http://gamingtrend.com
August 28, 2014, 01:50:34 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: HDTV  (Read 4282 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
DarkEL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2931



View Profile WWW
« on: November 17, 2005, 08:32:35 PM »

With the impending delivery of my 360 next week - I'm finding myself suddenly wanting an HDTV more and more.  But I'm on a tight budget this year and so any TV purchases would go on an already too-big credit card bill.

So hoping that some of our more audio/video technophiles here could help me out with some recommendations / warnings /etc.

From my understanding since I use digital cable - I don't need an HD tuner in the TV - just somethings that's HD-ready.

So I'm looking for something that's going to give me a good trade off between size and performance. Originally was thinking around $500 - $800 (course the wife wants it below that $500 mark).

The tv would go in the living room and be hooked up to the digital cable and the 360 of course. I'll be sitting about 4-6 feet away from it normally but would still like something that's viewable from further away as well.

I assume it's in my best interest to get a widescreen format picture. Is that correct?

I saw this Sony and thought it looked pretty good even though it is at the top of price range I could push past the wife after buying the 360 already.
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=6494135&type=product&productCategoryId=cat15072&id=1077628885856

Any help is greatly appreciated, and will of course free up my mental energys to get more code written for the new site.
Logged
Hetz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4217


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 17, 2005, 08:46:38 PM »

I just picked up this TV for our bedroom about a month ago. I got it as an open item at Circuit City for $750.

It does 480p/720p/1080i and has a built in tuner. It also has HDMI inputs which are pretty much essential for the future of HD. I am very pleased with it.

Samsungs are flatout amazing when it comes to picture quality.

With the Xbpx 360, you really need an HDTV to take full advantage of it. I played a little bit of Kameo on my regular TV that doesn't even do 480p and it looked ok, but not near as good as it did on my 720p widescreen. It didn't look bad, but I think I was spoiled by playing it in 720p first.
Logged

XBox Live: Hetz OO
PSN: Hetz76
Steam: hetz_gg
Knightshade Dragon
Administrator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 21054



View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 17, 2005, 10:18:34 PM »

I'll agree with Hetz on the Samsung thing.  They look really solid for the price.  As for widescreen - yea, the industry is moving that direction, and once you see your favorite movie widescreen, you just can't go back.  

You might take a look at DLP TVs as well - the maintenance is FAR less than plasma and they look pretty damn sharp.

As for the HDTV thing, I'm all good to go for HD...but my carrier doesn't carry it.  :/  The end result is that TV just looks ugly (in comparison) as the receiver only supports composite.  Similarly, my TiVo only supports S-Video at the most.
Logged

Ron Burke
EiC, Director of Gaming Trend
Gamertag:
Gaming Trend
PS3 Tag: GamingTrend
JCC
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2366


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 17, 2005, 10:40:49 PM »

I have the 32" (non-widescreen) version of that Sony, and I love it. Keep in mind when deciding on Normal vs widescreen that a 32" TV gives you a widescreen picture equivalent to a 29" widescreen. Whereas, a 30" widescreen's SD pictures is equivalent to around a 24" regular TV. Just something to consider.
Logged

-John

XBox Live ID: "JCC Davros"
egrudzin
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 199


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 17, 2005, 11:26:52 PM »

I have the TV you linked to.  It's awesome.  I got it on sale and saved a couple hundred bucks.  One of the best electronics purchases I've made.  One downside is that it has no HD tuner (just a regular one). but chances are you'll wind up getting a set-top box from your cable/satellite provider anyway.

When I was shopping for new TVs I read a lot of home theater enthsuast forums and they basically said that if you want HD for under $1000 and don't want to screw around or don't know what you're doing, get the Sony.
Logged
DamageInc
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2412


Starts with s and ends with litting their throats


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 17, 2005, 11:56:36 PM »

DLP is a great technology for price and performance.
Samsung actually makes many of the components Sony uses.

The TV you picked out would be fine as long as you get 720p with that 1080i

If you are going to spend the $$ it would be best to get a TV with 720p.
Logged

The freaks come out at nine and it's twenty to ten
Thin_J
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3409


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: November 18, 2005, 02:40:25 AM »

The smaller Samsung's have geometry issues that make the screen warp slightly at the sides and/or bottom.

