Path: inforamp.net!woody15.inforamp.net!user From: poynton@poynton.com (Charles Poynton) Newsgroups: sci.engr.advanced-tv Subject: Re: Variable aspect ratio as a feature of advanced TV? Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 19:33:21 -0500 Lines: 35 Message-ID: References: ,<3d6jru$i7@newsbf02.news-fddi.aol.com> <1994Dec20.151755.16684@nb.rockwell.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: woody15.inforamp.net In article <1994Dec20.151755.16684@nb.rockwell.com>, manfredi@engr04.comsys.rockwell.com wrote: > Could you explain, in 3 sentences or less, what the big deal is [with 16:9]? 16:9 is the geometric mean of current television aspect ratio (4:3) and the widest cinema aspect ratio in wide use (2.35:1). It is also very very close to the predominant cinema aspect ratio, 1.85:1. It represents international, broad, open agreement among people who want to make programs and people who want to make equipment. Members of the American Society of Cinematographers were well aware of the discussions that led to the international standard at 16:9 (most of the meetings in L.A.). They didn't show up. Anyone who has had first-hand experience with production for a diversity of aspect ratios, or even firsthand experience with international distribution of documents (US Letter vs A4) understands the value of agreement on a recommended aspect ratio. There is no need to preclude anyone's special interests in a particular, unusual aspect ratio, but to force a variable or unknown aspect ratio on everyone is simply uneconomical and impractical. As far as I am aware, no manufacturers and no program producers are asking for a diversity of aspect ratios. C. -- Charles Poynton vox: +1 416 486 3271 fax: +1 416 486 3657 poynton@poynton.com [preferred, Mac Eudora, MIME, BinHqx] --