1187: "Aspect Ratio"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

rmsgrey
Posts: 3074
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby rmsgrey » Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:37 pm UTC

Whizbang wrote:The support script is the only workable solution to the problem of people thinking they know what they are doing, without spending gobs and gobs of time and money to train support techs, and even more time and money training users. Even the best tech will fall into the trap of the "smart" user who has "tried everything", only to find out that "everything" didn't include checking the plug or turning on/off some minor and obvious setting.

It sucks. It is excruciating for everyone involved, but it works and avoids spending heaps of time on more complex fixes when the solution is something simple. So, unfortunately both techs and users need to run through the script.

Sometimes it just takes having someone stand over your shoulder, making you take it one step at a time.


If it helps, try thinking of the support script as the equivalent of a NASA pre-flight checklist: "rebooted?" "check" "all plugs secure?" "check" "power to all components?" "check" "tried running task manager to check whether the service runs?" "I'm not using Windows..."

Okay, so it only works if your computer fits the script, but still...

Zylon
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 5:37 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Zylon » Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:42 pm UTC

rickane58 wrote:I have no problem with stretching 4:3 content to 16:9

Sounds like you're intellectually qualified to manage a sports bar.

twcarlson
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:52 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby twcarlson » Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:24 pm UTC

What's worse than the linear stretch of 4:3 to 16:9, is the variable stretch sometimes called "panorama mode" where the sides are stretched and the center stays proportional. This mode has good intentions, but wait until someone or something moves across the screen, accelerating and decelerating as it goes. Or look at a diagonal line on the screen that warps back and forth.

crossalchemist
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 6:51 am UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby crossalchemist » Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:31 pm UTC

Good(ish) news everyone! Sony Pictures has reserved several Animorphs related domains. (I'd say which ones, but if I do, I get a "This message was flagged as spam and has been denied." message. Just look it up on the Animorphs wikipedia page.) This, of course, means next to nothing, but still nice to know that some corporate flunky knows Animorphs exists.

Personally, I think Animorphs would do much better as a high production value cable TV show, similar to shows like Walking Dead, than as a movie (unless it was to be a series of movies). I think you could justify making the material a little more 'adult' (blood, violence, and such), as those who enjoyed the books when they were new are much older now.

Also, most TVs have several different 'fit' settings to get rid of the extra bars.

endolith
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 2:14 am UTC
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby endolith » Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:34 pm UTC

jasc15 wrote:Here is a more elaborate rant on this topic that I was immediately reminded of when reading this comic.


This man is very angry about black bars on his TV screen.

Native
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:52 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Native » Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:58 pm UTC

endolith wrote:
jasc15 wrote:...


This man is very angry about black bars on his TV screen.


Not as angry as some. I can't post a link, but google "philips hostage 2002" for some bbc and cnn coverage, or watch Off Screen (2005).

User avatar
AlexTheSeal
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:57 am UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby AlexTheSeal » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:19 pm UTC

endolith wrote:
jasc15 wrote:Here is a more elaborate rant on this topic that I was immediately reminded of when reading this comic.

This man is very angry about black bars on his TV screen.


I wish I could say that I stopped reading at "Sometimes movie buffs will notice things missing in a 4:3 transfer of a scope movie, but it's rarely a serious problem." However, I read the whole thing, even through "All you're getting on the sides of a real HDTV show is junk, like scenery or lines from graphics that simply extend a few inches more to the sides. The only action on the sides is talent or players walking on or off the stage."

The guy is a hopeless fruitcake.

Code: Select all

10 REM WORLD'S SMALLEST ADVENTURE GAME
20 PRINT "YOU ARE IN A CAVE (N, S, E, W)? ";
30 INPUT A$
40 GOTO 10

Lulled to sleep by the one-hertz chuckle of Linux logfile writes since 1997.

Xjph
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 3:59 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Xjph » Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:24 pm UTC

AlexTheSeal wrote:
endolith wrote:
jasc15 wrote:Here is a more elaborate rant on this topic that I was immediately reminded of when reading this comic.