I was skeptical of this info at first, but when I went into stores to look at one.. sure enough, there was warping at the sides of the screen.

It's not an issue with quality of one set either. It's related directly to a couple of the design choices on the innards of the TV. I noticed it on three different displays in three different stores.

On the other hand, some people can't seem to see it. When I was checking out the TV in the store a friend of mine said he couldn't see the warping. I had to hold an ink pen up to the screen for him to notice it. So it may be a trivial little thing that you won't notice. It drove me nuts to look at it for thirty seconds. Maybe it's the thought of spending that much money on something that isn't as good as it could be for the price. As always, your mileage may vary.

The Sony is a better buy quality wise and is $100 cheaper to boot. The only thing the Samsung has over the sony is the built in tuner, but if your primary use of the HD function on the TV is going to be your gaming then the tuner isn't really necessary.

That Sony is actually the exact TV I plan to pick up when I get the 360 for myself.

As usual, most of my info originated on AVS forums. That's easily the best place to ask around about stuff like this.

Quote from: "JCC"
I have the 32" (non-widescreen) version of that Sony, and I love it. Keep in mind when deciding on Normal vs widescreen that a 32" TV gives you a widescreen picture equivalent to a 29" widescreen. Whereas, a 30" widescreen's SD pictures is equivalent to around a 24" regular TV. Just something to consider.


And that.. well, that's an issue for anyone who watches a lot of regular TV right now. Until the whole industry switches over to widescreen it will be an issue for a lot of people, and it is something that big TV watchers should consider.
Logged

Xbox Live: Thin J
PSN: Thin_J
JCC
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2366


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: November 18, 2005, 03:40:49 AM »

ThinJ,

Yep, and that was my main reason for going with a normal TV for my entry into HD. For me, it was a nice choice, since there is even less HD content available than even I guessed. I am sure that's the last non widescreen TV I will ever buy, and there are times I wished I had bought a widescreen (and bigger) TV, but it will wait for a year or two. smile

Edited to add, ThinJ mentioned the AVS Forums. This is an essential forum for anyone looking to make an informed decision about buying virtually any piece of audio/video equipment.
Logged

-John

XBox Live ID: "JCC Davros"
Crawley
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1686


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: November 18, 2005, 03:41:57 AM »

I've been looking in to HDTV's for a few months now and am no expert but if you are looking for them I would reccomend checking out http://www.avsforum.com/ as there is a plethora of audio and videophiles there who really know what they're talking about.
Logged
Hetz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4217


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: November 18, 2005, 03:58:46 AM »

I went with widescreen because I am a big movie watcher (I don't watch much TV and the TV I do watch is mostly in widescreen HD ie. Lost). Also with the XBox 360, all the games are in widescreen HD, which is another plus. In fact, Gun forces people that have non-widescreen sets to have a letterbox version of the game and it doesn't fill up the whole screen, I'm not sure if other games do that or not.

Now with more and more HD content on TV, I think if this is a set you want to keep for more than a year or two, it would be silly to get one that is not widescreen.
Logged

XBox Live: Hetz OO
PSN: Hetz76
Steam: hetz_gg
Thin_J
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3409


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: November 18, 2005, 04:06:02 AM »

See, for me the widescreen issue isn't an issue. I don't watch TV. I just watch movies and play games, so going with a widescreen is a no brainer.
Logged

Xbox Live: Thin J
PSN: Thin_J
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: November 18, 2005, 04:14:35 AM »

Quote from: "Hetz"
Now with more and more HD content on TV, I think if this is a set you want to keep for more than a year or two, it would be silly to get one that is not widescreen.


Read what JCC said carefully- at that pricerange you get a better deal going with a 32" 4:3 set than a 30" 16:9 set since the 32" 4:3 buys you essentially identical screen real estate for 16:9 content (29" viewable area) and a 32" picture vice 24" picture for 4:3 content.  You sacrifice nothing.  

There is pretty much zero advantage to a widescreen set in this specific case unless you find black bars distracting (I tune them out).

Before the nazis attack, again I must reiterate this is for a very specific price target.  Anyone looking to spend over $1000 is much better off going with a widescreen larger (42"+) set.  

