. I say again. It does not need resolving.
     
  15. Liam @ Prog AV

    Liam @ Prog AV
    Well-known Member AVForums Sponsor

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2002
    Messages:
    8,498
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +827
    What Nigel said.
     
  16. Figment

    Figment
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2005
    Messages:
    811
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +39
    Sorry but being quite new to this and having just got my new PV500 the first widescreen I have owned I too am perplexed, if not to say dismayed also.
    Having just bought some DVD's all in "widescreen" 2.35:1 I assumed that was one of the main reasons for getting widescreen display so that widescreen DVD's filled it. I now find that I still have black bars when watching these and feel somewhat cheated. What is the point of having a "widescreen" display and buying "widescreen" DVD's when they dont match up ? Surely most lay-people would expect this and not have to use a zoom.
    Is there a ratio that does fill the display of 16:9 without loosing part of the image ? if so what is it?, if so why is it not widely available? and if not why not ?. I am probably being a bit thick here but to me it just seems logical. If I bought a gallon of oil it would fit in a gallon can would it not ? Ahh unless of course it was a US gallon then there would be room to spare, dont tell me US widescreen is not the same as ours ?.
     
  17. Liam @ Prog AV

    Liam @ Prog AV
    Well-known Member AVForums Sponsor

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2002
    Messages:
    8,498
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +827
    2.35:1 is not widescreen it's Cinemascope. If we all had Cinemascope TVs we'd all be complaining about black bars at the sides on 16:9, 16:10 and 4:3 stuff!!!! No need to feel cheated, it's completely normal. If you wish you can zoom it up, but to retain proportion this will mean chopping the sides to get it to fit. This would then be the equivalent of having bought the same disc in 1.78:1 widescreen.
     
  18. Figment

    Figment
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2005
    Messages:
    811
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +39
    Thanks Shirley....I mean Liam...think I got it...but now my brain hurts :rolleyes:
     
  19. Liam @ Prog AV

    Liam @ Prog AV
    Well-known Member AVForums Sponsor

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2002
    Messages:
    8,498
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Kent
    Ratings:
    +827
    :rotfl: :rotfl: No worries fig
     
  20. TeresaTT

    TeresaTT
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2004
    Messages:
    507
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Walsall
    Ratings:
    +13
    Not only does the Zoom function affect the quality of the picture but anamorphic images will be shown in the wrong proportion, ie tall thin people. The only way to watch an anamorphic image is to stretch it sideways.

    However my DVD player has a zoom function that will enlarge anamorphic pictures in the correct proportions although I never use it. I've not come across this feature on TVs.

    Some older widescreen DVDs aren't anamorphic but letterboxed with black bars top and bottom and at the sides. These need to be zoomed into. I have a few DVDs like this and the quality does suffer a little. Thankfully pretty much all new DVDs are anamorphic.

    Does anyone remember flippers? :) (In the context of DVDs that is.)

    Teresa
     
  21. yellowpostit

    yellowpostit
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    177
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Ratings:
    +0
    But who decides what matters, and what are the parameters for this 'safe area'? It sounds a bit arbitrary to me. Why can't I see the image as the film maker intended?
     
  22. LV426

    LV426
    Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    12,754
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere in South Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +4,908
    What is it, that makes you believe that you arent? Overscanning (by another name) occurs in Cinemas, too. It's no more abitrary than the film maker deciding exactly where to point his camera, and what zoom setting to use. When doing so, they take into account, the safe area of which I speak. It really is that simple.
     
  23. MAW

    MAW
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    14,082
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    Nr Dorking
    Ratings:
    +412
    5% can be generous though. You need 2% to get rid of edge artefacts with TV material, ever seen that little bit of black and white flickering? Usually on MTV and similar low rent channels. DVD does not usually do this, so not too much problem. Most plasmas can adjust overscan to be 'just enough' and not too much.
     