This man is very angry about black bars on his TV screen.


I wish I could say that I stopped reading at "Sometimes movie buffs will notice things missing in a 4:3 transfer of a scope movie, but it's rarely a serious problem." However, I read the whole thing, even through "All you're getting on the sides of a real HDTV show is junk, like scenery or lines from graphics that simply extend a few inches more to the sides. The only action on the sides is talent or players walking on or off the stage."

The guy is a hopeless fruitcake.


I stopped giving him any credit when I realised he was arguing in favour of stretching 4:3 images to fullscreen rather than ensuring that all images were displayed at their proper aspect ratio.

Zendax
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:07 am UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Zendax » Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:00 pm UTC

Steve the Pocket wrote:I have the same problem with people who watch SD broadcasts on widescreen televisions stretched out to the edges. How does it not bother them? There should literally not be the option on the remote. Pillarbox that shit or spring for the HD cable package, buddy! This goes double for the morons in charge of the TVs at places like Applebee's because then everyone else has to put up with it too.


It's even worse when they HAVE the HD package, but just settled for the first channel they found.

speising
Posts: 2066
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby speising » Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:01 pm UTC

Xjph wrote:
AlexTheSeal wrote:
endolith wrote:
jasc15 wrote:Here is a more elaborate rant on this topic that I was immediately reminded of when reading this comic.

This man is very angry about black bars on his TV screen.


I wish I could say that I stopped reading at "Sometimes movie buffs will notice things missing in a 4:3 transfer of a scope movie, but it's rarely a serious problem." However, I read the whole thing, even through "All you're getting on the sides of a real HDTV show is junk, like scenery or lines from graphics that simply extend a few inches more to the sides. The only action on the sides is talent or players walking on or off the stage."

The guy is a hopeless fruitcake.


I stopped giving him any credit when I realised he was arguing in favour of stretching 4:3 images to fullscreen rather than ensuring that all images were displayed at their proper aspect ratio.


then you didn't understand him correctly. he argues for stretching of 16:9 content sent as 4:3

Joe O
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:16 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Joe O » Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:06 pm UTC

This entire thread should go on whitewhine.com. God damn. If you don't like watching something then turn it off, watch something different, or maybe go outside for some fresh air... you're a big bunch of babies

Fritzed
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 4:58 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Fritzed » Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:33 pm UTC

It's like trying to watch the TV in every single mid range hotel. Hyatt, Hilton, Mariott Marquis, whatever. They almost all have HD TVs, mostly SD content, a default aspect ratio of "wide", and the menu system locked down so that you can't fix it.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25786
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:43 pm UTC

Joe O wrote:This entire thread should go on whitewhine.com. God damn. If you don't like watching something then turn it off, watch something different, or maybe go outside for some fresh air... you're a big bunch of babies
And here you are, complaining about what other people are complaining about on an internet forum.

Who's the bigger whiny baby?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

MadH
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2012 4:51 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby MadH » Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:52 pm UTC

While I also hate stretching or squishing video outside of its intended format...

I was always under the impression that many video uploaders on youtube squished or stretched the videos to get around youtube automatically detecting the content and pulling the video for copyright reasons. I know some of them flip the whole video for this reason as well.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 3898
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Pfhorrest » Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:03 pm UTC

What drives me nuts is old DVDs (or DVD sets) with a "Standard" and "Widescreen" version of the content, except the "Widescreen" content is letterboxed to 4:3... which proceeds to get pillarboxed to 16:9 on my wide screen, resulting in a little 16:9 box in the middle of a bunch of black on my big 16:9 screen.

Since I watch all media on my computer I can thankfully fall back on VLC to let me zoom as necessary to fill the full screen, though then I'm losing detail compared to if the "Widescreen" version of the content was actually of the proper aspect ratio.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

rickane58
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:58 am UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby rickane58 » Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:10 pm UTC

Zylon wrote:
rickane58 wrote:I have no problem with stretching 4:3 content to 16:9

Sounds like you're intellectually qualified to manage a sports bar.

Yes, clearly not being overly picky is a sign of my intelligence...

User avatar
Crissa
Posts: 284
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:06 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Crissa » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:15 pm UTC

What about when they've stretched a 4:3 image to 16:9 by extending the 25% on each side? AUGH that's even worse than it being in the wrong aspect ratio.

Or a show that has a dozen photos, videos, and films in it - and all of them have been blown out to a different aspect ratio than they were in. WTF, what kind of documentary plays random videos from previous films and videos and photographs without cropping properly? How did you even do that? Lincoln's head shouldn't be that wide. Just because it was on TV in the 80s doesn't mean everyone's head was that wide. How can you not see that when the show keeps flipping back and forth in and out of aspect?

Why is changing the aspect ratio even part of modern video software? AUGH.

-Crissa

User avatar
Crissa
Posts: 284
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:06 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Crissa » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:16 pm UTC

rickane58 wrote:
Zylon wrote:
rickane58 wrote:I have no problem with stretching 4:3 content to 16:9

Sounds like you're intellectually qualified to manage a sports bar.

Yes, clearly not being overly picky is a sign of my intelligence...

Yes, yes it is. A sign it isn't well.

-Crissa

Sunidesus
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 9:09 pm UTC
Location: Rhode Island
Contact:

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Sunidesus » Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:35 pm UTC

My aspect ratio peeve (well, really I have several but most have been covered already) is DVD sets that have one aspect ratio for the menu screens and a different one for the content.

The most common combo I've seen has the menu screens at 16:9 and the content 16:9 letterboxed to 4:3. I can change settings on my TV to make both look right but having to switch back and forth in order to get at everything on the menu is... annoying to say the least.

Mirkwood
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:10 am UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Mirkwood » Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:32 pm UTC

Ah, that brings back memories... I used to read one Animorphs book a day. The last book I did that with was No Easy Day, so yes, Animorphs got me just as excited as the death of Osama bin Laden.

As for aspect ratios...I have long since given up on trying to find the setting on my TV that will show the image properly. I'm not sure one exists.

Aiwendil
Posts: 307
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:53 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Aiwendil » Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:15 pm UTC

What I don't understand is why people are willing to pay so much money for a nice high-definition TV but are then perfectly fine with watching a grotesquely distorted image on it. I mean, if they don't care about the image quality, why on earth did they spend so much money on it? And if they do care about the image quality, how can the distortion not bother them? Personally, I'd take the correct aspect ratio in SD over a distorted one in HD any day.

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 803
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby da Doctah » Tue Mar 19, 2013 12:42 am UTC

AlexTheSeal wrote:I wish I could say that I stopped reading at "Sometimes movie buffs will notice things missing in a 4:3 transfer of a scope movie, but it's rarely a serious problem." However, I read the whole thing, even through "All you're getting on the sides of a real HDTV show is junk, like scenery or lines from graphics that simply extend a few inches more to the sides. The only action on the sides is talent or players walking on or off the stage."

The guy is a hopeless fruitcake.


For the most part there's nothing of significance on the sides of a 16:9 broadcast show, but there are exceptions. When David Letterman got ahold of the video of the vomiting robot, I had the misfortune of not being able to watch the HD feed, so what I saw every time he ran the clip was a spray of liquid shooting across the screen from no visible source.

(I'm glad to see "The Simpsons" chalkboard gag has been made downward compatible to 4:3. When HDTV first became standard, those of us still watching on an old set could never see all of what Bart was writing.)

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Steve the Pocket » Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:22 am UTC

J L wrote:I find pillarboxing to be much more distracting than letterboxing. The only thing even worse, as has been said before, is stretching or cutting it, Cinderella-like, until it fits, without any pillars at all.

Heh. Cinderella definitely isn't the first reference I would have thought of there. I was thinking more along the lines of Procrustes.

Yannow what? I think that's what I'm going to call it from now on when people stretch out their screens improperly. Procrustean widescreen.

