DVDs on Widescreen and Aspect Ration

[mbechak]

Extreme newbie here, please excuse my ignorance.

1) Will DVDs have their black bars or letterbox elimintaed when being played on a 16:9 ration hdtv?

2) Will standard broadcasts appear as a square on a 16:9 ratio TV?

3) Is there a difference between projection and non-projection hdtv sets? Which is better.

Thanks

[ZeroDegreeK]

Answers to your questions:

1. There will be no letterboxing if the aspect ratio is around 1.85:1 (16:9 is actually 1.78:1 but there is always some overscan on a projection TV that allows 1.85:1 to fill the screen), however many widescreen movies are really wide with an aspect ratio of 2.40:1. There will still be letterboxing, but it is minimized.

2. Standard broadcasting is 4:3. There are two ways a widescreen TV handles this signal (actually there are more than 2 but these are the most common). One is to display the signal as is, with either black or grey bars on the sides of the picture (much like the letterboxing on the top and bottom of widescreen movies, except the black bars are on the sides). The other way is for the TV to stretch the picture to fit. Some sets handle the stretch better than others, but all add some distortion that takes some getting used to, because everybody looks fat.

3. There is a big difference between the two but without getting technical, it is all about size. The largest non-projection tv I think is 40 inches. Rear projection sets can get much bigger. Some people feel that a direct view set offers a brighter more detailed picture.

hope this helps

[zarlor]

I'd agree with everything ZDK said. I would only add, on question 3, that the difference between the smaller direct-view (non-projection, as you called them) and a Rear or Front Projection set in a regular set was huge! Direct-views tended to be brighter and cleaner looking. That difference is MUCH smaller on an HD set.

The main reason being, simply, resolution. WHen you blow up 480 lines from, say, 30" to 50" it's real easy to see the flaws and line structure on that 50" screen, plus you only have the light coming from 480 lines to show. On a screen with 1080 lines (or 720, depending on the set) I find that the larger projection screens can show me much greater detail and maintain an excellent level of contrast that I would never have thought possible from a projection set based on the old ones I had seen.

If you can get a chance, get to a store that has these sets and do a comparison in person, preferably with true HD material (not just a DVD or some upconverted cable channel). Then you can really have a good idea of which sets you really prefer.

[ZeroDegreeK]

I knew I was going to be spanked for not going into more detail about the 3rd question. Zarlor got it right. I was refering to non-HD broadcasting.

With regular broadcasting a direct view tv still beats a rear projection widescreen HD set. I can't see anyone arguing with that. (Except you could add things like a high end scaler to the mix and a projection set could compete better)

But I feel, and this is only an opinion, that HD broadcasting looks better on a rear-projection tv. Hands down, HD was made for big TVs. When HDTV first came out, one of the major complaints was based on the cost vs. the average consumer not being able to tell the difference on a 27" set. However, I was able to watch a San Antonio Spurs game on a 110" HD front projection set up at a friends house, and on a wide shot of the crowd I could read people's T-shirts. You could read the dates off the back of some kid's WrestleMania shirt.

I have a 65" HD rear-projection set, and my brother just bought a direct-view HD set (I think it is 37"). With HD broadcasting, my picture is just as bright and detailed. I feel even more detailed because what is small and detailed on his set, is large and detailed on mine.

Sorry for the ramblings.