> Interesting. I *watched* the snooker, and it didn't appear to be in 
> widescreen. (Or maybe that's just FreeSat?)

I watch it via my Sky box (that's the same signal as FreeSat isn't it?) and 
I certainly didn't notice any stretching (it would be quite obvious in 
snooker because there are lots of perfectly spherical objects in view all 
the time).  What made you think it wasn't widescreen?

> There seems to be a great lack of the sciency type of programs I like 
> these days. We used to have great shows like Rough Science, Scrapheap 
> Challenge, Local Heroes, Horizon, BBC Wildlife, etc. Now there's just 
> Brainiac... which is rather lame.

Scrap heap challenge was good fun, but it got a bit annoying when they 
obviously planted useful stuff.  Like "oh look there's a complete working V8 
engine that's just lying here under this rusted car shell".

Post a reply to this message

>> Interesting. I *watched* the snooker, and it didn't appear to be in 
>> widescreen. (Or maybe that's just FreeSat?)
> 
> I watch it via my Sky box (that's the same signal as FreeSat isn't it?) 
> and I certainly didn't notice any stretching (it would be quite obvious 
> in snooker because there are lots of perfectly spherical objects in view 
> all the time).  What made you think it wasn't widescreen?

The lack of black bars at the top and bottom of the screen on my 
grandparent's 4:3 CRT. Maybe they were there and I just didn't notice? 
Certainly when you watch a 4:3 signal on a 16:9 screen that's errantly 
configured to distort the image, it's pretty damned noticable!

>> There seems to be a great lack of the sciency type of programs I like 
>> these days. We used to have great shows like Rough Science, Scrapheap 
>> Challenge, Local Heroes, Horizon, BBC Wildlife, etc. Now there's just 
>> Brainiac... which is rather lame.
> 
> Scrap heap challenge was good fun, but it got a bit annoying when they 
> obviously planted useful stuff.  Like "oh look there's a complete 
> working V8 engine that's just lying here under this rusted car shell".

Yeah, well, that part of the show was *sliiightly* tenuous at times. But 
the whole concept of "OK, we need to mash together a machine to do X... 
how the hell do we actually do that?" was really neat.

Unfortunately the show slowly drifted from being about the science to 
being about the personallity clashes, differences of opinion, mutinies, 
etc. that I don't give a damn about. Why is it that today everything has 
to be about "reality TV"? Just get on with the engineering!

Post a reply to this message

> The lack of black bars at the top and bottom of the screen on my 
> grandparent's 4:3 CRT. Maybe they were there and I just didn't notice?

Oh, on my Sky box if you tell them that you have a 4:3 device connected it 
chops off the sides to make a 4:3 picture from a 16:9 one.  Some programs 
that I see (I think that Snooker might be one of them) keep all the 
important detail (ie the scores, any graphics etc) in the central part of 
the picture, so that those watching a 4:3 chopped image don't miss anythign 
important.

> Certainly when you watch a 4:3 signal on a 16:9 screen that's errantly 
> configured to distort the image, it's pretty damned noticable!

I have never noticed this, either my Sky box is zooming 4:3 streams to fill 
the screen, or it's just there are no 4:3 streams that I watch.  BTW, it's 
quite common that 16:9 streams have black bars top and bottom as well to 
give an even wider aspect ratio, don't assume the presence or absence of 
black bars says anything about whether it's widescreen or not.

> Yeah, well, that part of the show was *sliiightly* tenuous at times. But 
> the whole concept of "OK, we need to mash together a machine to do X... 
> how the hell do we actually do that?" was really neat.

Yeh it was cool to watch them making things, I really like that sort of 
stuff.  Just a shame I don't have room at home to make a nice workshop, one 
day though :-)

> Unfortunately the show slowly drifted from being about the science to 
> being about the personallity clashes, differences of opinion, mutinies, 
> etc. that I don't give a damn about. Why is it that today everything has 
> to be about "reality TV"? Just get on with the engineering!

Agreed, although haven't watched it recently so it might be worse now than I 
remember!

Post a reply to this message

"scott" <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote:
> Oh, on my Sky box if you tell them that you have a 4:3 device connected it
> chops off the sides to make a 4:3 picture from a 16:9 one.  Some programs
> that I see (I think that Snooker might be one of them) keep all the
> important detail (ie the scores, any graphics etc) in the central part of
> the picture, so that those watching a 4:3 chopped image don't miss anythign
> important.

Not forgetting the channel logo (if it has one - another great thing about BBC),
which can be really irritating. I wouldn't mind if that got chopped off *at
all*.

