Why do most movies only use about 75% of the screen?

  • Thread starter cameron paterson
  • Start date
William Lemmerhirt

William Lemmerhirt

Audioholic Warlord
If the room, and front wall are dark enough, it shouldn’t matter too much. Unless of course your using an LCD...
 
j_garcia

j_garcia

Audioholic Jedi
Problem I have with this right now is Comcast, HBO specifically. Some their content displays correctly and others do not. Changing channels and having it go to a different aspect ratio is irritating.
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
Ya i am just gonna live with the bars. Dont want to mess with original content.
I'm throwing a like your way, because once you give it enough time, you start to respect that image. I didn't actually ask if you used a projector, but I lean towards projectors as THE way to watch movies. If you do ever go with a projector, then you can really get the incredible size and benefits of all the resolution that's currently available.

On a small screen (anything under 100" I consider 'small'), you do certainly notice that the screen isn't being completely filled when you have a 2.35 movie showing on your 1.78 screen with those bars.

All that means is that you need a bigger TV. :D
 
panteragstk

panteragstk

Audioholic Spartan
I had considered doing a scope (2.35:1) screen in my theater, but I realized that my screen width would be exactly the same no matter what aspect ratio I chose so I went with 16x9. Now I have the best of both worlds. Big 16x9 picture and the same 2.35:1 picture I would have had if I had gone with a scope screen.

Another way I've considered "solving" this problem is using blackout material to cover the bars, but with some movies switching between aspect ratios I don't think I'll ever do it. Plus, when I get a new PJ that has decent black levels it will be a non issue.
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
I had considered doing a scope (2.35:1) screen in my theater, but I realized that my screen width would be exactly the same no matter what aspect ratio I chose so I went with 16x9. Now I have the best of both worlds. Big 16x9 picture and the same 2.35:1 picture I would have had if I had gone with a scope screen.

Another way I've considered "solving" this problem is using blackout material to cover the bars, but with some movies switching between aspect ratios I don't think I'll ever do it. Plus, when I get a new PJ that has decent black levels it will be a non issue.
I've found that with my JVC, I still see the bars. It is totally something I'm used to, but when I switch things up in my basement, I will probably go all out with some sort of masking system. I can't even figure out if I'm going to go 2.35 or not. If I go 2.35 it may be a 170" diagonal or so to really use the width, but I'm not sure what will really happen at that point.

What you chose to do, in regards to 2.35 vs. 1.78 is what I always tell people. If you have the height to go 16:9, ALWAYS go 16:9. If you are height limited, and have the width, then 2.35 is a good way to go, but you must get a projector with motorized presets to switch between movies.
 
panteragstk

panteragstk

Audioholic Spartan
I've found that with my JVC, I still see the bars. It is totally something I'm used to, but when I switch things up in my basement, I will probably go all out with some sort of masking system. I can't even figure out if I'm going to go 2.35 or not. If I go 2.35 it may be a 170" diagonal or so to really use the width, but I'm not sure what will really happen at that point.

What you chose to do, in regards to 2.35 vs. 1.78 is what I always tell people. If you have the height to go 16:9, ALWAYS go 16:9. If you are height limited, and have the width, then 2.35 is a good way to go, but you must get a projector with motorized presets to switch between movies.
That's exactly what I did. Why waste the height?
 

Latest posts


newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top