[opendtv] Re: Pan-scan-zoom
- From: "Peter Wilson" <peter.wilson@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 16:42:16 +0100
My memory might be getting rusty but I believe Hollywood forced the Japanese
to move from 5-3 to 16-9.If they wanted 2-1 I don't remember them being very
vocal. This was very expensive as all the CRT's needed to be reworked.
The main supporter of 2-1 today is Vittorio Storaro with the Univisium
system which also runs at 25 Fps.
I spent a lot of time in Washington in the late 90's at the ATTC and I
believe the only people who supported 4-3 for HD were the computer
industries who wanted progressive scan, a laudable wish but most of them did
not know the difference between frame rate and refresh rate and the
processing power capability was limited to de-interlacing 525.There was
already a significant population of 16-9 TVs in Europe at this time so 4-3
for a new service was already obsolete. As to the-Blu ray issue I think its
Cest la vie. I remember visiting I think the Warner DVD plant at LAX at the
beginning of DVD's and they had every brand and model on the planet as
nearly every designer had interpreted the menu stuff differently.
As I understand it the 702 / 720 debate is about Digital Filtering. Analogue
line length is approximately 702 pixels long but you have to allow for
Nyquist and ringing when you convert to and from Digital so the system
designers put in some slack which would be buried by overscan. If you have
active picture to 720 you may well find you are in trouble. You can
digitally generate full amplitude Black to white transitions on adjacent
pixels but it does not relate to reality.
Best Regards,
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Tom Barry
Sent: 08 October 2009 16:18
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: Pan-scan-zoom
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
> Good point.
>
> Unfortunately, the TV industry really pissed off Hollywood with the
> choice of 16:9 for HDTV.
>
> At least Philips is offering a display that is slightly wider than the
> AR that Hollywood wanted (2:1).
>
> The net result is that Hollywood decided that the solution is to
> encode ANY AR into the 16:9 bucket with varying amounts of
> letterboxing. They really want you to see the entire picture; they do
> not want you to view their creations cropped.
>
> Regards
> Craig
>
> And don't forget that Tilt and Scan is often a better way to extract a
> 16:9 aperture from 4:3 and other sources that do not fill the width of
> the 16:9 frame. Some of the studios are using this technique both for
> new production and for release of older titles.
>
With NTSC it used to be that consumers really hated the black bars
simply because TV's were so small you could not afford the wasted space
and still get enough detail out of SD on a small TV to see the damn
picture. But now large HD displays are becoming cheaper and much much
more common and horizontal or vertical black bars do not really cause
that problem.
Meanwhile CRT's are going away and most displays no longer have the burn
in problem that used to be the other reason to avoid the bars.
So generally I don't think it is as important to fill up the screen
anymore. Again, I prefer the bars and keeping very close to the
original image.
- Tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts: