 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
12.214.248.248
I have a relative that is employed at bestbuy. We are looking at widescreen TVs since they are planning on leaving within a few months. When I went there to look at them the kid in the area said that even if we get a widescreen which I believe is 16:9 many movies will still have bars on the top and bottom because so many producers have so many different ratios they like. Is this a joke? I am limited to what is sold there, is anything decent there? I heard (but it was many years ago) that the Mitsubishi's were really good. I primarily want a widescreen to watch movies on. I mean I don't mind have 4:3 television in the middle of it. I mostly watch news (I can't stand most dumb TV programming)They don't show regular TV on them. Does it look real horrible on a big screen? How about if I want to play a PS2 game on it.... will that look horrible? Like a small jpg blown up 300%?
I saw some incredible pictures there, but there is no way (even if I could spend enough for them) I would pay that much for a monitor. Is DLP much better? I looked at plasma (I hope that is correct) but he said they are still rear projection TVs. So in short or to sum up, what is a good monitor for watching movies w/o getting a second mrg?
Follow Ups:
BTW...what's a "mrg"?If you'll be gaming, watching vintage movies in academy ratio and tons of news programs, seems to me you'd be better off with a DLP, DiLA or LCD screen where there is no chance of burn-in. Plasma and CRT displays can suffer from burn-in unless your willing to use zoom features to even out the wear. If you leave your set on CNN for hours at a time, plasma or CRT aren't the best options without zooming of some sort. You can minimize burn-in by turning down contrast and brightness to medium levels (which you should be doing anyway). WS will eventually take over broadcasting, but there will always be classic films and archived material in 4:3 most of us will want to watch on our HDTVs.
There are only two commonly used ratios for the vast majority of modern movies. Most films are released in 1.85:1 ratio which will nicely fill up your 16:9 widescreen teevee, no bars whatsoever. Epics like LOTR & M&C, which are shot in 2.35:1, will have very narrow, unobtrusive black bars top and bottom on WS displays, because that ratio is obviously wider than 1:85.1. Classic movies, made before the 1950's WS boom, are in the classic 4"3 ratio, the shape of yer old TV.
Aspect ratio is a choice made by the film director and his/her cinematographer based on how they want to compose their frames based on what they are trying to convey. I have no problem with filmmakers using different aspect ratios to tell the story they want to tell, and I have no probelm with those unobtrusive little black bars on my 16:9 TV when playing LOTR or Lawrence of Arabia. Those movies sure as heck look better with little bars than they did on my ancient 23" 4:3 Sony!! I don't find it difficult to deal with 3 different aspect ratios...as long as I can see films in their *original* aspect ratio, or as close to it as possible.
Plasmas are RP??? Uh...I don't think you got a salesperson who knew very much. BB is fine to buy from, and if you can get a discount through a family member, by all means go for it - BB has some very good HDTVs. The cheaper Mits IMO are to be avoided. The Sony CRT RPs are the best bargain/bang-for-the-buck in HDTV I know of now, but you'll have to deal with burn-in. Plasmas have come a long way and are very good looking and very (VERY) sexy, but they too have burn-in issues. As per above, the DLP, DiLA and LCD RPs are light, thin, don't have burn-in issues plus they have appealing images for DVDs and digital content.
*All* of these technologies will look fabulous on HD content, and very good with DVDs. Some look better on standard def broadcasts than others, although there are ways of coping with SD depending on the set. This is a topic in itself- suffice to say that displays optimized for HD will not necessarily be optimized for shitty analog signals... although...most HD sets are lots better with SD than they used to be a few years ago. HDTVs upconvert SD signals, and frankly, garbage in garbage out - and ugly is uglier when its blown up onto a larger screen. This is one reason I chose the Philips HDmodel that I did - it's SD was much better than comparable competing sets at the time.
There is no such thing (yet) as a perfect display. Sorry. There are some darned good looking one though. All these competing technologies each have strengths and weaknesses. There's always a few trade-offs - some very minor, some major. Only you can decide which trade-offs you can live with.
Also keep in mind when you shop, that often the display models are not set up well - they're in torch mode, fed by signals through a gazillion splitters etc. It can make it hard to compare. If you can play a familiar DVD through them, it may tell you much more than the HD loop being run through 50 TVs. Avoid digital animation such as Shrek or Toy Story - all digital animation looks fab on HD sets, they won't tell you a darned thing about PQ with live action material.
I highly recommend avsforum.com - check out the FAQs for the various forums - plasma, RP, etc. This is the best place I know to get TV info.
The thing is, if you're now watching flicks on an old TV, nearly ANY WS HDTV experience is gonna BURY what you're now viewing. If you like movies, think about how much fun you're missing.
