Anyone else annoyed with TV transmissions in different aspect ratios?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
A

Alsone

New member
Jul 21, 2007
68
0
0
Hi,

I was just wondering if anyone else is getting as fed up as I am with TV companies transmitting different programs in different aspect ratios.

One minute I find a program looks best on full, another on wide, another on cinema, a film on zoom (because it doesn't fit the 16:9 format - why the hell can't they use an anamorphic master?), some films on zoom that even then still have bars...

I have to say I'm finding this very irritating. In the old days you turned the tv on and the programs filled the screen, now you often get bars ranging from a few millimetres to 10 or more centimetres unless you adjust the aspect ratio affecting a wide range of programs.

Does anyone else think that its time tv companies transmitted programs in a nice standard 16:9 ratio so they always fitted the tv without adjustment and transmitted films in 16:9 by using anamorphic masters?
 
No. TV programmes are created in 4:3 or 16:9 - films are usually neither - I would rather they transmitted them in their original format, personally, and put up with the bars........
 
Alsone:
Hi,

I was just wondering if anyone else is getting as fed up as I am with TV companies transmitting different programs in different aspect ratios.

One minute I find a program looks best on full, another on wide, another on cinema, a film on zoom (because it doesn't fit the 16:9 format - why the hell can't they use an anamorphic master?), some films on zoom that even then still have bars...

I have to say I'm finding this very irritating. In the old days you turned the tv on and the programs filled the screen, now you often get bars ranging from a few millimetres to 10 or more centimetres unless you adjust the aspect ratio affecting a wide range of programs.

Does anyone else think that its time tv companies transmitted programs in a nice standard 16:9 ratio so they always fitted the tv without adjustment and transmitted films in 16:9 by using anamorphic masters?

Just set your tv to auto and you will get what it's supposed to be.
 
JohnDuncan:No. TV programmes are created in 4:3 or 16:9 - films are usually neither - I would rather they transmitted them in their original format, personally, and put up with the bars........

Problem is John for anyone with a plasma or CRT tv you wear the phosphors unevenly if you have black bars top and bottom.

Point taken Gerrard, I do run auto, but its still annoying to find it changing aspect constantly and you can't always rely on the tv to get the best aspect so I often find myself just making sure manually. I can understand the problem with films (although with anamorphic recordings its hard to understand why they can be transmitted 16:9) but with programs, surely they should all just fit the screen? I can't understand why its necessary to apply 3 different aspect settings - full, wide or cinema to ordinary programming just to get a perfect fit.

Football on tv (especially ITV) is a perfect example. The program before it will probably be great on "full". Footy comes on and you immediately notice the logo towards the top of the screen is towards the edge. Bit of playing around and you find the wide or cinema aspect give a better fit, and bring the logo down and more screen into view, I mean why? Why can't programs be transmitted the same.
 
Hi Like Prof Hat and J.D. can"t say it bothers me as it is.what I do dislike is the channel logos that the channels still insist on using, like we don"t know what we"ve chosen so to speak.Maybe they are testing for image retention.Bugs me I"m afraid.
 
professorhat:
Can't say I've noticed any issue with this personally.

In fairness you probably have to look.

With films its obvious because of the width of the bars but with many programs the gap is maybe only a centimetre top and bottom, not something you'd notice necessarily unless being consious of being careful of your screen. Same with football. You could quite happily watch it and never notice there was picture off the screen as you just see the logo towards the top. Its only when you change aspect ratio and see the logo move down but the picture still fill the screen you realise there's a better option that gives you more of the picture.
 
Personally I'd rather have the black bars and see the picture in the correct ratio than have it stretched or zoomed to fill the screen. The only one that bugs me is when they transmit the picture in 4:3 but have narrow black bars at the top and bottom as well as the wide ones at the sides, can't say I really understand why the do that occasionally...
 
Even more annoying for me is the common practice of releasing DVD/Bluray in that accursed 1:2.35 ratio . Nearly a quarter of that precious screen area wasted .It's got to the point where I'm searching for that magic 1:1.85 number on the back of the box whilst standing in the shop....but I can't often read it . Keep meaning to take a magnifying glass with me but wary of how weird that's going to look.

Anyway , my point is that I've found a reasonable solution ; namely to select Zoom on the remote ! Sure , you lose a sizeable amount either side , but the real content of the film is nearly always smack in the middle of the frame . As a test I watched the Blu Iron Man on consecutive nights ; firstly in wide and secondly in zoom mode . Despite the lack of freshness when viewing for the second time , I thought that the bigger screen images made for a much more engaging experience ; for me size really does matter.

Try it for yourselves .
 
Surely Alsone is trying to provoke a reaction with his "2.35:1 wastes half of my screen" comment!? This really is only two steps away from people who refuse to watch black and white films "because they are boring".

If you are a real film fan you want to watch what the director intended you to watch - the aspect ratio of a film has a significant affect on the viewing experience if utilised properly. Try telling me that the opening sequence of Star Wars (with the destroyer ship flying overhead) is half as dramatic and impressive in 4:3 as it is in the original 2.35:1 as Mr Lucas filmed it...if you do I'll laugh at you and possibly throw some out of date fish-product in your general direction.

With regard to the original issue of changing broadcast aspect ratios it sounds to me like you haven't got your sky box/cable box/freeview tuner set to widescreen. If you set the source of the picture to 'widescreen' and your tv to 'auto' you won't have any problem.

There are occassional issues of programmes being incorrectly broadcast, but these are few and far between.

Wolfred
 
Can't say it bother me either. I sometimes notice it half way through watching something. Anyway it gives you a chance to use your remote.

Agree about the channel ident though - why oh why do we need this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SergSlim
Question Which speakers to select for TV and music?
Replies
1
Views
266
Hi-Fi
ultraminiature
ultraminiature
steve_1979
Peter Aczel
Replies
14
Views
2K
Hi-Fi
Roog
R
R
Living with a Phillips 21:9
Replies
2
Views
479
TVs & Projectors
v1c
V
D
Is there a tablet that meets these criteria?
Replies
2
Views
821
Smartphones & Tablets
Paul.
P
bigboss
Is Ultra HD really 4K?
Replies
10
Views
1K
TVs & Projectors
bigboss
bigboss

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom