long tall sally and her short wide screen…

One of the big questions this fall is all around our television/monitor setup. Currently we have a nice 26″ (or is it 27″) crt television and a 21″ crt monitor. There is a move afoot to switch to a single screen, and an lcd one to boot. Part of the issue with this has been that I have no experience with such a beast, except for looking at the Alien DVD menu at Kurty’s… Until now.

The folks here have a 27″ Akia TV and so I spent a little time checking it out. First thing, they had it set to “fill” or “full” or something, so the picture (Charter cable via Tivo) looks bad, like a stretched out old VHS picture. Even when you switch it to 4:3 the picture still looks bad. There is one HD broadcast channel that they can pick up, NBC, and this morning the Today Show on it looked grand, a big full widescreen picture, rich and the right ratio to fill the screen with no stretching or anything. Now this doesn’t make much difference to me, as I can’t generally stand tv, cable or otherwise. But occasionally I like to watch PBS and if the HD PBS that we get at home looks like this, that seems quite nice. I’m also not too concerned with using it for a computer, as the screen is big enough to replace my screen (which honestly, could easily be smaller with no bother to me)

The issue is, of course, movies. I want to watch them in the correct ratio, and have them be larger than my current viewing set-up. I tried checking out the different DVD realities here, but I don’t feel confident that I really learned the deal. Nearly all of their DVD’s are fullscreen (I always wondered who bought those) and though I don’t have very many of those, there seem to be two viewing options: 4:3, in which case they are much smaller then they would be on our current TV, or stretched out, which doesn’t look good. Widescreen DVD’s (non-anthropomorphic) basically end up being very small, as they appear, bars and all, in a little 4:3 box in the center of the screen. It seems that in these cases, we would be dropping a lot of picture size with this switch.

The anthropomorphic widescreen DVD’s, on the other hand, seem like they might work out. Though using a 16:9 TV, the differences of the various widescreen formats becomes very apparent. Basically, the issue is that if all of the DVD’s were anthropomorphic widescreens at a 16:9 ratio, it seems like a TV like this would be a great improvement, but I fear that with a lot of things (maybe everything but HD tv and anthropomorphic DVD’s), we would be losing a lot of viewing area.

Anyway, I didn’t have much time to really dig around, so these feelings are all from a cursory examination. It seems to me that a 27″ (which would be the most convenient to buy) won’t cut it and that we may need to think about a 32″ LCD. I am curious about the experiences of anyone (who is a dvd watcher, concerned with picture quality and image size) who has switched from a CRT to an LCD.


4 Responses to “long tall sally and her short wide screen…”

  1. Thud on October 16, 2007 13:37

    We switched some time ago, and yes; I think you want to make sure your 4:3 ratio viewing size is roughly equal to what you’re used to. (So that means the vertical dimension of your new screen should match or exceed the vertical dimension of your widescreen). On a 16:9 screen, you do sacrifice quite a bit of real estate on the left and right.

    For those non-anamorphic widescreen DVDs my TV has a “zoom” setting that fills out the sides and keeps the aspect ratio correct. The image quality is not that great, but that’s the fault of the dumbasses who decided not to go anamorphic in the first place.

    We absolutely love our (inexpensive) LCD television, though. It makes movies much more enjoyable, and the brilliant color and lessened susceptibility to glare make the TV watching fun, too.

  2. Ashley on October 18, 2007 19:35

    Shoot, that makes perfect sense. But it means that to not lose area, we’ll have to go to a 32″ screen.

    It certainly is tempting, but hopefully I can wait until the prices drop even further…

  3. Kurty on October 20, 2007 14:25

    well, you know what I think about all of this … main thing to take into consideration is how far away you’ll sit from the screen (don’t read what they say about this on the web, if I’d believed that we would have needed a 42″ screen or larger). I think if you were about 8 feet away a 32″ would be good, and yes, you can probably go for Olevia or one of those lesser-known brands and get fine quality. Be on the lookout for a variety of screen-size adjustments. Ours has different varieties for DVDs or Broadcast. The more ratios you got, the better. Of course I’d recommend Sharp.

  4. Ashley on October 20, 2007 23:37

    8 Feet? Are you nuts? I’m talking 6 feet. That’s how far away we sit now! Yeah, I still need to look into the screen adjustments, and the 720p vs 1080p.

    But I thought that the Sharp Aquos looked good.