I just purchased a 4:3 HDTV primarily for gaming for this exact reason since I had a limit on how much I could spend on a TV that it is primarily used for gaming.  Once I did the math on viewable screen area for 30" widescreen and 32" 4:3 sets the decision was a no brainer.  We also have a 55" Mitsibishi Diamond widescreen HDTV in the living room that is exclusively for movies and television.
Logged
JCC
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2366


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: November 18, 2005, 04:15:42 AM »

Agree with those who had valid reasons for widescreen. I primarily watch sports on TV, and it's frankly appalling to me how much of it (especially college footbal. *ahem* ABC *ahem*) is NOT in HD. In a year or two I will get a much bigger (and much wider) HD TV. I hope the prices will be even lower by that time! It'd be cool if the HD TVs could be priced lower than the game consoles! Tongue
Logged

-John

XBox Live ID: "JCC Davros"
DarkEL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2931



View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: November 20, 2005, 03:45:04 AM »

Follow-Up.

I just got back from Best Buy with the 30" Widescreen Samsung that Hetz recommended (and a progressive scan DVD - so I can enjoy this bad boy while waiting for my 360).

Best Buy had the Sony model I picked earlier and this Samsung sitting side by side so I could easily compare picture quality and the Samsung was quite noticably a crisper, clearer image.

I'll be hooking it all up over the next few hours and post a follow up later.
Logged
Eco-Logic
Gaming Trend Member
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2927


Gamertag: St0ckBroker


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: November 20, 2005, 04:05:32 AM »

Quote from: "DarkEL"
Follow-Up.

I just got back from Best Buy with the 30" Widescreen Samsung that Hetz recommended (and a progressive scan DVD - so I can enjoy this bad boy while waiting for my 360).

Best Buy had the Sony model I picked earlier and this Samsung sitting side by side so I could easily compare picture quality and the Samsung was quite noticably a crisper, clearer image.

I'll be hooking it all up over the next few hours and post a follow up later.


I've got the 34 inch version and I love it.  No 360 for it though, for a while at least.  

Great purchase, congrats!
Logged

This signature is intentional, ie not a mistake.  If you thing Rick Perry should be forced to resign for this crap, you're part of the problem with our country.  Give me a freaking break.
shon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 689


View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 20, 2005, 04:27:03 AM »

I wanted an HDTV 2 years ago but they were too expensive so I went and found a DLP front projector the Infocus X1 and couldn't be more pleased.  It does 480p/720p/1080i and it does very well.

If you can't afford a big HDTV right now this maybe your best opportunity. I paid about 950 for everything and have a 100' wide screen tv.
Logged

Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 20, 2005, 05:54:08 AM »

Quote from: "Kevin Grey"
Read what JCC said carefully- at that pricerange you get a better deal going with a 32" 4:3 set than a 30" 16:9 set since the 32" 4:3 buys you essentially identical screen real estate for 16:9 content (29" viewable area) and a 32" picture vice 24" picture for 4:3 content.  You sacrifice nothing.  

There is pretty much zero advantage to a widescreen set in this specific case unless you find black bars distracting (I tune them out).

Before the nazis attack, again I must reiterate this is for a very specific price target.  Anyone looking to spend over $1000 is much better off going with a widescreen larger (42"+) set.  


Slow down bucko... first for the Nazi comment. People who are avid about their toys are NOT the same as a facist regime who had the wherewithal to commit genocide AND pursue world domination at the same time.

The context is Eldon looking for an HD set. We'll stick to the thread on this.

To start things off, when you play games, or watch movies, what direction is commonly panned?

Left <---> Right   or    Up <--->Down? Think about it. The height of the picture is not nearly as critical as peripheral vision. Your eyes just don't work that way.

As to zero loss... lets do some quick math...

480i = 307,200 pixels, 153,600 per frame (standard TV)
480p = 307,200 pixels, 307,200 per frame (DVD quality... requires proscan) This is the default Xbox1 resolution
720p =  921,600 pixels, 921,600 per frame (HDTV, common with sports as it runs 60fps) Minimum required for x360 titles
1080i (540p) = 2,073,600 pixels, 1,036,800 per frame (HDTV)
1080p = 2,073,600 pixels, 2,073,600 per frame (non-ratified HDTV... not truly a standard and bandwidth is cost-prohibitive for broadcast as it takes twice the required space of either 720p or 1080i)


Inch per inch, regardless of screen SIZE, the resolution makes a BIG difference. To go to 480p from 720p is a 2/3 loss of screen resolution regardless of shape. That's like going from 1024x768 on your monitor down to 320x200. If he stated he wanted to watch full frame analog TV and get the most out of it, you'd be bang on. Oh, and that 307,200 is only progressive, if your set doesn't do progressive that means your down to 150K worth of per-frame pixels.
 
