M
I've been hearing for 3 years that 'everything' will be widescreen in 6 months time - it just never quite seems to happen. I'd love to see some statistics on the percentage of material filmed in widescreen on each channel.
I've been hearing for 3 years that 'everything' will be widescreen in 6 months time - it just never quite seems to happen. I'd love to see some statistics on the percentage of material filmed in widescreen on each channel.
It really doesn't matter whether is it broadcast in widescreen. What really matters is whether it was shot in widescreen.By clicking the link to each programme tells whether it's broadcast in widescreen or not.
It really doesn't matter whether is it broadcast in widescreen. What really matters is whether it was shot in widescreen.
You only need to worry about how the director intended the picture to be seen in films and the vast majority of films are made for the cinema, not TV, and therefore shot in one of various widescreen aspect ratios. The way TV stations got around this was by using a pan and scan device in the 4:3 aspect ratio which enabled them to broadcast the most relevant part of the movie - but not it all.My logic is that if material was not shot in widescreen, then when it is either transmitted in widescreen or watched on a widescreen TV in one of the 'adjusted' modes, you are not watching the picture the director intended - you are watching a cropped or adjusted version of the picture.
Not true. Widescreen TV's are fully capable of displaying exactly the same picture you would see on a 4:3 TV. A 32" widescreen would be the equivalent of a 28" normal TVYou can't fit a 4:3 picture onto a 16:9 screen without losing something.
That's exactly my point! As you say yourself, 'not it all'. The pan-and-scan device means you see a cropped or adjusted version of the original picture. It is not as the director intended.The way TV stations got around this was by using a pan and scan device in the 4:3 aspect ratio which enabled them to broadcast the most relevant part of the movie - but not it all.
As we approach the panto season, I'll respond with 'Oh yes it is'. You can't fit a 4:3 picture onto a 16:9 screen without losing something. When a 4:3 picture is displayed on a 16:9 screen, you can either display it inNot true. Widescreen TV's are fully capable of displaying exactly the same picture you would see on a 4:3 TV.
I'm glad we agree on something. This was one of issues for me in deciding to choose a normal TV on my last purchase. The 32" widescreen & the (much cheaper) 29" normal TV were side by side, and it was clear that the picture sizes were roughly equivalent. In fact, even when some materials were broadcast in widescreen (e.g. E.R.), the normal ratio TV shows them in widescreen mode (with bars on the top/bottom of the screen). The resulting image size was roughly the same as the 32" widescreen, so there was no good reason to choose the widescreen TV.A 32" widescreen would be the equivalent of a 28" normal TV
My logic is that if material was not shot in widescreen, then when it is either transmitted in widescreen or watched on a widescreen TV in one of the 'adjusted' modes, you are not watching the picture the director intended - you are watching a cropped or adjusted version of the picture. You can't fit a square peg in a round hole. You can't fit a 4:3 picture onto a 16:9 screen without losing something.
By mid January a fix will be available to make the DVI jack on Sagem's Axium DLP rear projection TV HDCP compatible.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?