logo Sign In

Star Wars Pan Scan — Page 5

Author
Time
Post link
I was talking about HDTV standard in general.

But i didn't know this what you are saying,i have a regular TV set. In fact i don't even
use it much,i watch TV on my computer with a tuner card.

By the way analog television is not 640x240.
First of all there are no pixels in analog television,just lines,and those lines
have continuous signals so you cant really talk about pixels here.
And the number of lines is not 240,it is 625 for PAL and 525 for NTSC.
Author
Time
Post link
I doubt if you'll be stuck with it for 20 years, Hal 9000. Given that digital TV will be the broadcast standard by 2006-07, you will either have to buy an adapter box for your old TV or go for a new HDTV if you want to watch any form of programming other than DVD or VHS. It'll come down to whether you want to spend $800 on an adapter that will scale down HD for your current TV, or $1000 for a brand new HD set.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
Wait a minute, even though the braodcasting standard will be HD, won't the stations still broadcast analog for older color tvs like they do for black and white signals for the black and white tvs? I am just asking because I don't know all the particualrs of the current plan for implimenting the HD standard.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Jedi Master DJR
Wait a minute, even though the braodcasting standard will be HD, won't the stations still broadcast analog for older color tvs like they do for black and white signals for the black and white tvs? I am just asking because I don't know all the particualrs of the current plan for implimenting the HD standard.


As far as I know, for some time both signals will be broadcast. After that, if you still want to use your old TV you will have to buy a box to convert the signal.

One interesting thing that happened here in Brazil (where I live) is that when they began changing from b&w to color, the signal was only broadcast in color, in PAL-M, a system that would work on both b&w and color TVs. Did they have to broadcast 2 different signals on the US?
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: cubebox
I was talking about HDTV standard in general.

But i didn't know this what you are saying,i have a regular TV set. In fact i don't even
use it much,i watch TV on my computer with a tuner card.

By the way analog television is not 640x240.
First of all there are no pixels in analog television,just lines,and those lines
have continuous signals so you cant really talk about pixels here.
And the number of lines is not 240,it is 625 for PAL and 525 for NTSC.


First of all you don't account for two things. One 525 is all the lines but only 480 of them are displayed. Where the other 45 lines go I have no idea. There is also interlaced scanning. In interlaced scanning only half of the 480 are displayed. So only 240 vertical lines are displayed on an analog television. Thats why DVDs look better progressive. With digital television and progressive DVD player you are seeing all 480 vertical lines so you get a far better image.
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleite
Quote
Originally posted by: Jedi Master DJR
Wait a minute, even though the braodcasting standard will be HD, won't the stations still broadcast analog for older color tvs like they do for black and white signals for the black and white tvs? I am just asking because I don't know all the particualrs of the current plan for implimenting the HD standard.


As far as I know, for some time both signals will be broadcast. After that, if you still want to use your old TV you will have to buy a box to convert the signal.

One interesting thing that happened here in Brazil (where I live) is that when they began changing from b&w to color, the signal was only broadcast in color, in PAL-M, a system that would work on both b&w and color TVs. Did they have to broadcast 2 different signals on the US?



As far as I know, that is what they were doing, it may have changed now, I'm not sure.
Author
Time
Post link
Jimbo...

I am talking about full frames,i know you never get to see a full frame,but
those two blend together in youe eye and seem like one frame of larger resolution
than 240 lines. Of course this way of viewing is not perfect and progressive if
a lot better.

And might i add that digital HD television is not progressive in nature it is 60i for
NTSC just like SD, only it's digital. You never get full frames in HD either,
just half frames.
Author
Time
Post link
It depends on the signal. Every TV has a maximum resolution. There are some expensive televisions that handle 1920 x 1080 progressive. But such a grand television wouldn't be much use since HDTV broadcasts are either 1080i (1920 x 540) or 720p (1280 x 720). It is unknown when 1080p broadcasts will start. HD-DVDs will support full 1920 x 1080 resolution so I guess such televisions will be great for HD-DVDs.
Author
Time
Post link
For airing movies it is not a problem to use progressive broadcast.
But if you want standard television programs like news,live shows etc,you need
to use 1080i because all HD cameras shoot 1080i unless they are swiched to the 24P
mode,but that is used for cinematography.
24P is not smooth enough for television programs,but it is good for fictional content (for a number of reasons)

If HD video content becomes progressive (like shows news etc.) it would need 60 fps progressive,and that is a waste of tape for
news or TV shows.

I imagine a future broadcast system that would switch between interlaced and progressive
in real time depending on the natue of the content. Like all 24P HD content,and film content being aired in
progressive and then everything else switched to interlaced.
I suspect future TV sets will accept both interlaced and progressive 1080 image.

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: cubebox
For airing movies it is not a problem to use progressive broadcast.
But if you want standard television programs like news,live shows etc,you need
to use 1080i because all HD cameras shoot 1080i unless they are swiched to the 24P
mode,but that is used for cinematography.
24P is not smooth enough for television programs,but it is good for fictional content (for a number of reasons)

If HD video content becomes progressive (like shows news etc.) it would need 60 fps progressive,and that is a waste of tape for
news or TV shows.

