Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why are there no 16:9 computer monitors?
- Thread starter rayneg
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Here's the problem. I have a Samsung 61" DLP, which is a widescreen TV (a very nice looking one, I might add 
), BUT:
Widescreen movies come with the black bars standard so that the image becomes 4:3. That means that I can't use the full dimensions of my TV, and the black bars surround all 4 sides. The top and bottom black is built into the image, and the side bars exist because a 4:3 image is centered onto the screen.
The only way to take advantage of the full width of the TV is to use the panorama mode, and although it does use a good algorithm to stretch, it's not quite the same as the whole image filling my screen.
16:9 screens will only be worth their salt for DVD watching when you can get DVDs that don't have the black bars as part of the image.
), BUT:Widescreen movies come with the black bars standard so that the image becomes 4:3. That means that I can't use the full dimensions of my TV, and the black bars surround all 4 sides. The top and bottom black is built into the image, and the side bars exist because a 4:3 image is centered onto the screen.
The only way to take advantage of the full width of the TV is to use the panorama mode, and although it does use a good algorithm to stretch, it's not quite the same as the whole image filling my screen.
16:9 screens will only be worth their salt for DVD watching when you can get DVDs that don't have the black bars as part of the image.
The problem with hollywood movies, is that they're are even wider rhan 16:9, more like 18:9 (or 2:1)....
So, even a widescreen TV (16:9) gets those black lines top and bottom. Sometimes those lines are being used for a good cause like subtitles.
Over here in Europe, we get more and more "native" 16:9 broadcasts, especially the very lucky UK BSB-sports viewers...
If you have a widescreen TV, then watching those live football matches widescreen on Sky Sports is absolutely perfect!
So, even a widescreen TV (16:9) gets those black lines top and bottom. Sometimes those lines are being used for a good cause like subtitles.
Over here in Europe, we get more and more "native" 16:9 broadcasts, especially the very lucky UK BSB-sports viewers...
If you have a widescreen TV, then watching those live football matches widescreen on Sky Sports is absolutely perfect!
The math is simple
It's easier to compare numbers when they are all X:1.
To get that, just devide the width by hight. so 16/9=1.77:1, or slightly squareer than many movies at 1.85:1. It works on the pixel level too since as far as I know all computer monitors have square pixels.
here's more:
Apples 17" studio display = 1280/1024 = 1.25:1
most regular 4/3 monitors (800x600, 1024x768, etc.)= 1.33:1
Apples 17" widescreens = 1440/900 = 16/10 = 1.6:1
Apples 15" PB display = 1280/854 = 1.5:1
35mm film = 36/24mm = 1.5:1
The last two match, so the 15" PB is the only computer in the universe that displays a full frame 35mm photo.
It's easier to compare numbers when they are all X:1.
To get that, just devide the width by hight. so 16/9=1.77:1, or slightly squareer than many movies at 1.85:1. It works on the pixel level too since as far as I know all computer monitors have square pixels.
here's more:
Apples 17" studio display = 1280/1024 = 1.25:1
most regular 4/3 monitors (800x600, 1024x768, etc.)= 1.33:1
Apples 17" widescreens = 1440/900 = 16/10 = 1.6:1
Apples 15" PB display = 1280/854 = 1.5:1
35mm film = 36/24mm = 1.5:1
The last two match, so the 15" PB is the only computer in the universe that displays a full frame 35mm photo.
Working out aspect ratios from the pixel count is one thing. But when I actually put a ruler to my 22" Cinema Display, the illuminated area is 18.5" wide x 12" high, for an aspect ratio of 1.54.
With so-called "full screen" DVDs, the image appears at 16" x 12" size (4:3 aspect ratio), so there's a 1.25" vertical strip of wasted space on each side.
The problem with a 1.85 aspect ratio on a computer screen is this. Keep the 18.5" width of the Cinema Display, and divide by 1.85 to get the height: 10 inches.
Oops! No black "letterbox" bars. But who's gonna put up with a big, wide, costly display that's only 10" tall and won't display a full 8.5" x 11" page?
I realize that "full screen" DVDs are considered a bit downscale and lowbrow by film purists. The issue for me is image magnification. The "full screen" image is a full 12" high, whereas the "widescreen" image is reduced to only 8" to 10" high to fit the screen width. For musical concerts I prefer the "closer in" feeling of full screen format.
I conclude that "widescreen" will never be popular for computer displays, because getting adequate height means absurd widths.
When I get a decent HDTV or projection screen with widescreen format, then I'll buy widescreen-format DVDs of my favorite concerts.
With so-called "full screen" DVDs, the image appears at 16" x 12" size (4:3 aspect ratio), so there's a 1.25" vertical strip of wasted space on each side.
The problem with a 1.85 aspect ratio on a computer screen is this. Keep the 18.5" width of the Cinema Display, and divide by 1.85 to get the height: 10 inches.
Oops! No black "letterbox" bars. But who's gonna put up with a big, wide, costly display that's only 10" tall and won't display a full 8.5" x 11" page?
I realize that "full screen" DVDs are considered a bit downscale and lowbrow by film purists. The issue for me is image magnification. The "full screen" image is a full 12" high, whereas the "widescreen" image is reduced to only 8" to 10" high to fit the screen width. For musical concerts I prefer the "closer in" feeling of full screen format.
I conclude that "widescreen" will never be popular for computer displays, because getting adequate height means absurd widths.
When I get a decent HDTV or projection screen with widescreen format, then I'll buy widescreen-format DVDs of my favorite concerts.
35 mm film
Hey
35mm anamorphic is 2.35:1
35mm motion picture film is 1.85:1 ratio not 1.5:1
Super 16mm is 16:9
Standard 16mm is 4:3
Hey
35mm anamorphic is 2.35:1
35mm motion picture film is 1.85:1 ratio not 1.5:1
Super 16mm is 16:9
Standard 16mm is 4:3