Aspect Ratios & SD Broadcasts

[Drummerboy]

What does it take for a station to stretch or justify SD content?
I think CBS 3 out of Madison stretches SD content and displays HD normally.  Do people have a preference?  I noticed a lot of people griped about TNT in the past but I think that was more of an issue of pq.
Personally I'd like to see SD content stretched (or justified).  Right now I either have to zoom or switch to analog and I would rather do neither.  Afraid of burn-in as I was a victim (from the SciAtl 3100HD box).

[kjnorman]

Its difficult to say.

I personally like it stretched and our Toshiba has a very good stretch mode (Theater Wide 1).  However my wife hates it and so we always ended up 4:3 pillarbox picture.

My TV is nearly four years old and has fairly chronic burn in for the side pillars (and yes the set was calibrated properly and we we using the grey bars as opposed to the black as these were supposedly better - they were not).

Conseqently I favor stretched when I can get away with in.  However that should not be the station's choice but that of the viewer.

[AndrewP]

I don't like when station stretches SD signal for me. I like stretch it myself using the receiver and/or TV options for that. PQ will be the way I like and not the way somebody at the station like it.

[Drummerboy]

My HD set is the primary viewing source in the house and since my wife has no idea what zooming or stretching even means I try to make the system as "dumby" proof as possible.  My STB remembers aspect per channel which is great but it doesn't change that from 5 to 7 o'clock everything is SD and from 7 to 9 everything is HD which is impossible to dumby proof.
If stretching is really not prefered then what if the station would at least display gray sidebars.  Fox 47 out of Madison puts gray sidebars instead of black (but I don't think they have it quite right because there is also a tiny bit of black border too).
I would like to see sidebars that would adjust to the brightness of the picture.

I guess I like to see the stations solve the problems I have with my technologically-challenged wife.  

[Racer47]

Does anyone think that eventually even std def will transmitted as 16:9 (not stretched but actually 16:9)? Or are we going to be stuck with 4:3 indefinitely? I personally don't like stretched modes.

[AndrewP]

Actually, I use separate outputs from the receiver for SD and HD programs. I programmed everything in Harmony remote so it can't be easier then pushing Watch SD or Watch HDTV button on the remote to make all magic switching in a sec.

[Drummerboy]

I have a JP1 remote so mine is programmed with one clicks also.  Then I come downstairs in the morning to find my wife watching the Today show with big sidebars because she pressed the SAT button (mapped for HD STB) to turn on the TV instead of the TV button (mapped to analog tuner).  :bang:

[SRW1000]

Please don't suggest stretching 4x3 content to any of the local providers.  One of the long-distance local broadcasts I picked up was broadcasting their newscast in stretch mode, and it was really distracting.  Leave the stretching decision up to each user.

Racer47, I agree with you and hope to see everything broadcast in a native 16x9 format (or for films, their original aspect ratio).  I don't know how long we'll have to wait.  I would guess depends on how quickly digital sets continue to increase in sales.  Once we hit over 50% saturation, I would expect to see local stations start switching.  

There will always be a large amount of 4x3 material (old TV shows and such), so we'll always have the dilemma of what to do with 4x3 content.  That's why the decision to stretch or zoom is best left to each viewer.

Scott

[GBK]

There will always be a large amount of 4x3 material (old TV shows and such), so we'll always have the dilemma of what to do with 4x3 content.  That's why the decision to stretch or zoom is best left to each viewer.

Scott

Agreed however some programming can be remastered from original source.. Ie movies.. there is no reason why those can't be 16x9.

[kjnorman]

Agreed however some programming can be remastered from original source.. Ie movies.. there is no reason why those can't be 16x9.

Or even original aspect ratio!

I went through the digital conversion (4:3 analog SD to 16:9 Mpeg SD) in Britain before I moved here.  The way the broadcasters solved their analog vs digital framing dilema was to film for a 14:9 ratio within the 16:9 frame.  I found it to be a good compromise.  No stretching was involved.  Also my 30in widescreen analog set (yep I've had a widescreen since 1995 had a variable zoom, so that I could zoom 14:9 or whatever ratio I wanted with ease.