And the "coming up next..." bars which obscure the critical action at the climax
of a movie. Those grind my gears even more. :)

Post a reply to this message

>> The lack of black bars at the top and bottom of the screen on my 
>> grandparent's 4:3 CRT. Maybe they were there and I just didn't notice?
> 
> Oh, on my Sky box if you tell them that you have a 4:3 device connected 
> it chops off the sides to make a 4:3 picture from a 16:9 one.

Ah, actually... I do seem to recall the picture coming up briefly on the 
TV, and then it flashing something about "auto" and the picture changing 
shape. So yes, I think the TV itself cut the edges off. That'll be why then!

>> Certainly when you watch a 4:3 signal on a 16:9 screen that's errantly 
>> configured to distort the image, it's pretty damned noticable!
> 
> I have never noticed this, either my Sky box is zooming 4:3 streams to 
> fill the screen, or it's just there are no 4:3 streams that I watch.

If it's just set to cut the edges off, it's not too bad. If it's set to 
mash the picture to the wrong aspect ratio, it looks terrible!

> BTW, it's quite common that 16:9 streams have black bars top and bottom 
> as well to give an even wider aspect ratio, don't assume the presence or 
> absence of black bars says anything about whether it's widescreen or not.

If you're watching it on a 4:3 screen and there's black bars, it's not a 
4:3 aspect signal. What aspect it *is*, who knows? But it's not 4:3. ;-)

>> Yeah, well, that part of the show was *sliiightly* tenuous at times. 
>> But the whole concept of "OK, we need to mash together a machine to do 
>> X... how the hell do we actually do that?" was really neat.
> 
> Yeh it was cool to watch them making things, I really like that sort of 
> stuff.  Just a shame I don't have room at home to make a nice workshop, 
> one day though :-)

...fortunately...for the safety of the world... ;-)

Who can forget the Barley Pickers and their "propper job" of building a 
machine that ****ed itself apart in the most spectacular way possible 
the very first time they tried to use it? :-D

>> Unfortunately the show slowly drifted from being about the science to 
>> being about the personallity clashes, differences of opinion, 
>> mutinies, etc. that I don't give a damn about. Why is it that today 
>> everything has to be about "reality TV"? Just get on with the 
>> engineering!
> 
> Agreed, although haven't watched it recently so it might be worse now 
> than I remember!

Well, there always was a social element to it. And that was part of what 
made it cool. But now they emphasize it too much, and don't talk enough 
about the engineering. There's a little Big Brother-style "confession 
booth" where team members can go in and be like "well I though it woz a 
good idea, right? But Dave, he says, right, leave it how it is. Well I 
mean that's silly, innit?"

Dude, like, who cares? I much preferred it back when it was a team of 
mates who'd mistaken the "build machine X" task for a "weld as much 
stuff as humanly possible" contest.

I feel it all went wrong when that girl presenter left...

Post a reply to this message

> Yeah, but I meant, HDMI is encrypted.

Not always.  DVI can be encrypted too.

> I'm not sure whether the laptop really supports generating an encrypted 
> video signal, and if so, from *what*...?

Does it have Vista?  If so then yes it probably does, for example if you 
connect a bluray drive (eg via USB if you don't have one in there already) 
and try to play a movie.  There is probably some API in Vista if you are 
writing a game and want it encrypted output for some reason.

Post a reply to this message

>> Yeah, but I meant, HDMI is encrypted.
> 
> Not always.  DVI can be encrypted too.

Really? That's interesting. I was told this is the defining difference 
between HDMI and DVI.

>> I'm not sure whether the laptop really supports generating an 
>> encrypted video signal, and if so, from *what*...?
> 
> Does it have Vista?  If so then yes it probably does, for example if you 
> connect a bluray drive (eg via USB if you don't have one in there 
> already) and try to play a movie.  There is probably some API in Vista 
> if you are writing a game and want it encrypted output for some reason.

I was *going* to buy the laptop with a BluRay drive (it was only £10 
more), but it sold out before I could order it. *My* laptop has only a 
DVD drive. (And yes, obviously it's Vista. It's impossible to buy 
anything else now...)

Post a reply to this message

>> Not always.  DVI can be encrypted too.
>
> Really? That's interesting. I was told this is the defining difference 
> between HDMI and DVI.

I guess they hadn't seen the monitors that accept HDCP over DVI?  Or the 
DirectX10/Vista graphics cards that have HDCP capable DVI outputs?  Or the 
Wikipedia page on HDCP for that matter :-)

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> It seems to me like *every* program is widescreen.

Maybe he still has an SDTV and doesn't realize it? ;-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> The video signal is electrically the same, just different connectors on 
> the end. 

And of course the HDMI carries the audio signals as well.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message