I imagine a future broadcast system that would switch between interlaced and progressive
in real time depending on the natue of the content. Like all 24P HD content,and film content being aired in
progressive and then everything else switched to interlaced.
I suspect future TV sets will accept both interlaced and progressive 1080 image.


There are already sets capable of 1080 progressive images. Tosiba released the first model in late 2002. There are now a few models but they are pretty expensive.
Author
Time
Post link
Just remember that HD is not just 1080i; there are 16 different standards that constitute HD broadcasting, ranging from 480p to 1080p, and each one will likely be used for a different purpose.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
Just remember that HD is not just 1080i; there are 16 different standards that constitute HD broadcasting, ranging from 480p to 1080p, and each one will likely be used for a different purpose.


That doesn't really make sense. Its just more pixal better picture. They all have the same purpose.
Author
Time
Post link
Not worth responding to, but I'll bite. The reason for all the different standards is one: cost. Bandwidth costs money, and a 720p image, for example, will take up less bandwidth than a 1080i or 1080p image. To quote Vince Vaughn in Starsky and Hutch:
It costs *money*. Planes: they cost money. My perm, this yacht, my kid's braces: it all costs money.
[pointing at his mistress] Do you think Kitty's free?

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but did you know the United States (I think all of Region 1 actually) will have both widescreen and fullscreen, but everywhere else it will be only widescreen? I guess GL loves to contradict himself.


1995, "Yes, its nice to consider them timeless."
1997, "I didn't want to live with my abandoned movie, I wanted to go back and complete it."

Same thing with widescreen/Satanscreen, first releases The Phantom Menace in widescreen only, then changes his mind on AOTC and has it made for AOTC and TPM.
Author
Time
Post link
Hypocrisy is a wonderful thing, ain't it?
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Post link
There is no such thing as Hypocrisy in two different kingdoms, Lucasland and the Kingdom of Politicans.
Author
Time
Post link
Could we safely say that GL is a mass of contradictions?

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
Just to add another perspective into the Full Screen vs Wide Screen debate...

I work in a video rental shop here in the UK & you wouldnt believe the number of customers I serve who choose a VIDEO over DVD because it's not presented in wide screen! I've explained til I'm blue in the face to ignoramouses the benefits of watching a movie in wide screen but alas it falls on deaf ears.

The most common response i hear is:

"but those bars on top & bottom, cutting the picture up gets on my nerves"

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT???????????????????????????????????????? Are these people for real????

Unfortunately, YES! The average punter doesn't understand how pan & scan works & if the movie they're watching fills their 28" tv screens then they are happy. If it is presented in wide screen on their puny 4:3 tv's then they feel they are not watching the whole movie & it's too small to see clearly!

Whilst these people still exist without their 42" Anamorphic Wide Screen tv's there will always be a demand for crappy pan and scan movies

sucks doesn't it?

Evil dude: "You do not no pain, you do not know fear. You will taste MAN FLESH"

Evil ugly dudes: "YIPPEEEEEEEEE!!!!"
Author
Time
Post link
Love that quote from the commentary on John Carpenter's The Fog.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: die-jarjar-die
sucks doesn't it?

Yes. It sucks incredibly. I've given up the fight because I've realized that some people are just too ignorant to waste my time convincing. I've got better things to spend my time on.
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Post link
Even before the advent of DVDs, I loved widescreen whenever I came across it. When I first decided to buy a DVD player, one of the main things I wanted it for was so that I could watch everything in widescreen. In fact, I adamantly refuse to buy anything in fullscreen (excepting a couple of TV shows, like Chappelle's Show, which have no other option, so they really don't count). My Wal-Mart at home had copies of Road to Perdition and Spy Game that I would have bought long ago, had they provided both formats, but alas, they're only full-frame. My parents don't particularly like the bars on the top and bottom of the screen, so anytime I'm at home and I rent a movie for us to watch, I always have to compromise and pick up the fullscreen version. Oh, well.

I dream of the day when I'll finally be able to sit down and watch the original trilogy in widescreen glory.
My Blog
Currently Reading: Shatterpoint, by Matthew Stover
Unrepentent Nader Voter
Author
Time
Post link
Amend that to say "in widescreen on DVD" because I actually own a copy of the original trilogy (pre SE) in widescreen VHS.
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Bossk
Amend that to say "in widescreen on DVD" because I actually own a copy of the original trilogy (pre SE) in widescreen VHS.


You're lucky, then. I toyed with the notion of buying widescreen VHS copies on e-bay a few years back, but they were fetching outrageous prices. I've only seen tantalizing bits of the widescreen originals on TV documentaries. But, yes, I should've added the 'on DVD' part.

My Blog
Currently Reading: Shatterpoint, by Matthew Stover
Unrepentent Nader Voter