criterionforum.org

And have you tried fiddling with the player output functions? I know one of my players (may have been my PS3) had a few different ways to output picture, and it took a bit of playing to get the player and TV settings aligned.

Thanks for the suggestions.

My player (Sony BDP-N460) offers "Original" and "Fixed Aspect Ratio" as the two choices under "Screen Formats". The term "Original" appears counter-intuitive since Sony's description implies 4:3 content will be stretched to fill a 16:9 screen using this option. "Fixed Aspect Ratio" will supposedly present all content in the appropriate aspect ratio. I believe I've tinkered with this set-up menu a couple of times already, but will try it again when I get home.

As it is, I'm in the habit of changing the output resolution of the player routinely depending on what content I'm viewing: 1080p for Blu-rays (naturally), 720p for anamorphic DVDs and internet streaming through the player (trying to upconvert this content to 1080p results in too blurry of an image) and 480p for non-anamorphic DVDs.

I'm not sure upconverting a non-anamorphic DVD from 480p to 720p will be an improvement for me, but it will be interesting to see if I can find the correct settings to maintain a proper 4:3 aspect ratio at higher output resolutions.

Yes, Fixed Aspect Ratio is what you want; I'm willing to bet you've got it set to Original. There's no reason you should have to be changing the output every time you watch a different format, it'd be crazy for a player manufacturer to expect a user to do this.

As for any quality differences you're seeing, it's likely a placebo effect: your TV upscales everything to 1080p regardless of how the player outputs. When you set your player to 720p for anamorphic DVDs for instance, you're still watching them in 1080p.

EddieLarkin wrote: ...As for any quality differences you're seeing, it's likely a placebo effect...

Perhaps it's the relationship between the player and the TV, but there is a real difference in the image; so much so that I can easily tell what resolution the player output is set at simply by looking at the player's start-up screen!

Ah, but that's different. If you have the output set to 480p, that becomes the native resolution of the start up screen. If you have it set to 1080p, then that becomes the native resolution of the start up screen. No upscaling is involved.

But with the actual 480p DVD, the DVD is native 480p regardless of how you set the output, and the upscaled result is 1080p regardless of how you set the output. Either your BD player does the scaling, or your TV does it.

I have to assume that the TV does a better job of upscaling to 1080p than the player does, so lowering the player's output resolution for content natively at 720p or lower results in a better overall image...according to my eyes, anyway .

David M. would obviously know for sure, but it's my impression that in general players do better jobs than TVs. But I guess that depends on the player.

For progressive content there's usually very little difference in in-player scaling vs in-TV scaling. It's possible they're using the same chip.

EddieLarkin wrote:Yes, Fixed Aspect Ratio is what you want; I'm willing to bet you've got it set to Original...

...and you were absolutely right, Eddie: the player was set to "Original" which, in no way, preserves 4:3 content in it's original aspect ratio! #-o
Thanks for the advice on that.

Another thing I discovered when comparing the Sony BDP-N460 output resolution settings is that in 480p the image is slightly zoomed in losing information on the sides (this affects 16:9 content as well as 4:3). This is not the case when the player output is set to 720p or higher. So, with the "Fixed Aspect Ratio" on, I'm now able to watch standard definition 4:3 content via a 720p output and get a better-looking image in the correct aspect ratio (no zoom in or cropping)*.

*Also, I can confirm that there is a discernible difference between outputting standard definition content in 720p vs. 1080p with this player; the 720p upscaling provides a sharper image than 1080p upscaling.

I humbly offer Eight Reasons Why You Should Dump That LCD Television and Buy an HD Projector:

http://worldcinemaparadise.com/2014/03/ ... projector/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So I'm getting a bit tired of my Home Theater in a Box- there are too many instances where dialogue gets muddled, my girlfriend asks "what'd he say?" and I miss too or three lines trying to think about it and explain it to her. I'd like to put together a better sound system, but my big question is how much to spend. I don't want to put more than $2k into the speakers, but most recommendations I see online are for 5.1 systems that are around $500 to $1000, or over $2500. Is it worthwhile to put my money into something like an NHT Absolute 5.1 system, or is the difference between that and a good $800 speaker set not worth the money?