In the 16:9 frame the area beyond 14:9 was considered "safe space".  Digital transmission got the full frame but not too much happed at the very edge of the frame.  Analog got to see a 14:9 frame with the edges cut off (but as there was no real useful information there is was not too bad) with small black bars top and bottom.  And considering most small analog sets overscan anyway, a lot of the time the black bars were not actually that visible.

Over time time (5 years) the ratio has shifted to being more 16:9 on the analog transmission and they now utilize the full 16:9 aspect ratio on the digital side.

During the conversion I wonder why we do not see more 14:9 versions of 16:9 programming on the analog channels?  Seems like a common sense way of doing it to me...

[StarvingForHDTV]

I prefer the sidebars and fully accept the risk of burn in.  I have been watching all SD with sidebars for some time, and there is no sign of burn in so far.  I can't stand stretched mode.

So I vote to let the person at home decide what to do with the signal.

[mred]

I have a 4:3 HD set (Samsung TXP-3271H).  It allows you to stretch the widescreen HD signal vertically.  When the "stretched SD" HD signal is broadcast, I can stretch it to fill the whole screen in the correct aspect ratio.   If pillar bars are sent, I end up watching with a black frame around the whole image (pillar bars + letterbox), effectively turning my 32" TV into a 24".

In case anyone is curious, I chose the 4:3 set because:

1.  Most of our TV viewing is still in SD
2.  The 32" 4:3 was about the same price as the 30" widescreen and they are about the same width, making the effective screen size when watching widescreen content roughly the same.

[AndrewP]

In case anyone is curious, I chose the 4:3 set because:

1.  Most of our TV viewing is still in SD
2.  The 32" 4:3 was about the same price as the 30" widescreen and they are about the same width, making the effective screen size when watching widescreen content roughly the same.

I can't beleive you are making a case for 4x3 TV when whole world moves to 16x9 format.

1. Are you sure? Are you watching network shows?, football (at least 3 hours per week), baseball playoffs?, Rome (maybe not, but upcoming Sopranos season).
Are you watching widescreen DVDs?
I watch 4x3 content not more then 15-20 mins per day (local weather report, some local news and sports).
2. Even the width of both TVs are close how you can compare wide picture on both TVs.
Bottom line 4x3 TV is good for 4x3 content, that means it is not good for me, because I am watching 95% widescreen HD content. I just can't go back. :wave:

[Drummerboy]

My wife used to turn on one of the Music Now channels for an hour here and there (see how I blame burn-in on my wife).  After a month the burn-in was so bad I saw it on all content, especially on bright blue or white backgrounds (outdoor shots).  I changed the setup with separate inputs like AndrewP and ever since I have tried to make sure that SD content was streched.  I was so happy with the bonus of the aspect control on the SA 8000 when that finally came out.  It took a long time but after a couple years the burn-in is barely noticible.
My current STB (no longer have cable) has an aspect setting called "pillar box".  I watched WISC 3 with that setting and 4x3 content looked normal.  Unfortunately my box only has zoom settings and no stretch settings which stinks when I'm watching news with crawls.
Of course when I woke up this morning my wife had the Today show again on with BIG BLACK PILLARS (um don't touch that).   I am surprised morning network news shows aren't in HD yet.

[GBK]

I can't beleive you are making a case for 4x3 TV when whole world moves to 16x9 format.

1. Are you sure? Are you watching network shows?, football (at least 3 hours per week), baseball playoffs?, Rome (maybe not, but upcoming Sopranos season).
Are you watching widescreen DVDs?
I watch 4x3 content not more then 15-20 mins per day (local weather report, some local news and sports).
2. Even the width of both TVs are close how you can compare wide picture on both TVs.
Bottom line 4x3 TV is good for 4x3 content, that means it is not good for me, because I am watching 95% widescreen HD content. I just can't go back. :wave:

Same here.  I can't stand 4x3.  Typically don't watch it.  Reruns don't interest me... I've seen them before.  There is a lot of programs that were great but they look so dated in picture quality etc.  Movies from back then were all shot widescreen and it really ticks me off to see "this has been formated to fit your screen" BS ... I have HD Widescreen it was not formated for my screen and I don't care to watch it in its hacked apart version.