I am one of those people who insist on original language and original aspect ratio. Which means that I have set my own 32" HDTV to display 4:3 content as 4:3, 16:9 content as 16:9, and content coming in from the Playstation or the DVD player to display whatever the source wants. So my DVDs of Stargate SG-1, for instance, display as 16:9 while The Simpsons shows up in 4:3 and something like Lord of the Rings is still letterboxed thanks to the 2.39:1 ratio.
The only pro football game you should see in SD is when CBS has the doubleheader and does not have the capacity to handle that many games in HD. (They generally take the smallest market game and make that the HD one.) I know they were going to expand capacity to be able to broadcast all games in 1080i, but I don’t know if they’ve got it done for 2008. I’ll have to check the AVS Forum to be sure. The only way you’ll get a 16:9 picture out of a SD broadcast (assuming you’ve set your TV correctly to pillarbox 4:3) is if they stretched it at the station before broadcast.
Oy: Are you aware that most HD delivery systems in the US have entirely different channels for HD and SD content for the same network? I have Comcast cable, and all the HD channels are int he 700s. So, SD NBC is channel 3, but HD NBC is channel 703. If you watch SD content on an HD channel (ie, if it’s not broadcast in HD), you cannot stretch it out to fill the screen. But… the picture quality is better on the HD channel (usually), so I generally watch all content on th HD channels, even if it’s broadcast in SD.
A friend of mine got a 50" HD set and had Comcast set him up with the HD box and programming.
A month later he was over at my house looking at my set and said “damn, my picture isn’t as nice as that, and mine looks stretched out.”
I said “you know there are seperate HD network channels right?”
Nope, he was watching NFL games for 3 hours on Sundays in SD stretched to fit the screen not knowing he had the game in 16:9 HD 200 hundred channels up.
The is NO ONE STANDARD for digital broadcasting. It is up to each station to decided which standard to use. And there are 18 of them.
This can result in the screen having bars at the bottom and top, on the sides, or even boxed.
HDTV for screens under 30" is useless as the screen is too small to make any noticable difference to the human eye. Only after you get about 32" does HDTV take effect.
Furthermore most cable companies compress their HDTV signals so the signal you get via cable or dish is usually less than that you get from over the air HDTV. Though sometimes the compression isn’t noticable, everyone I’ve pointed this out to and when I have set up an antenna for over the air HDTV they can see it.
She probably will. For a little while, at least, until she figures it out. Mistakes are a necessary precursor to learning. In a while, she won’t remember she didn’t know how to do it.
Besides, as mistakes go, this is almost entirely painless. It isn’t as if choosing the wrong aspect ratio will make her teeth fall out or something.
If an SD channel is showing a movie letterboxed, it won’t fill the screen. Even on a 4:3 TV, you will have black bars at top and bottom. On a widescreen TV you will get a good fit if you zoom the picture, but there is no way for the TV to know that the program is letterboxed, so it can’t zoom automatically for you.
You might still have black bars at top and bottom even when zoomed, if the movie has a wider aspect ratio that the TV’s 16:9, but that’s normal.
OK, adventures in widescreen have continued. It turns out that with widescreen DVDs, I can adjust the Screen Mode, as it seems to be called with this brand (Element) so that with a 1.85:1 movie it fills the screen entirely, and a 2.35:1 movie it has bands top and bottom as would be expected. I assume the same thing would be true for widescreen VCR tapes, but I’m not sure either of us has any. Full screen or pan n’ scan is a little less cut and dried; it seems to depend on the movie or the day of the week or the fullness of the moon or something - sometimes what the TV calls Sidebar (vertical black bars both sides) is best, sometimes stretching to fill the screen seems best - there doesn’t seem to be any distortion to speak of or any loss of quality. Broadcast TV works best in Sidebar mode.
John, I had no idea whatsoever that there were HD channels, but if Comcast offers them in Trenton (and they probably do), we don’t get them and aren’t willing to pay for them. My mom’s retired and living on SS and a very small amount of savings. No one else in the family is in a position right now to help her out on this, so she’ll just get by with what she has.