For a 2k budget I wouldn't recommend doing more than a 2.1 or 3.1 system. I'm not familiar with the nht set. You can always add more speakers later if you want. The thing is once you get a good set of speakers you never need to upgrade. If you buy cheap speakers, you may want to upgrade again down the line and end up wasting even more money. Do you need to include a receiver in that budget? How big is your space?

Personally I've always liked klipsch speakers. Some people don't. But for 2k you'd get a very good 3.1 setup for a small to medium room with 2 rf-62 towers, 1 rc-62 center, and a svs sound sub. Cheap bookshelves, flea market, or your current speakers if you need rears right now

It's an odd L shaped room with a sloping roof. Overall, it's 27x27, but with a 18 x 13 chunk taken out of one of the corners. It also has a sloped ceiling that goes from 8 feet at the wall to 14 feet at the apex.

Stuart Galbraith IV wrote:I humbly offer Eight Reasons Why You Should Dump That LCD Television and Buy an HD Projector:

http://worldcinemaparadise.com/2014/03/ ... projector/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for this. I read your article a few weeks ago and you made me aware of the value out there with projectors, especially when looking to build a home cinema system on a budget. After doing my own research, I'm pretty convinced that I'm going to get a projector when I move in a few months. The projector seems the easy bit, with there being a couple of £550-800 choices, but the screen solution is less straight forward.

The extras on A Tree Grows in Brooklyn only occupy the top left corner of my screen when played. Has anyone came across this issue before or know how to rectify it? Thanks.

Never experienced it myself, but have heard about it several times. I believe it's a Fox thing. Unfortunately I cannot recall a solution.

Those things are typically fixed via firmware update of your player. (Or not.)

I'm afraid I know what this is, but my projector is showing a thin band of blue tint on the bottom and red tint on the top. Is there any way this is something I can actually fix, or is it something in the LCD system degrading that is just going to get worse and worse?

The latter, sorry. The best you can do is make sure it's getting plenty of ventilation. But yes, I wouldn't be surprised if they cooked themselves over time.

Goddamn it, I knew it. I so can't afford to replace this stupid thing.

Ask the manufacturer to service it?

It's well out of warranty, and I'm guessing servicing costs are going to be more than getting another one would be. Argh, I love this thing, but it's frustrating as hell.

That reminds me of a similar problem I'm having with my Panny GT30, one that happens infrequently enough that I keep forgetting to do anything about it. Basically, once in a blue moon I'll turn the TV on and as long as it's showing something with deep blacks (pillar bars for instance), red pixels will appear in a smudge form in the bottom right hand side of the screen, dancing around. If I keep turning the screen on and off again eventually they'll go away and won't come back for awhile. The TV is still under a 5 year warranty, but I don't see how I could demonstrate it to a technician when it happens so randomly and infrequently.

Any ideas as to the cause?

eerik wrote:PowerDVD sucks because it does not let you mess up the aspect ratio:

One thing that made me almost go for it was it promised the ability to stretch the video. If I put a BluRay on my player and TV I can zoom and get it to fit the screen. Even on a 1.33 to 1 video that is not anamorphic. This program offers NO ZOOM. NO CROP NO alternative but to watch a video that looks like Lincoln's Stove Pipe Hat Ratio! Example: Poirot. I love the show. I bought a hundred dollar (no give or take) set. I get the Lincoln Effect on version 12 and this version.

Although it still sucks, as it does not let you correct the ratio on some botched discs and let you crop windowboxing!

TMDaines wrote:Although it still sucks, as it does not let you correct the ratio on some botched discs and let you crop windowboxing!

What DVD/Blu-Ray program DOESn'T suck? Anything?