[opendtv] Re: (No Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:30:37 -0400

  • From: Tom Barry <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 19:49:32 -0500

I have grown accustomed to the 16:9 ratio and think it will become the 
standard.  But I still would have chosen the nice 1.61:1 harmonic ratio 
if given the choice. (16:10 instead of 16:9)  I just think would have 
been more aesthetic and closer to my own needs as far as TV placement 
and wall space usage.

- Tom


Manfredi, Albert E wrote:

> Craig Birkmaier wrote:
> 
> 
>>The fact remains that the human visual field is
>>closer to 4:3 than 16:9. But this is not relevant
>>unless you are designing an immersive display
>>experience like IMAX.
> 
> 
> No, you are only partly correct in this.
> 
> The *screen* aspect ratio best suited to human
> vision is clearly not even close to 4:3. The
> mistake is to equate the screen aspect ratio
> with the ratio of field of view angles we
> see. You seem to still be making that mistake.
> Maybe I'm just misinterpreting your words.
> 
> If you used your notion, the article that claims
> a field of view of 180h by 60v degrees would
> translate to a 3:1 screen ratio. Yet, as proven
> with simple trig, this simply is wrong. Even that
> 3:1 ratio, in a screen, could stand some
> widening.
> 
> IMAX is simply filling the front wall of a venue
> with steeply raked seating arrangement. It is not
> designed to *most efficiently* fill your
> peripheral vision.
> 
> The best screen aspect ratio, in my opinion, is
> therefore not going to be based just on filling
> peripheral vision, nor should it be based on
> what movies made the most money. It should instead
> favor wide aspect ratio for the technical reasons
> given, and it should be a compromise to best fit
> the *majority* of upcoming *content*.
> 
> Although I personally was in favor of 2:1 back
> when, now that the TV industry and movie industry
> have both converged on 1.77:1 or 1.85:1, the
> 16:9 compromise makes very good sense. This
> compromise makes even more sense considering that
> your typical new stadium style movie theaters will
> likely encourage new blockbusters to use 1.85:1
> rather than 2.35:1 aspect ratios. In stadium
> theaters, 2.35:1 blockbusters create *smaller*
> images than 1.85:1 movies. Hardly what the
> Cinerama, Vistavision, or Panavision folks had
> in mind!!
> 
> Bert
>  
>  
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> 
> - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at 
> FreeLists.org 
> 
> - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
> 
> 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at 
FreeLists.org 

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. opendtv
  3. Archive
  4. 11-2004