(Also now I have "Cinderelly, Cinderelly" stuck in my head, so thanks for that.)

Manabu wrote:So, no discussion about people who encode 720 × 480 NSTC (or 720 × 576 PAL) DVD and leave out the aspect ratio correction? And then all the work to convince the person that the resolution of the encoded stream is not the resolution you are supposed to see?

Anamorphic content may be clever, but it is a headache...

Ugh. Our DVD recorder does that. It records widescreen correctly but was never programmed to set the flag that identifies the chapter as such, so we have to mess with the aspect-ratio on our TV to view it the way it was intended.

Granted, that particular model is just garbage in general. It crashes maybe a third of the time we try to turn it on, and frequently pops up a "DVD [STEREO]" box in the corner of the screen in the middle of the movie for no reason. So it's not like the people who designed it were oblivious to how widescreen works; it was just hack-job programming all around.
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

m1el
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2012 5:38 am UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby m1el » Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:37 am UTC

Fun fact: there is a video on youtube I had to remaster to watch it with pleasure.

pareidolon
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:59 am UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby pareidolon » Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:58 am UTC

I just can't stop thinking about Randall running back and forth to rotate those cranks with his bare hands.

User avatar
keithl
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:46 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby keithl » Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:27 am UTC

Distorted videos aside, I hate what 16x9 did to computer screens. I'm one of those ancients who spends 10x more time writing, reading long content, computing (numbers!) and creating, relative to consuming Hollywood and Madison Avenue emissions. Given the way programmers put toolbars and banners across the top and bottom, the text box shown in a typical word processing program (or the text box I am typing into right now) is already too "letterboxed" on a 4x3 screen, and is ridiculously short on a 16x9 screen.

The original 16x9 screens were a miracle of cynical marketing. Years ago, it was difficult to make a single large 4 x 3 computer screen on one piece of glass; the defect density was too high. As manufacturing improved, they got to the point where they could reliably make a 20x16 inch screen (25 inch diagonal), but the demand for those big expensive computer screens was small. What if they took that same piece of glass and made two 16 inch by 10 inch screens with it? With round-up, that became a 19 inch diagonal "widescreen" with 8% fewer square inches than a 4:3 aspect ratio 19 inch screen. Call it "widescreen" and sell it for a premium! 16 by 9? Profit!

This biases computer use towards paid media consumption and away from competitive creation, both pluses for Big Media. Hence the growing partnerships between MicroApple and the media cartels, with even Canonical (Ubuntu) starting to dabble as a content channel instead of a tool and support provider.

BTW, I stockpile Thinkpad T60s (the last of the top end 4x3 laptops) and replacement parts, as well as some 2048x1536 15 inch prototype LCDs that never made it into mass production. Hopefully those will last me until there are open-source direct-to-brain interfaces. OTOH, the idea of HollyMicroApple direct-to-brain implants is way too frightening to think about.

User avatar
Eshru
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 3:51 am UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Eshru » Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:34 am UTC

Without something putting pressure on it from the top, wouldn't the car at some point break in the middle in one spot and fold like a V (either upward or down, not sure)?

Edit: Rather than scrunching as it has in the comic.

User avatar
keithl
Posts: 609
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:46 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby keithl » Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:10 am UTC

Whizbang wrote:The support script is the only workable solution to the problem of people thinking they know what they are doing, without spending gobs and gobs of time and money to train support techs, and even more time and money training users. Even the best tech will fall into the trap of the "smart" user who has "tried everything", only to find out that "everything" didn't include checking the plug or turning on/off some minor and obvious setting.


1) An EE PhD co-worker of mine, at his workbench one evening probing a motorcycle electronic ignition system that mysteriously stopped working. When I asked, "what does this little switch do?" he turned a lovely shade of red.

