- From: "Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 09:20:35 -0800
"Peter A" <paitken@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
In article <c5lpj.700$U12.212@trnddc06>, w.newell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Ugh!
From: Wes Newell <w.newell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 22:47:25 -0800, Charles Tomaras wrote:
I can understand one's desire for size but come on Wes...are you going
to tell us that if you had your choice between watching the widescreen
Ben Hur on a big ass widescreen television or a cropped 4:3 version on
tv with the same center cut size you would choose the crop? The outcome
might be the same but please don't tell us there's no artistic
Of course I'd rather see it in it's original form. But not at the expense
of having to scale the picture to half my screen size to do so.
There's the point - image size is more important to you than the
artistry of the film. Many of us find this to be bizarre. A TV is a
means to view content, and you consider the size of the TV screen to be
more important than the content.
I find this pixels before picture concept even more disturbing with the
advent of HDTV's higher resolutions which, for the most part with HD
content, removes the negative resolution aspect of the pixel penalty.