'Simpsons,' 'Hill' HD Upgrade on Hold

[Gregg Lengling]

Producers and Network in Dispute Over Aspect Ratio
Despite a recent HD airing of "King of the Hill" that excited fans, Fox has no immediate plans to upgrade the production of its Sunday night animated comedies due to an aspect ratio dispute with producers. On Jan. 28, Fox aired an episode of "Hill" in HD, but the show was still formatted in the traditional 4:3 aspect ratio of the standard-definition regular series.

http://www.tvweek.com/page.cms?pageId=590

[Mark Strube]

As much as I love HD, I really feel that these shows don't need it. The animation doesn't really lend itself to too much detail, and I think they should keep things consistent with earlier episodes.

Honestly, if they do go HD... I hope they keep it in 4:3.

[SRW1000]

As much as I love HD, I really feel that these shows don't need it. The animation doesn't really lend itself to too much detail, and I think they should keep things consistent with earlier episodes.

Honestly, if they do go HD... I hope they keep it in 4:3.

I feel the opposite way.  There was a notable difference between the SD and HD versions, with a clearer picture, subtler details, and a reduction in digital noise.

I'd also prefer a 16x9 aspect ratio, just as I would for all other television programming.  

Scott

[Bebop]

Simpsons in HD.

http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox/thesimpsonsmovie/

[Paul S.]

I feel the opposite way.  There was a notable difference between the SD and HD versions, with a clearer picture, subtler details, and a reduction in digital noise.

I'd also prefer a 16x9 aspect ratio, just as I would for all other television programming.  

Scott

x1000000000

[Bebop]

About time.

[techguy1975]

I would say there is a difference.  I still use a "old fashined" non-HD tv, and there was a difference in tonights Simpsons.   It was very subtle on a non-HD TV, and I would imagine it would be much more noticeable

[TPK]

While I agree that animation really doesn't *NEED* the enhanced resolution of HD, I think that the widescreen (16x9) can really enhance the show..

I think this is especially true for a show like The Simpsons, where half of everything that is hilarious comes from the background...  Imagine all the fun the animators will have with all that extra room...

[ArgMeMatey]

I agree with the people who disagreed with Mark Strube.  Sorry, Mark.  

In other words, ultimately no one really "needs" TV AT ALL, animated or not.  But the goal of new TV production should be 16:9 for the same reasons widescreen is the standard for theatres.  

This is not the place for nostalgia; however I would like somebody to point out a thread or website with a list of points about how 4:3 is better than 16:9.  Cheaper, yes.  Easier, yes.  Besides that?

[TPK]

I agree with the people who disagreed with Mark Strube.  Sorry, Mark.  

In other words, ultimately no one really "needs" TV AT ALL, animated or not.  But the goal of new TV production should be 16:9 for the same reasons widescreen is the standard for theatres.  

This is not the place for nostalgia; however I would like somebody to point out a thread or website with a list of points about how 4:3 is better than 16:9.  Cheaper, yes.  Easier, yes.  Besides that?

For TV and movies, widescreen is most certainly better...

For just about anything else (computer displays, navigation units, etc..) widescreen is worse...

Unfortunately, too many (perhaps most) devices with a display these days are set up for widescreen landscape mode...

Here is an article I read about a month ago:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10150269-1.html

[ArgMeMatey]

For TV and movies, widescreen is most certainly better...

For just about anything else (computer displays, navigation units, etc..) widescreen is worse...

Thanks, I agree completely.  Good points in the article that I would echo based on my own computer experience.  I almost never use a widescreen display's full width for one application.  Usually it would be a bunch of separate apps so they could sit side by side without too much switching.  

So I would amend my earlier statement to say that just entertainment should shoot for 16:9.  Now can we have news and education in 4:3 HD?  I guess just regular widescreen HD with the bars on the sides?  And what do we do, as Homer would say, about "Infotainment"?  

[TPK]

Now can we have news and education in 4:3 HD?  I guess just regular widescreen HD with the bars on the sides?

Heh, I would say just the opposite (News in SD but widescreen)...

I think widescreen can lend itself to news as well as entertainment...  More room to put the "graphic" of the story next to the newscaster's head...  And I think that 4:3 is too constrained for on-location takes..  I think widescreen can be enhancing for newscasts..

Meanwhile some of these newscasters are just butt-ugly, with all sorts of skin blemishes that no amount of makeup can conceal, not at least wihtout making it obvious that they are wearing a lot of makeup...

The enhanced resolution of HD is not doing them (most of them) any favors

I'm sure most of them are not thrilled with the idea of going HD...  I sure as hell wouldn't be (but hey, I am not the one on television)....

[Bebop]

With any screen, it's all about real estate. I'll never go back to anything 4:3.

How else will I able to watch full screen HD on my computer monitor?