|
||||||||
Why have broadcasters ditched 4:3 safe areas? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#51 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Sussex (Crystal Palace)
Posts: 3,377
|
Quote:
Sky news has a 16X9 safe title area, unlike the BBC News channel which seems to use 14X9.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: south west
Posts: 9,914
|
Quote:
Do televisions with built in digital tuners give a better picture by virtue of not having to convert the signal into analogue for an old TV?
If so, is the difference noticeable to the naked eye? Also smaller TVs will show SD better than larger TVs, so a small HD LCD bedroom TV with built in freeview will look ok for SD especially if you aren't too close. A large HD ready model for your lounge will likely look rubbish at SD. Full HD slightly better especially if its got freeview HD built in. |
|
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: south west
Posts: 9,914
|
Quote:
BBC News still uses 4:3. Looks amateurish.
Its definitely a generous 14:9 safe, but the ticker on the news channel does at least come in from the very right hand side and on the left the bar goes beyond the BBC news logo right the left hand side. |
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,700
|
This is a thing i always look out for. However on some archival programs I watch, there tends to be a mix or current HD 16:9 and 4:3 footage and I notice on some of the older footage the black bars change thickness, sometimes it is a little bigger, sometimes smaller. I think maybe sometimes they stretch the picture but why?
I also like DOGS in the areas to the side when 4:3 footage is shown. I get annoyed on the SD TCM channel because their DOG just hangs over the safe zone yet on older programs like Gunsmoke, i guess it must have been made with black bars at the side, it blends in with their own black bars so the TCM logo is complletely in that area and not hanging over onto the picture. |
|
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Sussex (Crystal Palace)
Posts: 3,377
|
Quote:
BBC news isn't 4:3 safe, I tried downscaling, centre cropping then outputting to an old 4:3 TV and it cut off the edges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: south west
Posts: 9,914
|
Quote:
This is a thing i always look out for. However on some archival programs I watch, there tends to be a mix or current HD 16:9 and 4:3 footage and I notice on some of the older footage the black bars change thickness, sometimes it is a little bigger, sometimes smaller. I think maybe sometimes they stretch the picture but why?
I also like DOGS in the areas to the side when 4:3 footage is shown. I get annoyed on the SD TCM channel because their DOG just hangs over the safe zone yet on older programs like Gunsmoke, i guess it must have been made with black bars at the side, it blends in with their own black bars so the TCM logo is complletely in that area and not hanging over onto the picture. Regarding DOGs I believe that if the dog moves over to the safe area then its because they are using the same feed. Either there is two playouts and the HD playout will take a feed from the SD playout to Upscale SD programs (I believe channel5 do this). Or there is one feed and they use AFDs to create a second downscaled feed for the SD channel (BBC do this I believe). I assume that in the latter example the AFDs uesd to create the SD channel will also control where the HD DOG goes. As a side note I presume in the first example with two playouts, that the SD playout will take a feed of the downscaled HD playout. |
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: south west
Posts: 9,914
|
Quote:
If I set a box to output in 4:3 mode then it doesn't chop anything off. Granted it's close to the edge and could be a victim of overscan but it still counts as 4:3 safe to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,775
|
Time to get a new TV
WS has been out for a long time I had one back in 1999 |
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,637
|
Quote:
Do televisions with built in digital tuners give a better picture by virtue of not having to convert the signal into analogue for an old TV?
If so, is the difference noticeable to the naked eye? A SCART-connected box using RGB and a quality SCART cable is pretty much as good as it gets for SD anyway Modern TVs would have the tuner and decoding hardware connected digitally to the display processor - so the result isn't really any different from having an HDMI connected set top box. The point I was really making is that an IDTV would handle aspect ratio switching correctly, guaranteed, whereas a set top box needs to be configured. I don't miss the days of going to a pub or someone's house and watching everything in "stretchyvision" or "slitvision" where the box is on 4:3 and the TV is set to stretch or zoom - and if you made any attempt to correct it they'd say "no, this is how I like it" |
|
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: England, E.Midlands & London
Posts: 7,692
|
BBC News is still 4:3 (Or 12:9)
Its right on the edge but its still 4:3 and there is zero need for that in 2015 |
|
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: North East
Posts: 12,254
|
Quote:
BBC News is still 4:3 (Or 12:9)
Its right on the edge but its still 4:3 and there is zero need for that in 2015 |
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: south west
Posts: 9,914
|
Quote:
Doesn't really matter as that channel looks like to be moved online under the next BBC cuts.
Transmission of the News channel as an actual channel can't be that much when they would still need all the production staff and news room ECT for it to be an online stream. |
|
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,336
|
About time this happened.
Why have the rest of us had to put up with broadcasters pandering to the technophobes for so bleeding long? |
|
|
|
|
|
#64 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,519
|
Quote:
I still use 4:3 TV's in my house and one thing that I hate is that most programmes/adverts/programme trailers etc don't stick to 4:3 safe areas. 4:3 safe means keeping text, captions, logos etc inside a 4:3 rectangle inside the 16:9 image, so that when a widescreen picture is cropped to 4:3, the content isn't chopped off. Easy thing to do, but for the past 12-18 months ago broadcasters and programme producers seemed to have stopped doing this. Yet since widescreen programming started they have always done it. But now they have stopped
So annoying. I can't tolerate a full 16:9 letterbox. My lounge TV is only 22 inch and letterboxing makes the picture too small. It also makes it look like the picture is cut off at the top and bottom (even though I know this isn't happening) when the camera zooms in on someones face and cuts the top of the head/bottom of thier chin off - wish cameramen/producers would stop doing this, it is so annoying.I can't watch in Centre Cut Out mode becuase it just cuts too much text off (thanks to no 4:3 safe grapghics. So I use a compromise 14:9 mode instead. It cuts a little off the sides and gives a thin black band on the top and bottom of the screen. I find this acceptable - but still the first letter or two is often chopped off - common culprits are Countryfile, many documentaries and football matches. When Wimbledon is on the first letter of each player is cut off, on Center Cut Out almost the whole name is cut off ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Sussex (Crystal Palace)
Posts: 3,377
|
Quote:
Doesn't really matter as that channel looks like to be moved online under the next BBC cuts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: England, E.Midlands & London
Posts: 7,692
|
I can certainly see BBC Four going and its time BBC kids channels were merged!