Cervaise, you’re quite right, and I’ve told her repeatedly not to hesitate to play with it, especially if she felt that there was any question that she was losing any content due to cropping. She’s handling the whole thing remarkably well, especially given that it involves a vocabulary that’s entirely new to her.
But it appears that my primary question has been answered. That was, what the heck was the purpose of the extra width of the screen in the first place? I’m still a bit puzzled as to why they didn’t go the extra mile and go to 1.85:1 so as to perfectly fit standard movies, but now that I understand that programs are actually being broadcast that fit these TVs, at least the new TV size makes a little sense to me. Thank you all again for your help, and my Mom sends her thanks and regards as well. She’s a bit bemused that all these strangers are taking the time and trouble to answer her questions, but she’ll take help where she can get it!
Oh, I might have missed this. But does your mother have an antenna as well as cable? All you need is something that can pick up the VHF/UHF band, as most broadcasters are using empty parts of the spectrum to simulcast in both analog and digital. Something roof-mounted would be great and you don’t need a new “HDTV antenna” (there’s no such thing) to get it to work. It looks like the TV (I’m guessing based on brand and size) has a built-in HD tuner, so picking up over-the-air HD should be as simple as sticking up an antenna in the right direction and plugging it in. I’ve got Dish Network and am too cheap right now to pay for the hardware upgrade to an HD DVR, but I still get all the network broadcasts in digital or HD with my little indoor antenna.
I’m assuming your mom is getting digital cable with Comcast. If so, rental of an HD box from Comacast is only an extra $6 a month. Even on the limited budget, it’s a must have when already having the LCD TV. I’m assuming she splurged on the purchase because she spends a good amount of time watching it. It would be a shame to not make use of the screen size and clarity potential.
According to this web page, if the TV has a QAM tuner, you don’t need to rent a box or pay for any extra service.
If it turns out you do need an HD box, a one time purchase may be an alternative to renting from Comcast. Someone here might be able to verify that.
No, they should equate 16:9 with HD, because HD is defined with a 16:9 aspect ratio. Digital vs. analog is purely a transmission issue. Digital is completely capable of transmitting various standards, including 480i (4:3), 480p (4:3), 480p (16:9), 720p (16:9), 1080i (16:9).
When you get a digital signal, you’re really just getting a data stream consisting of multiple MPEG2 or MPEG4 programs. The format of those programs has nothing to do with the fact that the transmission is digital.
Bear in mind this splurge was $422 plus tax, so it wasn’t that big a splurge. She doesn’t watch as much TV as you might think. Never during the day (except golf once in while on weekends), and maybe 4 evenings out of seven. I’ll sound her out about an HD box. At six bucks a month, it’s remotely conceivable she might be interested, but the chances are she’ll pass. Her income is significantly lower than $20K/year, so you make some choices.
As for HD channels, the TV itself scanned for channels. It did not find any digital channels. It may have found HD channels; I don’t know. I haven’t looked to see what all channels are active. So the next time I’m over there, I’ll have a look and see if any high number channels are active. I’ve never heard of QAM and the TV certainly doesn’t have anything in the documentation about it.
asterion, Mom doesn’t have an antenna, and there’s only one local UHF and no VHF channels in Trenton, as far as I know. Back when I was a kid in Flemington, NJ, we used a rooftop antenna and got both NYC and Philly (and about 11 channels), but she’s in a subsidized senior apartment complex. I really don’t think she would find HD worth coping with an antenna. Remember: 88 years old, and a little timid about technology. I do what I can, but…
Again, thanks for all the input! You guys are fantastic!
Find out what service she’s getting. If she’s getting standard cable, according to the info Comcast’s website gave me for my area, she’s paying $57/month. If she goes digital, she’ll pay $29.99/month for 6 months and $55.75/month after that. She’ll be saving money and getting a much better picture than the analog signal.
Ah. I’ll look into that. <pause> In fact I just have, and the website, while somewhat self-contradictory, suggests that basic digital only costs $1/month more that the basic analog. That I think I can probably talk her into. Thanks so much, x-ray!