The industry is working towards completely digital content. This does NOT mean that 16:9 sets will completely replace the 4:3 in the next few years. What it DOES mean is that people get more out of it, and if the black horizontal bars don't bother you then the vertical grey bars shouldn't bother you either.

I can speak to the Sony TV set you were looking at buying Eldon, I have it's 2003 model. (has a memory stick plug and some other bells and whistles that were yanked last year to bring down the cost). It's awesome, it's affordable, and it's beautiful. The nice thing about this set (along with the stand) is that Sony provides a child-safe setup... it'd take a monumental amount of effort for ME to tip the television forward. I have a 2yr old, and this was a concern at the time of purchase.

The remote works well, the set is watchable close or at a distance, and the colors pop (after I used Avia to properly calibrate it).

Sounds like you found your set, I'm happy for ya. smile
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: November 20, 2005, 06:44:54 AM »

Quote from: "Purge"
Inch per inch, regardless of screen SIZE, the resolution makes a BIG difference.


Good thing then that resolution wasn't a factor since we were talking about HDTV all along isn't it?  Given that SD TVs were never the issue here, then SIZE certainly is a consideration and my point was specifically on how a 32" 4:3 HDTV will provide the same SIZE 16:9 picture as a 30" 16:9 HDTV while providing a substantial increase in SD 4:3 content.
Logged
Hetz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4217


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: November 20, 2005, 01:39:34 PM »

Quote from: "Kevin Grey"
Quote from: "Purge"
Inch per inch, regardless of screen SIZE, the resolution makes a BIG difference.


Good thing then that resolution wasn't a factor since we were talking about HDTV all along isn't it?  Given that SD TVs were never the issue here, then SIZE certainly is a consideration and my point was specifically on how a 32" 4:3 HDTV will provide the same SIZE 16:9 picture as a 30" 16:9 HDTV while providing a substantial increase in SD 4:3 content.


Yeah, but 4:3 is SOOOO 1990's!   :wink:
Logged

XBox Live: Hetz OO
PSN: Hetz76
Steam: hetz_gg
Hetz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4217


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: November 20, 2005, 01:40:37 PM »

Quote from: "DarkEL"
Follow-Up.

I just got back from Best Buy with the 30" Widescreen Samsung that Hetz recommended (and a progressive scan DVD - so I can enjoy this bad boy while waiting for my 360).

Best Buy had the Sony model I picked earlier and this Samsung sitting side by side so I could easily compare picture quality and the Samsung was quite noticably a crisper, clearer image.

I'll be hooking it all up over the next few hours and post a follow up later.


Congrats, man!

Told ya the Samsungs were sharp as hell. I'm sure you will really enjoy the set.
Logged

XBox Live: Hetz OO
PSN: Hetz76
Steam: hetz_gg
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 20, 2005, 02:20:52 PM »

Quote from: "Kevin Grey"
Good thing then that resolution wasn't a factor since we were talking about HDTV all along isn't it?  Given that SD TVs were never the issue here, then SIZE certainly is a consideration and my point was specifically on how a 32" 4:3 HDTV will provide the same SIZE 16:9 picture as a 30" 16:9 HDTV while providing a substantial increase in SD 4:3 content.


I could write HDTV on a piece of white toast and it doesn't constitute it being HD(as clearly a piece of toast is way closer to 4:3 aspect slywink. The thing is the aspect ratio is also a constant, not a variable. Let's check what the FCC has to say about 4:3 HDTV :

4:3 isn't High Definition compliant.
Quote
HDTV is a type of DTV service. HDTV provides high resolution programming in a widescreen format.


Here's the FCC's consumer facts page...
Quote

Standard Definition TV (SDTV) - SDTV is the basic level of quality display and resolution for both analog and digital. Transmission of SDTV may be in either the traditional (4:3) or widescreen (16:9) format.

