Tom C said:
Thanks Tom. (btw, this post is directed at no one, I just wanted to be subscribed to it)
I knew the figures, but this site (Tom's link) is easy to help me make a point.
This is exactly why I stay with 4:3
I like to use most of the screen as possible.
And the least amount of masking.
Take for example (see first picture) I have a size constraint on width, and I use a 120" 4:3 screen. (by chance this is what I have)
When watching on this screen, 16:9 material is at 110" (I lose just 10")
Now with the width constraint, I can only get a 110" 16:9 screen in.
So when watching 4:3 material it is at 90" (so I just lost 30" of what I am capable of watching)
Ok lets say I don't have width constraint and I can get a 120" 4:3 or a 120" 16:9 in the spot.
(see second picture)
Once again on a 4:3 screen, material for 16:9 is 110" (lost just 10")
For a 120" 16:9 and watching 4:3 material at 98" (I lose 22" of viewable screen)
At this point I would have to say that 70% of my dvd collection, (1600+ dvd's) is 4:3
However, once again, for the 16:9 material I do have, I lose less usable screen by staying with 4:3 native screen (and projector)
EDIT:: Note, this goes for all sizes 50" 80" 96" and so on.
EDIT #2: On the masking.
You will have less masking for a native 4:3 projector screen viewing 16:9 (just have to mask the top)
(that is for a movable screen (pull down), for a fixed you have to mask top and bottom)
For a native 16:9 screen (because of different formats 2.35:1 etc..) you will have to mask the top + bottom + both left and right sides. That is for a fixed screen, for movable pull down (manual or electric) you still have to mask both L&R sides and the top.
Also look at the amount of 4:3 dvd's (1.33:1)
(a lot say the format will die, I don't think it will die anytime soon)
http://www.imdb.com/Sections/DVDs/AspectRatios/
For those that need terms of the sizes here is a link for you.
http://www.timefordvd.com/glossary/GlossaryNumbers.shtml