home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!gatech!destroyer!ncar!noao!arizona!arizona.edu!cerritos.edu!wilbur!batpad!larryg
- From: larryg@batpad.lgb.ca.us (Larry Greenfield)
- Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan
- Subject: Re: HDTV in Japan
- Message-ID: <ooRwXB2w165w@batpad.lgb.ca.us>
- Date: 25 Jan 93 01:08:23 GMT
- References: <1993Jan24.085238.7282@gibdo.engr.washington.edu>
- Organization: The Batchelor Pad
- Lines: 22
-
- Tad, when you say HDTV sets are quite large, that's correct... that's
- bcause of the viewing angle (although I'm sure currently it takes
- more components inside as well). Speaking of HDTV, I'm surprised that
- there is a concensious in the screen size... everyone seems to be
- aiming for 16:9 ratio. The reason why 1.33:1 was chosen for
- NTSC/American standard a long time ago, was, at the time, that WAS
- the size of movies currently being released (before widescreen). Now,
- there are many more sizes to choose from. 16:9 is the "compromise"
- ratio: usually just shot in 1.33:1 but "black-barred" at the top and
- bottom (and assumed, compsed with 16:9 ratio in mind). However, the
- vast majority of Panavision pictures are shot in 2.35:1. So even if
- you have an HDTV set, if you watch T2, Die Hard, Hook, etc., they'll
- STILL be black bars at the top and bottom (though not as much)
- because these movies are made wider than 16:9. Stuff lik "E.T." will
- fit 16:9 perfectly, but not the wide-screen movies. Still, I guess it
- is a good compromise... I don't know what watching a static program
- (ie, the nightly newscast anchor) in 2.35:1 would be like.
- :::::Larry:::::
-
- :::::larryg@batpad.lgb.ca.us::::: // :::::Larry Greenfield:::::
- ::::::::Just your average modeming Classical Violinist:::::::::
- :::::::::::Using a 6809-based Tandy Color Computer 3:::::::::::
-