Enhanced Definition TV (EDTV) - EDTV is a step up from Analog Television. EDTV comes in 480p widescreen (16:9) or traditional (4:3) format and provides better picture quality than SDTV, but not as high as HDTV.

High Definition TV (HDTV) - HDTV in widescreen format (16:9) provides the highest resolution and picture quality of all digital broadcast formats. Combined with digitally enhanced sound technology, HDTV sets new standards for sound and picture quality in television. (Note: HDTV and digital TV are not the same thing -- HDTV is one format of digital TV.)


You'll note there is no 4:3 HDTV. That's the way it is. When talking HDTV there currently IS only one apect ratio (16:9). Anything else is does not fall within HDTV compliance. In all seriousness a 4:3 HDTV set would need an even HIGHER Resolution to properly show widescreen 1080i /720p signal and letterbox the unused space to meet the screen shape required.

some quick math :

1920 vertical lines (required to display the full width of an HD signal) which would mean you'd have a 4:3 set that does (¹) 1920x1440, significantly higher resolution than 1920x1080. You would then waste (²) 691200 pixels or (³) 1920x360 worth of that HDTV 4:3 set.

¹ - (1920/4)*3=1440 (Y axis)
² - (1920x1440)-(1920*1080)=691200 (pixels used in letterbox)
³ - (691200/1920)=360 (Y axis lines wasted)

To answer the question
Quote from: "DarkEl"
I assume it's in my best interest to get a widescreen format picture[when buying an HDTV]. Is that correct?


There is no other way to get a HDTV. biggrin Clearly he's done that, so this point is now moot.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: November 20, 2005, 03:01:57 PM »

Quote
You'll note there is no 4:3 for HDTV. That's the way it is. When talking HDTV there currently IS only one apect ratio (16:9). Anything else is NOT HDTV. (nor would it meet the standard requirements set by the FCC). In all seriousness a 4:3 HDTV set would need an even HIGHER Resolution to properly show widescreen 1080i /720p signal and letterbox the unused space to meet the screen shape required.


I'm now convinced that you are merely regurgitating google quotes with no knowledge of what they mean.

HD encoded material is officially encoded in 16:9 format- that has zero to do with the TV.  

Letterboxing is not a part of the signal and is actually done by the TV itself.  The 1080 lines of resolution are displayed, by the television, within the borders of the letterboxing itself- no resolution is lost at all.  If I display a 16:9 HD signal on a 32" 4:3 TV, then the entire 1080 lines of resolution are displayed in the 30" letterboxed area.

Its the same principal as the difference between anamorphically encoded DVDs and non-anamorphic letterbox DVDs.  

It sounds like you are trying to say that a 4:3 TV cannot be High Def in which case you are 100% wrong.
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #22 on: November 20, 2005, 03:39:17 PM »

Quote from: "Kevin Grey"
I'm now convinced that you are merely regurgitating google quotes with no knowledge of what they mean.

And that comment was intended to do what?  :? Help the discussion? Answer a question?

I believe I stated the word "properly". :idea: Be as convinced as you want, I actually went to the FCC site directly so we could get it straight from the horses mouth. Note how I didn't quote Wikipedia or any other "fyi" site.

Look, if you don't letterbox on a 4:3 set, mini-me becomes Larry Bird. Anamorphic Widescreen recording is based on resolution on the actual film used (to maximize the space) and then transferring the image from film to media, DVD being the most common use (as not all VHS titles got the "widescreen" treatment). Or at least, that is how I understand it. I'm not above admitting where I'm wrong, KG. It's bound to happen.

We are talking aspect, aren't we? I'm well aware of the fact that TVs can stretch/shrink the image to fit the display, the problem is that you're not going to find a 4:3 set that is going to display the image properly and at a truly "high definition" in the proper aspect (unless the native resolution of your television is at 1920x1440). On top of which you'd need to find a 4:3 set that does component / HDMI / DVI). I had a Sony VVega 34" back in 2000 that did it, but the picture was garbage. It accepts the signal, but then down-converts it to it's own native resolution (480p). You are sacrificing image quality to be able to watch reruns of Seinfeld on the "classic" 4:3 set.

It doesn't matter if you are looking at a sharp picture through a muddy display, you are limited by the maximum res your image is being put through. End of story.

