So you went out and bought yourself a new HDTV. Many of you bought a sound system to go with it. Now you are inundated with all kinds of terms and acronyms. In this series we will go through the jargon associated with your new system. While these articles are aimed at newbies, some experienced readers out there may learn a thing or two as well. Today we start with two topics that come up on our podcast ( HDTV and Home Theater Podcast) quite frequently....

Read the Column

Although imdb lists several foreign CinemaScope flicks after 1968, I once read that 'In Like Flint' was the last true Cinemascope movie, 20th Century Fox still uses the Cinemascope extention of the music on their production logo. imdb indicates that Star Wars IV (AKA Star Wars) was shot in Panavision with special effects in VistaVision.

Raoul Walsh filmed 'The Big Trail' in 1930 using both a 35 mm version and in a 70mm 2.1 widescreen version.

'How to Marry a Millionaire" was the first movie filmed in Cinemascope, but 'The Robe,' Fox's prestige release, was released first.

I find the 16:9 aspect ratio, when done correctly, to be a very cinematic and enjoyable experience. However, it bugs me the number of times I have to fiddle with the "picture size" on my Samsung HD set to avoid having my DirecTV signal converted into a squished image or having part of the picture off the frame. And what really bugs me is the number of times there is no solution. There are times when no setting will make the picture look normal, probably because some technician has decided to modify a 4:3 source into 16:9 giving the effect of sitting too close to the screen in a drive in theater, and no way to undo the damage. I don't see why the native aspect ratio can't be part of the signal and give the TV set a way of sorting this out depending on your tastes.

The saving grace is that many, if not most, network programming is in a beautiful, highly detailed 16:9 format. But unfortunately the networks just can't leave that beautiful picture alone. They turn an artistic triumph into an advertising nightmare by inserting commercials into their own content, sometimes constant static reminders to watch another show or even other content. Yes, commercials pay for the free show, but why can't we have a little artistic integrity and keep the commercials separate from the content?

Although many movies are shot with a wider aspect ratio then 16:9, it doesn't always mean that the movie was cropped to make it fill the 16:9 screen (same for 4:3 too). Many times the film maker will film at 16:9 and then crop the movie for the movie theatre. So in reality, on TV, you get more of the movie. Of course, it is still not the same as the original movie in the theatre.

Yes, but this goes to my comment about artistic integrity. It's not a question of showing more or less of the picture; it's a question of what the artistic vision of the director was to begin with. In my humble opinion, that vision should be maintained even if it means black space at the top and bottom of your 16:9 HD TV.