Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

looking for saorview box which has same aspect ratio as analog

  • 20-10-2012 5:27pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 266 ✭✭


    i'm looking for a saorview box for the parents they have a tv for the sitting room and i'm getting a box for the 4:3 CRT in the kitchen. I'm wondering what boxes have the analog aspect ratio setting (14:9?? i think) so it will look the same and not cut off too much screen like the pal scan mode. doesn't matter if its approved either no need for txt or anything


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 545 ✭✭✭formerly scottish paddy


    sky23 wrote: »
    i'm looking for a saorview box for the parents they have a tv for the sitting room and i'm getting a box for the 4:3 CRT in the kitchen. I'm wondering what boxes have the analog aspect ratio setting (14:9?? i think) so it will look the same and not cut off too much screen like the pal scan mode. doesn't matter if its approved either no need for txt or anything
    I think most of them allow you to choose if the set is 16:9 or 4:3.


  • Moderators, Regional North West Moderators Posts: 19,158 Mod ✭✭✭✭byte
    byte


    None that I know of will do a 14:9, thankfully, as it's a stupid aspect anyway, IMO.

    You're gonna have to make do with 4:3 Pan & Scan, 4:3 Letterbox, or just get a widescreen TV.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    We use 16:9 on our 4:3 TVs. Chopped off bits is more objectionable than black bars as I made sure all TVs have black frame anyway.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 599 ✭✭✭jonnygee


    I have a cheap 4.3 tv that i bought from argos about 4 years ago for 99 stg. that allows you to stretch the picture to fill the screen, so no black bars , for a bedroom tv it is fine, actually the picture quality is excellent on it. it is a mikomi brand. After a few minutes watching it you dont notice the picture stretch. wont be changing it anytime soon.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭swoofer


    sky23, i posted a while ago showing how a 13 ins portable looks, the box i used has a setting that says, "squeezed" and looks great.

    here
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056774386


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 93,567 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    How big is the TV another option might be to replace it !

    Plenty of people getting rid of large TV's as they trade up to flat screens
    check freecycle / adverts.ie


    Check out the bargain alerts thread too

    cheapest 16" saorview TV I've seen is €89 , not much more than the price of a saorview box and a lot neater in the kitchen

    https://www.argos.ie/static/Product/partNumber/5298226.htm


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 88,972 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    jonnygee wrote: »
    I have a cheap 4.3 tv that i bought from argos about 4 years ago for 99 stg. that allows you to stretch the picture to fill the screen, so no black bars , for a bedroom tv it is fine, actually the picture quality is excellent on it. it is a mikomi brand. After a few minutes watching it you dont notice the picture stretch. wont be changing it anytime soon.

    :eek: even as a bedroom viewing experience that is caveman!

    (and analog is spelt analogue)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 599 ✭✭✭jonnygee


    No, it,s not. It does the job just fine.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,688 ✭✭✭winston_1


    Those pictures look awful, squeezed. Use pan and scan mode for correctly formatted pictures.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,729 ✭✭✭Speak Now


    Lads whats the smallest saorview box on the market?
    I have a flat screen on the wall in the bedroom with very little room for a box.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    Put the box somewhere else and run an HDMI cable. They can be up to 14m without an amplifier.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,729 ✭✭✭Speak Now


    watty wrote: »
    Put the box somewhere else and run an HDMI cable. They can be up to 14m without an amplifier.

    So it's not like a sky box? The remote will be changing channels through the tv rather the box?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    no, the box. But unless the IR remote is really poor the location isn't very important.

    Our sky box is quite far from TV and you don't have to point the remote exactly at it.


  • Moderators, Regional North West Moderators Posts: 19,158 Mod ✭✭✭✭byte
    byte


    me wrote:
    None that I know of will do a 14:9, thankfully, as it's a stupid aspect anyway, IMO.
    I stand corrected, as the Nordmende NM8030 has a 14:9 option


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    It's still pointless.

    WS IMO should not have been EVER done on SD, only on HD, and 14:9 was a stupid compromise.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,757 ✭✭✭lawhec


    watty wrote: »
    It's still pointless.

    WS IMO should not have been EVER done on SD, only on HD, and 14:9 was a stupid compromise.
    It's down to personal preference. In terms of picture preference, the anamorphic widescreen employed with 576i pictures looks OK in my opinion provided the horizontal resolution is 720/704 pixels provided the bit rate is sufficient. When its 544 or 528 pixels though the sharpness does suffer though.

    For me 14:9 is a good compromise on small-screen 4:3 TV's as displaying 16:9 content gives too much black space for my liking without missing too much important content in the frame unless it's specifically designed for 16:9 viewing - for larger 4:3 screen sizes though 14:9 display isn't as important as viewing 16:9 material in a letterbox mode should still be sufficient for most viewers.


Advertisement