FYI: I have an HDTV for my set, so most primetime TV comes in HD just fine. Widescreen and all. My next set will have a built-in HDTV tuner, so I'm holding off for a few years. I had a 51" Sony RPTV, as well as a 51" Hitachi (Sony was exchanged due to the green flicker flaw). The ex wanted the 51"; I took the 30" Sony CRT HDTV. Also, I use my 2405FPW for HD signal once in a while.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: November 20, 2005, 03:59:32 PM »

Purge, it looks to me like you don't understand that there are, in fact, true HD 4:3 sets.  I own one (as well as a 16:9 HD set).

Here is how it works- the TV is capable of decoding the full 1080 lines of resolution 16:9 image.  To make the 16:9 image fit, the TV adds letterboxing to the top and bottom of the image and squeezes the image into the center.  Since the TV is adding these after the fact, the entire 1080 encoded image is diplayed within the letterboxed area.  

So if you have a 32" 4:3 dimensioned set, you will get a 29" 16:9 area in the middle of the TV with full resolution in that 29" area.  No loss of aspect ratio or resolution.

You are wrong in your FCC quotes because they refer strictly the to the signal- all offiicial HD material must be encoded in a 16:9 aspect ratio.  So yeah, if someone said they watching a 4:3 image in High Def then they'd be wrong but that isn't what I'm referring.  

The anamorphic comparison is this:

With a non-anamorphic widescreen DVD, the letterboxing is actually a part of the video signal.  So a substantial portion of those 480 lines of resolution are being taken up with black bars and not actual picture signal.  

Anamorphically encoded DVDs use the full 480 lines of resolution for the picture signal and have the DVD player add the black bars after the fact, just like a 4:3 TV is doing for 16:9 material or a 16:9 TV does with 4:3 material.  When played back on a TV that supports anamorphic material (which doesn't have to be HD in this case) then the full 480 lines of signal are diplayed strictly for picture content and the black bars aren't included in those 480 lines.

Anamorphic has nothing to do with resolution of the actual film since that can vary based on the film equipment used (16mm, 32mm, Super35, HD cameras, etc) and type of master created later (HD is standard now).  You might be getting it confused because shooting a film anamorphically means something entirely different than  anamorphically encoding DVDs.
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #24 on: November 20, 2005, 05:20:05 PM »

I suppose if the set itself compresses the dots on the Y axis you could get the image you're referring to, however I'd like to know what model TV you have. I've yet to see one (although I'll be the first to admit I've not looked for one).

Since most of my desired viewing is HD it wouldn't impact my own purchasing agenda;  I watch DVDs, some HD TV shows, HD gaming and a little bit of standard TV. My screen-watching aspect is primarily 16:9 and 16:10 (PC)

Update:  found a Toshiba 32" TV that does it. I stand corrected. Apparently there are the two modes, one where the rest of the screen is painted black (thusly it IS likely firing 1440 lines of resolution as black ain't free), and grey bars (which is the more desired method to avoid potential burn-in).
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: November 20, 2005, 05:34:13 PM »

Quote from: "Purge"
how many dots can your television produce on the X and Y axis? Have you checked to make sure that it's not downconverting the signal after-the-fact? I suppose if the set itself compresses the dots on the Y axis you could get the image you're referring to, however I'd like to know what model TV you have. I've yet to see one (although I'll be the first to admit I've not looked for one).

Since most of my desired viewing is HD it wouldn't impact my own purchasing agenda;  I watch DVDs, some HD TV shows, HD gaming and a little bit of standard TV.


Panasonic 32HL15.  

From the manual:

Quote
No. of dots 1080i=1920x1080i


I believe Y axis compression is exactly what its doing.  

I don't expect this to be a solution for everyone (or even most people).  I brought this up in the specific case of someone who is looking at buying a 30" widescreen CRT since the 32" provides equivalent HD size and resolution and improved 32" SD size.  A very specific case to be sure but one anyone looking at a 30" widescreen CRT should consider.  

I'm a home theater fanatic and have been one for many years.  I take this stuff very seriously and would never have purchased something without knowing exactly what I'm getting.
Logged
DarkEL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2931



View Profile WWW
« Reply #26 on: November 20, 2005, 06:38:05 PM »

Quote from: "Hetz"
Quote from: "DarkEL"
Follow-Up.

