[opendtv] Re: Redefining anamorphic
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 16:38:33 -0500
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
> John Shutt wrote:
>>
>> Craig,
>>
>> To me, "anamorphic" has come to mean "full height widescreen" when
>> a given frame could either be widescreen or standard aspect ratio.
>>
>> All of the HD downsamples you describe are always 16:9, therefore
>> I wouldn't call them "anamorphic."
>
> We agree. Anamorphic is really a term used to describe optic
> according to Dictionary.com.
>
> "Optics. having or producing unequal magnifications along two axes
> perpendicular to each other."
>
> What we are talking about here is square pixels versus non-square
> pixels.
The display's pixel arrangement, square or non-square, is not the issue
here. It is merely how the content of the MPEG frame has to be stretched
to fill the display. The only variable that matters is display aspect
ratio.
In my older 16:9 set, 1024 X 768, the pixels are not square. And yet,
you have to decide whether the incoming MPEG frame should be "stretched
out" to a 16:9 ratio, or "not stretched out," painted in a 4:3 frame in
the middle of the display. EXACTLY the same effect as I get with my 1366
X 768 display, with square pixels.
The term "anamorphic" in DTV simply harkens back to 35mm movie days, and
it ASSUMES that a standard MPEG frame must be displayed on a 4:3
display. In fact, that assumption is becoming less and less valid, but
I'm sure the term will stick.
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.
Other related posts:
