Posted by JoeBloe on 09/10/06 20:05

On 9 Sep 2006 14:24:25 -0700, "aloha.kakuikanu"
<aloha.kakuikanu@yahoo.com> Gave us:

>Mark Jones wrote:
>> Try getting a decent TV. I have a 65 inch widescreen HDTV
>> and a 32 inch widescreen HDTV. I have noticed that a lot of
>> stores have cut way back on the percentage of 4:3 format
>> TVs in favor of 16:9 format widescreens. The next time you
>> need to purchase a TV, widescreen may be just about all
>> there is to choose from.
>
>I have 100" projector screen. It has decent vertical dimension, so that
>4:3 picture fills the whole view. I don't have any room to get wider
>than 100".
>
>Now with 100" diagonal size constraint, 4:3 screen has 15% more area
>than 16:9 shortscreen. I'm not even talking about letterbox which is
>ridiculously narrow.
>
>No I suggest you try to educate yourself -- wikipedia "widescreen" and
>"aspect ratio" critisism section is a good start.


Jeez. Dude, is your name Max?

You're an idiot. WikiTURDia is NOT the place to find out about the
art of film making and your analysis of what your projector renders on
your wall is NOT indicative of anything in the real world. The fact
that you call a wide form factor aspect ratio "ridiculously narrow is
a good place for one to declare that you don't know a goddamned thing
about it.

[Back to original message]