I just got back from Best Buy with the 30" Widescreen Samsung that Hetz recommended (and a progressive scan DVD - so I can enjoy this bad boy while waiting for my 360).

Best Buy had the Sony model I picked earlier and this Samsung sitting side by side so I could easily compare picture quality and the Samsung was quite noticably a crisper, clearer image.

I'll be hooking it all up over the next few hours and post a follow up later.


Congrats, man!

Told ya the Samsungs were sharp as hell. I'm sure you will really enjoy the set.


Taking it back to Best Buy this afternoon.

picture is distorted on the top and bottom - sorta like the pincushion settings on a monitor so horizontal lines have a noticeable "bow" to them.  There's also a small grey line along the top "bow" - that's present all the time.

Doing a bit of research last night trying to troubleshoot it shows that apparently it's a common problem with the Samsung slim fit models.

Going to try and get Best buy to hook up the replacement there in the store so I can verify that it doesn't have any bowing before I go throuh all the hassle of lugging another one home.  Otherwise I'll trade it for the Sony model.

Was also very dissapointed and embarrassed trying to justify it to the wife when  we discovered that popping in a widescreen DVD movie still gave us huge amounts of black bars above and below the picture (like 4-6 inches each way) - now granted we could fill the screen by changing view from 16x9 to zoom:1 but then we lose some of the image. Losing that much screen real-estate really made me look like I had made a bad purchase in the wifes eyes.

Also all of the HD channels also leave black bars (albeit much smaller) above and below the pic in 16x9.
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: November 20, 2005, 07:21:04 PM »

that isn't normal; 16:9 should fill the screen. If you have a 16:10 display that may be the reason... (I suppose they should actually say 8:5 but that would mess up the avg consumer more.)

Note that some movies *will* still give you black bars, as the ratio is even higher.. (2.35:1 movies, for instance). Your set can stretch vertically to use the space, or you can live with it.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
gellar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8974


I'm a dolphin!


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: November 20, 2005, 07:27:34 PM »

Uh, change your devices (DVD Player/Cable Box) to know that you have a 16:9 TV.  That'll get rid of just about all the black bars, unless its a 2.35:1 DVD (in which case you'll have small black bars).

Happy HDing.

gellar
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: November 20, 2005, 07:39:22 PM »

What gellar said about chaning the DVD player settings and the 2:35 aspect ratio.

Your set's aspect ratio is 1.78:1.  Movies filmed with a 1.85:1 ratio will fill the screen but movies filmed 2:35:1 (LOTR, Star Wars, and many, many more) will still have black bars.
Logged
Roguetad
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1994


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: November 21, 2005, 12:24:17 AM »

For a tv that supports 480p and 1080i, but not 720p, will the xbox 360 upconvert to 1080i automatically?  Or is that something I'd have to do in the dashboard of the 360 or on the tv?

On my current xbox I have both 480p and 1080i set to "yes", but I have no idea if any of my xbox games have ever upconverted to 1080i.
Logged
Soulchilde
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5158


You and I have unfinished business


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: November 21, 2005, 12:30:55 AM »

My TV only does 480p, 480i and 1080i, so I the let the 360 do the up conversion.  I have it set to 1080i and it looks great
Logged

Quote from: Devil on January 12, 2007, 01:14:38 AM

NiM$
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: November 21, 2005, 01:15:24 AM »

Quote from: "Roguetad"
For a tv that supports 480p and 1080i, but not 720p, will the xbox 360 upconvert to 1080i automatically?  Or is that something I'd have to do in the dashboard of the 360 or on the tv?

On my current xbox I have both 480p and 1080i set to "yes", but I have no idea if any of my xbox games have ever upconverted to 1080i.