2) The late lamented "Working Kirk" Reeves, who briefly had a job in phone support, reading scripts into the phone. He was supporting a PC modem card (remember those?) with a design flaw - the company sold hundreds of thousands of cards that didn't work. His assigned script was designed to make the callers feel stupid and incompetent and go away; those few super-geniuses who made it all the way down the list got a working replacement. Kirk hated that, so his calls went something like "did you select F7 - say yes" "what is the interrupt setting - say 11". Everyone got a replacement modem, he got through the calls in record time. So he was getting praise and big bonuses until some bean counter noticed the big increase in replacement modem shipments, and he was fired.

3) Another unnamed friend, first level supervisor for a team supporting printers for an unnamed large company known by two initials, one of which is "H". As he was walking by one desk, the concerned worker was saying into the phone " ... no, hang up and call 911. ... call about your warranty later, but call the fire department NOW ... ". Some luser had a printer jam that actually caught fire, and they called X.X. support for help.

We're ALL bozos on this bus ... (which, BTW, is the venerable DEC Unibus, the result of my friend Clem giving the Firesign Theater troupe a tour through the Carnegie Mellon computer lab).

User avatar
TimeSpaceMage
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 4:05 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby TimeSpaceMage » Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:50 am UTC

I was a huge Animorphs fan in high school, and I still have almost all of the books. Never seen the show, though. IIRC I'm only missing two of the Chronicles, but my collection is still in boxes from when my parents brought me a bunch of my stuff cross-country.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 3898
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:31 am UTC

Regarding scripts, I think a lot of the hate of them and feeling of being condescended to could be cut down just by prefacing every script with "Ok, before we go any further, let's double-check some obvious things. Let me know if you've already checked any of these. [First thing]?" "Checked that already, no luck." "Ok, [second thing]?" "One sec... nope, still nothing." "Ok, [third thing]?" and so on. That way the clueless grandmas still get their "did you try the 'on' button?" lesson, but the more knowledgeable users get confirmation that these are obvious things they should have (and probably have) checked already and they get to just say that they've already done so and move on to the next thing.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
5th Earth
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 7:22 pm UTC
Location: Santa Cruz, California

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby 5th Earth » Tue Mar 19, 2013 7:50 am UTC

I'm reminded of a friend who was ripping the DVDs of a TV show onto his computer. He couldn't get the conversion from interlaced to progressive scan to come out right no matter what he did. Eventually, he figured out that the show had been deinterlaced in the incorrect order, rescaled, and then reinterlaced on the DVD, making it impossible to remove the first improper interlacing.
It seemed like a good idea at the time.

User avatar
PolakoVoador
Posts: 1028
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:11 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby PolakoVoador » Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:21 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:Regarding scripts, I think a lot of the hate of them and feeling of being condescended to could be cut down just by prefacing every script with "Ok, before we go any further, let's double-check some obvious things. Let me know if you've already checked any of these. [First thing]?" "Checked that already, no luck." "Ok, [second thing]?" "One sec... nope, still nothing." "Ok, [third thing]?" and so on. That way the clueless grandmas still get their "did you try the 'on' button?" lesson, but the more knowledgeable users get confirmation that these are obvious things they should have (and probably have) checked already and they get to just say that they've already done so and move on to the next thing.


Around here, an internet provider managed to do something quite good. While you're waiting for a human to pick up the phone, a recording says something like "Sometimes the solution is simpler than we think. Have you tried turned your computer and modem on and off? Have you checked the cable's connection?". From this point on, they assume you already tried all this obvious steps. I love this company for this reason.

Kit.
Posts: 1020
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:14 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Kit. » Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:41 pm UTC

As an employee of a big STB vendor, I will assert my right to remain silent.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25786
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:47 pm UTC

5th Earth wrote:I'm reminded of a friend who was ripping the DVDs of a TV show onto his computer. He couldn't get the conversion from interlaced to progressive scan to come out right no matter what he did. Eventually, he figured out that the show had been deinterlaced in the incorrect order, rescaled, and then reinterlaced on the DVD, making it impossible to remove the first improper interlacing.
If it still played properly on a dvd player, I wouldn't be surprised if such a thing were done intentionally, as a form of copy protection.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
ManaUser
Posts: 284
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 9:28 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby ManaUser » Tue Mar 19, 2013 3:52 pm UTC

PolakoVoador wrote:Around here, an internet provider managed to do something quite good. While you're waiting for a human to pick up the phone, a recording says something like "Sometimes the solution is simpler than we think. Have you tried turned your computer and modem on and off? Have you checked the cable's connection?". From this point on, they assume you already tried all this obvious steps. I love this company for this reason.

