HI-FI

Returning to this topic (started in the 19th Feb thread DVD subtitles
partly invisible), I made a DVD with a program called ConvertXToDVD,
working in 16:9 PAL throughout. Just before making the DVD, this is
what I see:
http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/AspectWrong1.jpg

As you see, instead of it being centered, it is shifted to the top.
Thats an issue Ive raised with VSO. But at least the title is still
*visible*.

The resulting DVD movie is fine, but the menu is WRONG. It looks like
4:3. And because of this darned overscan effect Ive learned about
here, the DVD menu title Thames Tour is now completely off the top
edge.
http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/TVAspect1.JPG

Its a real PITA and Im surprised its tolerated so widely!

--
Terry, West Sussex, UK

In uk.tech.digital-tv Terry Pinnell wrote:
: The resulting DVD movie is fine, but the menu is WRONG. It looks like
: 4:3. And because of this darned overscan effect Ive learned about
: here, the DVD menu title Thames Tour is now completely off the top
: edge.
: http://www.terrypin.dial.pipex.com/Images/TVAspect1.JPG

: Its a real PITA and Im surprised its tolerated so widely!

The whole point of the safe area is that captions, at least,
should always be visible. If you (or the software youve used)
allow captions/text to extend outside the safe area then you
shouldnt be surprised if they end up not being visible.

You might like to suggest to the authors of ConvertXtoDVD that
an option to display a safe-area graticule would be useful!

Richard.
http://www.rtrussell.co.uk/
To reply by email change news to my forename.

news@rtrussell.co.uk wrote:


Thanks. Did that yesterday, when the balance of probability shifted to
its being their program at fault, not me .

But surely youre not saying this overscan is justifiable? If so, I
disagree.

Theres an obvious analogy with my desktop PC monitor. All 1024 x 768
of its pixels are visible. I cant afford to lose 10-20% of them! If I
drag a folder off the edge, thats down to me, and if I want to see
the whole folder again I just drag it back. If I share a photo with
someone, I know theyll be able to see its entirety. No arbitrary bits
missing. Its been like this for as long as I remember having a PC
(about 23 years?).

It should be just as easily achievable on my LCD TV! And its every
bit as desirable IMO.

Hmm, maybe Ill ask the BBC for a 19% reduction in my licence fee, on
the grounds that 10% overscan means Im only seeing 81% of their
broadcasts?

--
Terry, West Sussex, UK

...snip...Theres an obvious analogy with my desktop PC monitor. All 1024 x
768

Terry,

Youre forgetting the large number of us with CRT 4:3 screens and even your
analogy with PCs breaks down at that point. My 17inch CRT actually displays
about 15.1inches diagonal and I get easily (mis)set the screen to heavily
overscan. To get a reasonable picture I either have to set the screen for a
slight black surround or accept overscan.

Now I know whats going one here and having a slight black surround is
fine - but not for Mr & Mrs Disgruntled of Suburbia its not. They paid
good money for their 21inch set 20 years ago and they want a 21inch (sic)
picture, not something with black around the edges!

So the broadcasters are caught between the I dont want overscanned LCD
and the I want overscanned CRT brigades - and its a loss-loss situation.

Paul DS.

In article ,
Paul D.Smith wrote:

IMHO overscanning has nothing to do with the broadcasters. Its the set
makers who want to try and have their picture look larger in the stores
for bigger sales from the great unwashed. Broadcasters will allow a safe
area, but set makers will always try and exploit this.

--
*I speak fluent patriarchy but its not my mother tongue

Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Its called widesceen the top and bottom of a picture are aestically
displeasing and are discarded for widescreen, get used to it, it
*is* better, I used to think it was horrible but I have now been
re-educated by the kind folks in this and other groups.
Thanks Guy, I am so embarassed when I look back
at when I believed the top and bottom of the picture were
necessary. How foolish do I look now!!!

Terry Pinnell wrote in message
news:iclrv1d93qtbvnei4ubru4ioiq55ptfm59@4ax.com...

On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:


It does - the broadcaster use the overscanned area to hide stuff still.
My CRT TV is underscanned at the moment (it used to be used as a TV studio
monitor) and you can see when broadcasters use vision mixers as the sides
of the picture behind the one being mixed are visible. This should
obviously be overscanned off the screen.

Overscanning is basically required for CRT TVs as straight vertical lines
arent straight on a normal TV at the edge. The top of the picture is
also used for teletext data and for widescreen switching signalling
(though its a bit of a cart before the horse situation as they used the
overscanned area because it was already there).

Most CRT TVs made towards the end of CRTs dominance (especially the cheap
ones sold in supermarkets) were built and set up incredibly cheaply. Low
grade electronic components mean that pictures with variations in
brightness produce lines at the edges of the screen that arent straight.
Theyre set up very quickly which means more overscanning than is strictly
needed is used. If consumers were willing to pay extra money for TVs to
be set up properly (like Sony and Panasonic TVs used to be) then they
would be, but consumers werent willing and the lowest common denominator
won.

Andrew

--
---------------------------- Andrew Maddison ----------------------------
*(email)* andrewnews *(at)* resbh *(dot)* co *(dot)* uk
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

In article
, Andrew
Maddison wrote:

No it shouldnt. Its part of the specified picture area, and if unwanted
stuff is visible there its a result of mistiming somewhere at the studio,
and it ought to be corrected at source. Its certainly not intended that
domestic TV sets should be adjusted to hide the broadcasters faults. Its
not right to use one bodge to cover up another.

Rod.