16:9 or 4:3 ... *POLL INCLUDED*

[purbeast0]

I am just wondering ...

I purchased a new TV this past weekend and it was a 16:9 TV. Since I watch movies MUCH more than TV (I mainly watch LOST, as well as repeats on FX and TBS, and sports), I didn't even hesitate and went with 16:9. Not to mention, HD is gearing towards 16:9, and HD is basically the future of TV so there is no way I would get a 4:3 tv now.

I am just wondering what you guys would get and why? I know some people still don't like WS stuff, even for movies. They prefer FS because they think they are getting more picture, when in reality its not even close.

Oh yea, and games in 16:9 look awesome too

 

[Deeko]

Considering I just bought a 16:9 last year....

 

[MrChad]

I will go with 16:9 for my next TV, but there are many compelling reasons for going 4:3.

1. Most TV content is still broadcast on 4:3, and 4:3 content still looks best on a 4:3 set.
2. At least with CRT HDTVs, 4:3 sets tend to give you the same or more screen real estate for less money. For instance, a 32" 4:3 set has almost the same widescreen viewable area as a 30" 16:9 set, and it costs the same amount of money. However, a 30" 16:9 has significantly less 4:3 viewable area than a 32" 4:3 set.

 

[Modeps]

Until 16:9 becomes a regular standard, I'll stick with 4:3 tube (f rear projection) and deal with the top/bottom black bars once every few weeks when I watch a DVD.

 

[thomsbrain]

i would never buy a 4:3 set.

 

[Qwest]

Originally posted by: Modeps
Until 16:9 becomes a regular standard, I'll stick with 4:3 tube (f rear projection) and deal with the top/bottom black bars once every few weeks when I watch a DVD.

i agree, 16:9 regular television looks terrible. i like my sony 4:3 tube just fine.

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: MrChad
I will go with 16:9 for my next TV, but there are many compelling reasons for going 4:3.

1. Most TV content is still broadcast on 4:3, and 4:3 content still looks best on a 4:3 set.
2. At least with CRT HDTVs, 4:3 sets tend to give you the same or more screen real estate for less money. For instance, a 32" 4:3 set has almost the same widescreen viewable area as a 30" 16:9 set, and it costs the same amount of money. However, a 30" 16:9 has significantly less 4:3 viewable area than a 32" 4:3 set.

content looks the same on a 4:3 as it does on a 16:9, as far as quality goes. the misconception is that usually when people buy a 16:9 tv, they get a big screen, usually over 50" or so. well on your new 16:9 50" tv, yes the cable broadcast looks very noisy. but this is only because your tv is so good and large that it can pick up on just how crappy the signal is, showing all of the noise. if you were to get a 50" 4:3 tv, the content would look just as bad.

but your 2nd point does make sense. It's just that alot of the new technology (DLP and LCD) doesn't really come in 4:3 at all, so if you want that you either have to get a tube or an out of date RPTV.

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: binoculaz

Originally posted by: Modeps
Until 16:9 becomes a regular standard, I'll stick with 4:3 tube (f rear projection) and deal with the top/bottom black bars once every few weeks when I watch a DVD.

i agree, 16:9 regular television looks terrible. i like my sony 4:3 tube just fine.

heh then don't stretch it, and it will be in 4:3 mode. it looks fine. you can't even notice the bars on the sides of the screen after 10 seconds of watching it, just like the bars don't bother you when watching a 16:9 movie on a 4:3 tv.

 

[Merlyn3D]

I have a 16:9 WS, and it's awesome, no more wasted space in movies or HDTV broadcasts, plus it just looks a hell of a lot cooler.

 

[Modeps]

Originally posted by: purbeast0

Originally posted by: binoculaz

Originally posted by: Modeps
Until 16:9 becomes a regular standard, I'll stick with 4:3 tube (f rear projection) and deal with the top/bottom black bars once every few weeks when I watch a DVD.

i agree, 16:9 regular television looks terrible. i like my sony 4:3 tube just fine.

heh then don't stretch it, and it will be in 4:3 mode. it looks fine. you can't even notice the bars on the sides of the screen after 10 seconds of watching it, just like the bars don't bother you when watching a 16:9 movie on a 4:3 tv.

What about that wacky 'burn in' problem?

 

[MrChad]

Originally posted by: Modeps
What about that wacky 'burn in' problem?

No burn-in if you keep the side bars gray (not black).

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: Modeps

Originally posted by: purbeast0

Originally posted by: binoculaz

Originally posted by: Modeps
Until 16:9 becomes a regular standard, I'll stick with 4:3 tube (f rear projection) and deal with the top/bottom black bars once every few weeks when I watch a DVD.

i agree, 16:9 regular television looks terrible. i like my sony 4:3 tube just fine.

heh then don't stretch it, and it will be in 4:3 mode. it looks fine. you can't even notice the bars on the sides of the screen after 10 seconds of watching it, just like the bars don't bother you when watching a 16:9 movie on a 4:3 tv.