Mine had a recording like that too... and then they insisted you do all the same steps again when you finally got ahold of a so-called human. :(

User avatar
AlexTheSeal
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:57 am UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby AlexTheSeal » Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:42 pm UTC

Steve the Pocket wrote:
J L wrote:I find pillarboxing to be much more distracting than letterboxing. The only thing even worse, as has been said before, is stretching or cutting it, Cinderella-like, until it fits, without any pillars at all.

Heh. Cinderella definitely isn't the first reference I would have thought of there. I was thinking more along the lines of Procrustes.

I'm sure J L is referring to the original un-Disneyfied version of the story in which Cinderella's stepsisters cut off their own toes and heels in an attempt to fit into the too-small glass slipper (and are found out by the prince when he notices the slipper filling with blood... ew).

Yannow what? I think that's what I'm going to call it from now on when people stretch out their screens improperly. Procrustean widescreen.

That's awesome.

Code: Select all

10 REM WORLD'S SMALLEST ADVENTURE GAME
20 PRINT "YOU ARE IN A CAVE (N, S, E, W)? ";
30 INPUT A$
40 GOTO 10

Lulled to sleep by the one-hertz chuckle of Linux logfile writes since 1997.

Xjph
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 3:59 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Xjph » Tue Mar 19, 2013 5:19 pm UTC

speising wrote:
Xjph wrote:I stopped giving him any credit when I realised he was arguing in favour of stretching 4:3 images to fullscreen rather than ensuring that all images were displayed at their proper aspect ratio.


then you didn't understand him correctly. he argues for stretching of 16:9 content sent as 4:3


He explicitly states that he prefers stretching standard definition 4:3 content to 16:9 full screen in the two paragraphs following the "HDTV broadcasts usually look like this" image. Direct quote: "This is why we watch the regular channels and not HD broadcasts at my house. HDTVs can stretch a standard-definition image to fill their screens."

speising
Posts: 2066
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby speising » Tue Mar 19, 2013 5:32 pm UTC

Xjph wrote:
speising wrote:
Xjph wrote:I stopped giving him any credit when I realised he was arguing in favour of stretching 4:3 images to fullscreen rather than ensuring that all images were displayed at their proper aspect ratio.


then you didn't understand him correctly. he argues for stretching of 16:9 content sent as 4:3


He explicitly states that he prefers stretching standard definition 4:3 content to 16:9 full screen in the two paragraphs following the "HDTV broadcasts usually look like this" image. Direct quote: "This is why we watch the regular channels and not HD broadcasts at my house. HDTVs can stretch a standard-definition image to fill their screens."


Oh. I understood this as talking about incorrectly squished 16x9 content. I'd be happy if 4x3 content was really always pillarboxed correctly.

Pingouin7
Posts: 91
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:50 pm UTC
Location: ~/

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby Pingouin7 » Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:30 pm UTC

Related:

Image
Dason wrote:
Kewangji wrote:I confess I am actually scared of peanuts, and tend to avoid them, given how lethal they are to some people.

I'm not. I do my part in the fight against peanuts by destroying them with my powerful teeth. Take that peanut! How does being digested feel!?

dragonfly_26
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:45 pm UTC

Re: 1187: "Aspect Ratio"

Postby dragonfly_26 » Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:47 pm UTC

I loved Animorphs. When I was in high school I would save up my money each week to buy the new book as the they came out. The ending made me sad and frustrated through.

A movie/reboot would be awesome with all of the advancements in graphics. Not to mention a neat game!


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hetas, Yahoo [Bot] and 35 guests