Local radio is going to get hammered and possibly some national services too! Back to the topic, no, 4:3 shouldn't be in use at all in 2015. Zero need for it!! |
|
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,810
|
Quote:
Why complain?
If I could work out how to crop to DOG off the edge of my wide-screen I'd be very happy. BTW, the pictures on my radio are always better than the tv. |
|
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,810
|
Quote:
I'm with you on this. Fortunately the BBC is posting its captions in the 4:3 safe area during their coverage of the Wimbledon Tennis Championships, so when we carry on watching a match in the kitchen while we eat our evening meal, at least we can still keep up with the score!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,637
|
Quote:
I can certainly see BBC Four going and its time BBC kids channels were merged!
Local radio is going to get hammered and possibly some national services too! Back to the topic, no, 4:3 shouldn't be in use at all in 2015. Zero need for it!! BBC Four could be argued to be the same. It is exactly why the BBC gets guaranteed funding. If it wants to become ITV without ads then it shouldn't deserve the licence fee |
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,810
|
Quote:
BBC news isn't 4:3 safe, I tried downscaling, centre cropping then outputting to an old 4:3 TV and it cut off the edges.
Its definitely a generous 14:9 safe, but the ticker on the news channel does at least come in from the very right hand side and on the left the bar goes beyond the BBC news logo right the left hand side. This is BBC News in Centre Cut Out on my old 4:3 tv: http://i1147.photobucket.com/albums/...825_162346.jpg https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B56...ew?usp=sharing This in in 14:9 compromise mode: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B56...ew?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B56...ew?usp=sharing As you can see the graphics appear 14:9 safe on my tv not 4:3 safe. This is in 16:9 letterbox mode: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B56...ew?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B56...ew?usp=sharing The graphics still look fine in 16:9 with a little blank space to the left and right which is WHY I can't understand why so many of you apparently can't stand 4:3 graphics when I bet the vast majority don't notice any difference or don't care. The average person doesn't care where graphics are on-screen as long as they are visible. The next time you watch a football match at the pub try asking your friends where the scorebar should be or whether the graphics should stretch right to the edge of the screen or be more central. I bet they won't care or won't even understand what you're talking about. |
|
|
|
|
|
#71 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,810
|
Quote:
We'll have to agree to disagree, which I do, 100%. Even Sky still has some graphics too far from the corner, e.g. on Sky News.
![]() ![]() ![]() I see Sky News on a 16:9 tv every day while I'm queuing up for lunch at the Cafeteria. The graphics go pretty much right to the edge and look fine (though in my opinion they'd look fine in 4:3 too). What are you all complaining about??? |
|
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,810
|
Quote:
You could also argue that it is better to have the graphics further away from the main action, as you are able to do with widescreen, so that there is less of a chance of it covering anything interesting.
As for "everyone" being able to see them, the reality is that 4:3 viewers are becoming as rare as the people who cling on to black and white TVs because of the cheaper licence. It probably wouldn't be an unrealistic guess to say most people have some form of widescreen TV, and very probably an HD one - and has already been said repeatedly, those viewers can switch their TVs into letterbox mode to get the full widescreen picture The only way to make progress is to do things that may disadvantage others. Hopefully you do it once it's a small and insignificant group of people. We're quickly moving into an age where broadcasters will be thinking about dumping SD broadcasts entirely in favour of HD (with 4K becoming the premium option), after all I felt better when I knew someone near me was still clinging on to a 4:3 tv as their main set. I guess I'm not the only one who still has a 4:3 tv! I bet there are still many more tucked away than we think!! |
|
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,810
|
Quote:
Ive never heard of the default out being centre cut out, it should be 16:9 to promote the fact that widescreen is the thing now digital is in! Then people would have to realise that it needs changing for an old TV, but some people haven't got a clue!
Because people haven't got a clue I would suggest that the broadcasters at least in this country keep a 16:9 raster all the time and pillarbox all 4:3 material making it hard to actually centre cut out expect in hidden menus, so people with 4:3 TVs default to letterboxing. It would likely push on people getting widescreen TVs then. People would always have the correct aspect ratio as it would be pre set by the broadcasters. Also 4:3 analogue material was always 500 lines wide or less by the 576 lines tall (we are talking active picture lines here only not blanking lines!) So that would fit nicely into a 720*576 image with pillarboxing and no details lost! |
|
|
|
|
|
#74 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: MCR
Posts: 2,194
|
all digital boxes have widescreen so even on old tv the widescreen works and just means black bars top and bottom of screen, does not make viewing worse off.
i hate the logos in top middle of screen it is a totall annoyance, dont mind logos is they far left where they should be |
|
|
|
|
|
#75 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,810
|
Quote:
It probably only looks good because the screen is only 21". I doubt there is anything magical about the set that would give you an especially good picture. It's just too small to see the issues.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 22:03.





So annoying. I can't tolerate a full 16:9 letterbox. My lounge TV is only 22 inch and letterboxing makes the picture too small. It also makes it look like the picture is cut off at the top and bottom (even though I know this isn't happening) when the camera zooms in on someones face and cuts the top of the head/bottom of thier chin off - wish cameramen/producers would stop doing this, it is so annoying.