What about that wacky 'burn in' problem?

and the new DLP's (and i believe LCD's) don't have this worry as well, they can't get burn-in. CRT RPTV's however do still have this problem.

 

[Modeps]

Originally posted by: MrChad

Originally posted by: Modeps
What about that wacky 'burn in' problem?

No burn-in if you keep the side bars gray (not black).

Ah, I gotcha. I'm still sticking with me 4:3 for now.

 

[Viper GTS]

Bought my first 16:9 6 months ago, don't plan on going back.

Viper GTS

 

[bluehorizon]

OMG. You're fvcking everywhere! I'd like to avoid your posts, but there's too damn many of them. You've posted in 24 different threads today, 4 of which you started yourself. You love being in the spotlight don't you? And you have the audacity to slander someone else for posting senseless crap (which got locked, good for the mods). Everywhere I look, I see your name. It might not be so bad if all of your posts weren't about childish ranting or self ego-boosting. Troll.

---

You will be elsewhere for the next week so you will not have to worry about his posts for awhile.

AnandTech Moderator

 

[Modeps]

Originally posted by: bluehorizon
OMG. You're fvcking everywhere! I'd like to avoid your posts, but there's too damn many of them. You've posted in 24 different threads today, 4 of which you started yourself. You love being in the spotlight don't you? And you have the audacity to slander someone else for posting senseless crap (which got locked, good for the mods). Everywhere I look, I see your name. It might not be so bad if all of your posts weren't about childish ranting or self ego-boosting. Troll.

SERENITY NOW!

 

[Trente]

16:9 hands down!

 

[slycat]

Originally posted by: bluehorizon
OMG. You're fvcking everywhere! I'd like to avoid your posts, but there's too damn many of them. You've posted in 24 different threads today, 4 of which you started yourself. You love being in the spotlight don't you? And you have the audacity to slander someone else for posting senseless crap (which got locked, good for the mods). Everywhere I look, I see your name. It might not be so bad if all of your posts weren't about childish ranting or self ego-boosting. Troll.

are u talking about the OP?

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: bluehorizon
OMG. You're fvcking everywhere! I'd like to avoid your posts, but there's too damn many of them. You've posted in 24 different threads today, 4 of which you started yourself. You love being in the spotlight don't you? And you have the audacity to slander someone else for posting senseless crap (which got locked, good for the mods). Everywhere I look, I see your name. It might not be so bad if all of your posts weren't about childish ranting or self ego-boosting. Troll.

plz let go of my sack, thanks.

 

[rh71]

we were on the fence when we bought our 57" WS in 2002. My now-wife had concerns that the picture on the WS would look awkward, but we quickly discovered Sony's "wide zoom" mode to suffice. There's no way we'd even consider 4:3 ever again.

I do have some DVDs that offer FS and WS discs in one (why don't more do that?... why do some actually do it if it's a cost thing?)... I only opt to use the FS version when I rip it for my 160x160 palm screen. Looks better.

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: rh71
we were on the fence when we bought our 57" WS in 2002. My now-wife had concerns that the picture on the WS would look awkward, but we quickly discovered Sony's "wide zoom" mode to suffice. There's no way we'd get 4:3 ever.

I do have some DVDs that offer FS and WS discs in one (why don't more do that?... why do some actually do it if it's a cost thing?)... I only opt to use the FS version when I rip it for my 160x160 palm screen. Looks better.

its all about the capacity left on the disc and the quality of the disc. if you notice, the ones that have a WS and FS version on the same disc, on the same side, typically are movies that do not have huge special effects, an awesome soundtrack, or alot of extras. therefore they have more capacity on the disc to put both a WS and FS version on one side of it.

also, in these cases where the WS and FS are on the same side of a disc, USUALLY the picture COULD potentially be better than it is, which would cause they to use more space.

I have noticed that DVD5 movies (movies that don't use dual layer DVDs, holding 4.5gb and not 9gb) typically are comedies or older movies with little or no extras (happy gilmore, home alone 1 and 2, TMNT).

you rarely see this on newer movies, especially ones with great special effects and great soundtracks.

 

[randomlinh]

i too tend to watch more movies than tv... ideally, i'd have a 32" flat screen tv in the wall, and when time comes... backdrop falls, and on comes the widescreen projector

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: Modeps
Until 16:9 becomes a regular standard, I'll stick with 4:3 tube (f rear projection) and deal with the top/bottom black bars once every few weeks when I watch a DVD.

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: Modeps
Until 16:9 becomes a regular standard, I'll stick with 4:3 tube (f rear projection) and deal with the top/bottom black bars once every few weeks when I watch a DVD.

you inspired me to create this thread

 

[bandana163]

I live in Europe, most channels are 4:3 and HDTV is expensive, so I voted 4:3.