Yes, I know there are definitely better but that is why I was thinking of the mitsu set. Big bang for the buck. Not going overboard. SD, 4:3, games, etc will not be sooo big on there and I think won't look so horrible. Then when I pop in the DVD which most are in WS will look fabulous (especially the ones that are only in WS and I have watch on a 27" 4:3 which is very small). I did like some Sonys, but then we make leap in $$. I'll have to see what he can do for a break on them.
I was not happy with the Mits - too much red punch for one thing. You should be able to get a good price on a Sony CRT RP - I'm no Sony fan, but these are very good and tweaked they are FAB. (See posts below.)Whatever you get, you will have a wonderful time with DVD movies. Happy hunting.
Best Buy has a lot of "decent" widescreen TV's. So many, in fact, it's a tough choice. Models from Sony, Toshiba, Panasonic, Mitsubishi, Samsung all can be stunningly good. You first have to decide on a budget, choose the type of TV (LCD, RPLCD, CRT, Plasma, DLP, etc), then do some search on avsforum.comFor a thorough explanation of "black bars" on widescreen TV's, read the link below. No matter how annoying you may find these little bars, the absolute beauty of native HD shown in 16:9 ratio is MORE than enough compensation IMO.
I know they have different ratios, what annoys me is that they do not have one std. I read the link I still think they can have one ratio and go with it.Also, does anyone have experience with the mitsu 65315?
The 65315 is entry level. I like the Mits CRT but only from the 615 series and up. The 815 has the 9" guns, quad field focus and a steller anti-glair screen. I sell a lot of TVs and get a lot of people coming back in to up-grade the 315s to the 515s or higher. This is something that is likely to be in your home for 5 or more years, dont cheap out now and try to save a few hundred dollers.Hear me now, listen to me later....
The HD widescreen is complicated to pull up correctly on 4x3 sets but the alternative is leaving the wide setting on 16x9's and watching 99% of the programming in stretch mode. I can't stand that and every widescreen owner does it.
My Hitachi 51SWX20B has 2 equally awful stretch modes-one applies a stretch to the sides of the picture to give you a nauseating funhouse mirror effect, the other applies a uniform stretch acroos the screen. The latter makes everyone look like characters in the Family Circus comic strip.I said burn-in be damned, set my contrast and brightness below 50% percent and watched what I wanted in the proper aspect ratio. I had a tech out to service my set last week, and he pointed out the faint (but unmistakeable) lines where the 4:3 gray bars had burned in.
Back to fatheads, and here's hoping they get more hidef programming quick.
I would put more split screen stuff one (PIP). Then you are filling it up and not really doing so much to the compressing and stretching......wonder if you split screen if it will then have to compress those two pictures to fit?!
Philips' CRT HDTVs have a very good stretch mode setting where the picture is only stretched toward the edges horizontally. The central half of the image is not stretched.Vertically the image is larger than the screen (which reduces amount of stretch needed on the horizontal) and can be adjusted up or down approx. 10% of the vertical height.
Not me. I watch in whatever the correct native mode is. 4.3 in 4.3, non anamorphic widescreen in "Zoom", and anamorphich widescreen in "Full". I never use "Wide Zoom" except in rare instances where a non anamorphic film has subtitles which don't appear in the "Zoom" mode.
I will not watch anything stretched. I would rather just have a 35" monitor than watch a bunch stretched crap! I don't want to see all my TV looking like circus mirrors. Why would you pay a lot for a TV and then watch everything all distorted?Paul
I thought that strech modes would bother me also but my Sony has whats called "wide zoom". It enlarges the picture and only streches certain portions of the screen-mostly around the edges-. It does a really good job.
If that's what you like (to look at)
I would never use the full mode for my 4.3 viewing. My Sony XBR Plasma has a Zoom 1 mode that leaves the picture as natural as 4.3. I only lose a very small portion of the top/bottom/sides, small enough to not even be of concern.
Sorry....it's the zoom 1 mode on my Samsung HD reciever.
You are portraying a 4:3 picture onto a "Full" 16:9 mode. The "Wide Zoom" on the SONYs only stretch the sides. Less distortion but I still don't like it.
Hollywood currently uses two aspect ratios: Panavision (formerly Cinemascope) which is 2:35 x 1 and "Academy Flat" which is 1.85 ro 1 (there have been others in limited use in the past). Properly transferred to video a 2:35 film WILL have (small) bars on a 16 x 9 display and a 1:85 film will have a small portion of the entire picture cropped. Most don't find either bothersome.Most current displays allow you to choose between a number of aspect ratios for wide screen films or standard broadcasts. Most DVDs are enhanced for 16 x 9 displays and one of these ratios is ideal for these DVDs (usually marked "Full" or "Cinema").
Most people agree that standard braodcast seen on a hi def TV is inferior to standard broadcast on a standard set. Over time more and more programming will be in hi def, however.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