  24. yellowpostit

    yellowpostit
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    177
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Ratings:
    +0
    LV426 (or can I call you "Hadley's Hope?!") - cheers man, but I still don't get it. The film makers choice of where to point the camera and what zoom setting to use is influenced by artistic license, but this overscanning is purely technical. I get MAL's point about why you would want to overscan TV images when there's those fuzzy black and white bits around the edges, but as that's not a problem with DVD, so I'd want to see everything that the film maker chose to point his camera at. What makes me beleive that I'm not seeing the whole image is that I imagine this overscan to fill the screen in the Y-axis by the same height (top and bottom) as the small black bars, and as long as it doesn't squash the actual image in the X-axis, it must overscan some of it (left and right). And I don't know what you mean by 'safe'. Why is it safe, how could it be unsafe? Is it potentially dangerous somehow?

    Sorry to bug you, I just wanna understand!!
     
  25. LV426

    LV426
    Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    12,754
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere in South Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +4,908
    How about putting it this way:

    The central portion of the image (say 95% of it in both directions) is the director's vision, and is what you are intended to see.

    As the filmmaker does his thing, he will take into account that this is the case. He will point his camera such that anything important is wholly within this area.

    The rest (the remaining 5%) is something that is there on the shot film, but it matters not a jot whether you see it or not.

    In the real world, there is nothing precise about how projectors are aimed at cinema screens, how the screen masking is configured, and so on. Likewise scanning of electrons on CRT TVs. This is why the concept of a safe area exists. "Safe" in this context means (to the filmmaker, say) that it is a "safe" to assume that the viewer WILL see this part of the image. And conversely it is not "safe" to assume they will see anything outside of it.

    So it is wholly true that you may be missing something when there is overscan. That I don't deny. My point is, that is is intentionally unimportant; that not seeing whatever is cropped off matters not one jot (except to pure theorists and/or fanatics) so long as it's within spec.
     
  26. yellowpostit

    yellowpostit
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    177
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Ratings:
    +0
    LV426 - cheers, that was quite clear!

    But what about something like Shark Tale or Shrek or something like that. The film maker isn't pointing a camera, but spending literally thousands of hours carefully animating everything on screen. Does your explanation mean that potentially they have spent many many many painstaking hours animating things in an 'unsafe area'? I would have thought they'd want to avoid that!
     
  27. LV426

    LV426
    Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    12,754
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere in South Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +4,908
    Real camera, digital "camera", paintbrush, whatever - makes no difference. As I say, everybody recognises that there is nothing precise about pointing a projector at a screen or moving adjustable masking..........the unsafe area has to be there just in case. And they all (should) know it. And cater for it.
     
  28. yellowpostit

    yellowpostit
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2005
    Messages:
    177
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Ratings:
    +0
    Wow. Now I know. I think I'm going to be one of those people that's always left wondering what lies at the edges (sounds a bit surreal!).

    One more trivia question based on your name: what was the name of the solar system that LV426 orbited?
     
  29. chedmaster

    chedmaster
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Messages:
    2,654
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    68
    Ratings:
    +28
    ever seen a camera in a documentary/making of? you see the big area, then a dotted box like this:

    [ ]

    and the director knows thats where he shoots.

    same with widescreen cameras, they have 16:9 displays like this:

    [ | | ] where all the important stuff (for TV anyway) will be in between the vertical lines, so that when it is trimmed by say, a sky box, they won't miss anything too important. you can see it on widescreen TV shows like the OC (season 2/3) and 24.
     
  30. bishman

    bishman
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2001
    Messages:
    4,902
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    hertford
    Ratings:
    +172
    I'd concentrate more on the main image than wondering what might be just off to the sides! You could see a film at the cinema and watch it at the home but if the cinema was set up slightly off, you might see more on one side at home than you did in the cinema. Obvioulsy the other side would show more at the cinema than at home.

    It really, really doesn't matter. :)
     

Share This Page

Loading...