There was a coalition of movie people, including as I recall Francis Ford Coppola, who appealed for a wider-than 16x9 aspect ratio standard for HDTV. I believe they were pushing for something like 2:1. Unfortunately, they came in waaaaay too late in the ATSC standards development process to be taken seriously.
I still have a dream of having a front projector with anamorphic lens, for 2.35:1 constant image height, but I really don't see the need for it in rear projection and flat panel. You'd just shift the question about "why do I have black bars above and below the screen" to "why do I have black bars at the side of the screen?" Or worse yet, the stretch mode that some people seem to like in 16x9 would become ridiculously stretched into 2.35:1.
“It's rare if a month flies by without some random university or DIYer proclaiming that the next major jump in battery technology is just over the horizon.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
There was a coalition of movie people, including as I recall Francis Ford Coppola, who appealed for a wider-than 16x9 aspect ratio standard for HDTV. I believe they were pushing for something like 2:1. Unfortunately, they came in waaaaay too late in the ATSC standards development process to be taken seriously.
I still have a dream of having a front projector with anamorphic lens, for 2.35:1 constant image height, but I really don't see the need for it in rear projection and flat panel. You'd just shift the question about "why do I have black bars above and below the screen" to "why do I have black bars at the side of the screen?" Or worse yet, the stretch mode that some people seem to like in 16x9 would become ridiculously stretched into 2.35:1.