Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mr Skrunts]

Is TV changeing again.

http://www.richersounds.com/product/lcd-tv/philips/56pfl9954/phil-56pfl9954

http://www.caron-informatique.fr/catalog/images/Image/Image%20et%20son/televiseur/56pfl9954h.jpg

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/07/31/review_hd_tv_philips_cinema_21_9_56pfl9954h/print.html

[Jimbob]

21:9 or 2.33:1......just getting nearer the 2.35:1 cinema standard  :-/

[cem_devecioglu]

still  too many channels are 4:3 ..

and I dont have enough deep pockets to follow that technology.. :-/

[Chris_H]

The 16:9 ratio was worked out on the basis of being pleasing to the eye (or more literally both eyes! ) and has been recognised in the art world for a long time.  I'm not sure where the cinema lot got the ratio for cinemascope etc. but it was probably more a case of "what they could do" than how pleasant the experience was.

The original 4:3 was only a gesture at a landscape aspect ratio and was always wasting good sensor-space on the circular imagers that preceded CCD pickups.  There was a foray into 5:4 when some crt manufacturers went bonkers and I never found out why they did it - there were never any 5:4 pictures originated AFAIK so all you got was skinny people and elliptical circles.

I can't see 16:9 being superceded for domestic use; advertising yes, games possibly, the stock-exchange yes, transport arrivals/departures lists (portrait) yes.  We already have extremely-wide displays at football matches!

[tunnie]

it all depends what the broadcasters do, unless watching something on blueray thats designed for that size, anything else will just be up-scaled

[Chris_H]

it all depends what the broadcasters do, unless watching something on blueray thats designed for that size, anything else will just be up-scaled

That's where it gets messy.  You can't "just upscale" between aspect ratios without losing picture or wasting display area with blank panels, or distorting the image.  Then you need to give the user a way of choosing which of those options to implement. Yuck!

[Mr Skrunts]

I looked at the physical size of the Phillips and my Panasonic.

I like the size of the Philips but it seems I would lose Screen viewing height if I got one.  Which is the thing that would put be off it, so maybe it would have to be a 60" if I ever replace this one.

[tunnie]

it all depends what the broadcasters do, unless watching something on blueray thats designed for that size, anything else will just be up-scaled

That's where it gets messy.  You can't "just upscale" between aspect ratios without losing picture or wasting display area with blank panels, or distorting the image.  Then you need to give the user a way of choosing which of those options to implement. Yuck!

Exactly problem we have in mobile TV encoding, although broadcast at 16:9, some shows are 4:3

[Chris_H]

it all depends what the broadcasters do, unless watching something on blueray thats designed for that size, anything else will just be up-scaled

That's where it gets messy.  You can't "just upscale" between aspect ratios without losing picture or wasting display area with blank panels, or distorting the image.  Then you need to give the user a way of choosing which of those options to implement. Yuck!

Exactly problem we have in mobile TV encoding, although broadcast at 16:9, some shows are 4:3

Yes, that's another reason for even more aspect ratios.  Mobile device manufacturers pluck display dimensions out of the air then feel obliged to show video on them!

[tunnie]

it all depends what the broadcasters do, unless watching something on blueray thats designed for that size, anything else will just be up-scaled

That's where it gets messy.  You can't "just upscale" between aspect ratios without losing picture or wasting display area with blank panels, or distorting the image.  Then you need to give the user a way of choosing which of those options to implement. Yuck!

Exactly problem we have in mobile TV encoding, although broadcast at 16:9, some shows are 4:3

Yes, that's another reason for even more aspect ratios.  Mobile device manufacturers pluck display dimensions out of the air then feel obliged to show video on them!

Its a bit of a headache for us, we use CDN's do deliver the content, but of course it needs to be in the right aspect ratio first!

Can't see it becoming unified any time soon, what with Apple going their way, Nokia the other 

[Chris_H]

it all depends what the broadcasters do, unless watching something on blueray thats designed for that size, anything else will just be up-scaled

That's where it gets messy.  You can't "just upscale" between aspect ratios without losing picture or wasting display area with blank panels, or distorting the image.  Then you need to give the user a way of choosing which of those options to implement. Yuck!

Exactly problem we have in mobile TV encoding, although broadcast at 16:9, some shows are 4:3

Yes, that's another reason for even more aspect ratios.  Mobile device manufacturers pluck display dimensions out of the air then feel obliged to show video on them!

Its a bit of a headache for us, we use CDN's do deliver the content, but of course it needs to be in the right aspect ratio first!

Can't see it becoming unified any time soon, what with Apple going their way, Nokia the other 

There are lots of tools for converting to any aspect ratio you want - in fact the structure of broadcasters is rapidly moving to one where the original material is held on a server and called-off at whatever resolution, frame-rate, data-rate or aspect ratio is requested - often automatically.

The aggro (apart from pan-and-scan conversions) is matching original material to the display aspect ratio.