Progressive DVD and 16:9

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Why does my 16:9 RCA HD set still have black bars on top and bottom when i
rent widescreen DVD movies??

I hope im just a dumbass... any help would be greatly appreciated..

david

dg2035@charter.net

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

:
: Because movies are not filmed at a 16:9 ratio or 1.78. Most modern
: movies at either 1.85:1 or 2.35:1 ratios - other ratios around are
: 1.66:1 or for old movies 1.37:1. The 1.85:1 movies will likely fill
your
: TV screen due to overscan, but you will get black bars on the top
and
: bottom for anamorphic 2.35:1 movies. See
: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/sho [...] did=332900 for
a
: short answer.

I might add:
The larger the difference between 1.78 (16:9) and the ratio of the
movie the larger the black bars. The smaller the difference the
smaller the black bars. Some movies the black bars will be almost
un-noticeable, others they will still be obvious.
Russ

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

.... and some discs are not anamorphic.

--
"Sleep is a poor substitute for coffee."
- Anon


"RR" <rr@not.net> wrote in message
news:1la5p0dudtb11pco4veg3j0g1av5p0k0s4@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:43:55 -0600, "David Colby" <dcolby4@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Why does my 16:9 RCA HD set still have black bars on top and bottom when i
>>rent widescreen DVD movies??
>>
>>I hope im just a dumbass... any help would be greatly appreciated..
>>
>>david
>>
>>dg2035@charter.net
>
> Because the movie is not precisely 16:9 format.
>
> This is so squares will still look like squares (not rectangles) and
> circles will still look like circle (not ovals).
>
> Unless the movie format is exactly 16:9 there would have to be such
> distortion if the entire screen were used.

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Matthew L. Martin" <nothere@notnow.never> wrote in message
news:10p6slupon45eac@corp.supernews.com...
> MrMike6by9 wrote:
>
>> ... and some discs are not anamorphic.
>>
>
> That has nothing to do with aspect ratios.
>
> Matthew

Remember, 16:9 was chosen because it could efficiently display all aspect
ratios. It was never expected that every program would be produced in 16:9.

Richard.