Xbox 1 does not upconvert.  The number of games that support 1080i natively on it can be counted on one hand I beieve (offhand I can only think of Matrix Reloaded and Dragon's Lair).
Logged
Knightshade Dragon
Administrator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 21054



View Profile WWW
« Reply #33 on: November 21, 2005, 04:27:52 AM »

And Syberia.
Logged

Ron Burke
EiC, Director of Gaming Trend
Gamertag:
Gaming Trend
PS3 Tag: GamingTrend
soulbringer
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 261



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: November 21, 2005, 04:28:52 AM »

Well just ordered me a http://sharpusa.com/products/ModelLanding/0,1058,1585,00.html from Bestbuy  Got a great deal on no financing plus i price matched with Circuit city to get about another $150 off.  So Now just gotta wait on the the 360 to arrive.
Logged
Harpua3
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2646


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: November 21, 2005, 09:03:44 AM »

Quote from: "JCC"
I have the 32" (non-widescreen) version of that Sony, and I love it. Keep in mind when deciding on Normal vs widescreen that a 32" TV gives you a widescreen picture equivalent to a 29" widescreen. Whereas, a 30" widescreen's SD pictures is equivalent to around a 24" regular TV. Just something to consider.


 I also have this TV biggrin , and I`m very happy with it as you can see :wink: .
Logged
DarkEL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2931



View Profile WWW
« Reply #36 on: December 19, 2005, 08:11:41 AM »

Figured I should post a follow-up to this thread to let everyone know the adventure I've had so far.

I finally took the Samsung 30" back to Best Buy for the final time this evening.

The image warping on the first one was so drastic that i took it back the very next day and then had to go through 3 additional sets at 2 Best Buy stores before i found one where there was no noticeable bowing of the image around the edges.

Been using it for the last several weeks but did notice a few days later that there were still some minor bowing and slight warping that was visible mainly when looking at pure horizontal lines and scrolling text. But after the huge ordeal I had in getting this one, I found the image issues to be something i could easily ignore to save myself of having to repeat the hassle.

The last few days it seemed like it was starting to get a little harder to ignore, to the point where even the wife commented about it once.

The straw that broke the camels back though was turning on the TV this afternoon to discover the tube starting to go bad with the upper right corner suddenly having a blue discoloration.

Took it back to Best Buy figuring that I was done with this model. Unfortunately the picture quality on all the other standard HDTV's in this size / price range looked like utter crap when compared to the samsung.  The Samsung really had a nice looking picture, just too bad about all these problems with the model (FYI - the tech at Best buy actually told me that mine was the 3rd of this same model returned this weekend from similar complaints.)

So figured I would shell out a few more hundred and go up to an LCD. Unfortunately the clerks there were telling me that LCD's would have issues with ghosting for gaming. Plus I wasn't too impressed with the picture quality on most of the LCD's in the 30" range. (The Sony Bravio was absolutely gorgeous though - course it needed to be since it was $1999 for only 26" )

I was just about to purchase either the Samsung 32" LCD or the Sharp Aquos 32" LCD  (both costing about $1600) - my wife points my attention to a Maxent 42" HD Plasma for only $1900

http://tinyurl.com/7mcso

Picture looks better than any of the LCD's (not counting that Sony Bravio), it's 12" bigger, it's plasma, and it's only $300 more than I was already looking at spending.

So that's my new rig as of tonight. And so far I cannot begin to communicate how much happier I am.

Yeah I know, there are better looking plasma's out there, but for me - this is a huge improvement even over the Samsungs picture and the price was certainly reasonable.
Logged
ChaoZ
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 608


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: December 19, 2005, 04:25:22 PM »

I just bought a Dell W2306C LCD HDTV. The size is simlar to the ones used by the Xbox 360 Demo stands. $600

Since I will be sitting 4 or 5 feet away from the screen (in my room), I figure that's sufficient. The HD game reviews at gametrailers.com really has me psyched.

HDTV, here I come!
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: December 19, 2005, 08:57:51 PM »

Samsung's are generally great TVs but never, ever judge a TV by its appearance in the store.  Unless you are in a high end electronics store the TVs are almost never set up properly, often don't have a decent signal fed to them, and usually have almost no attempt at calibration.  The best thing you can do is write down model numbers and do some research on the internet on the set in question.
Logged
ChaoZ
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 608


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: December 19, 2005, 09:27:55 PM »

Quote from: "Kevin Grey"
Samsung's are generally great TVs but never, ever judge a TV by its appearance in the store.  Unless you are in a high end electronics store the TVs are almost never set up properly, often don't have a decent signal fed to them, and usually have almost no attempt at calibration.  The best thing you can do is write down model numbers and do some research on the internet on the set in question.


From the pros at AVS forums, they dislike the Samsung for it's DNIe, saying it cannot be turned off and causes a darker image that looses details.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.167 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.036s, 2q)