On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 18:40, Joseph A. Caputo wrote: > On Thursday 05 May 2005 13:10, Michael Haan wrote: > > On 5/5/05, James Stembridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 5/5/05, Doug Larrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > But are your pixels square? 720x480 is pretty close to square > > > > pixels on > > > > a 16:9 set. > > > > > > I wouldn't think so, I'm using 720x576 too. I'll have a closer look > > > tonight. > > > > > > James. > > > > What do you mean by saying your pixels are square? The text is blocky > > in the UI? > > He's referring to the actual shape of a pixel on a computer monitor vs. > a television. Computer monitors have square (well, really circular) > pixels, while TVs have oblong (wider than tall) pixels. So an image > that looks like a perfect square on a computer monitor will look > 'stretched' (i.e., rectangular) on a television. I'm not sure if a HD > television has oblong or 'square' pixels.
Thankfully, true HD has square pixels :) Do the maths to check: 4/3=1.3333, 16/9=1.7777 1280/720=1.7777 1920/1080=1.7777 So if you are driving a 16:9 display at 1280x720, it should display everything in the right shape if the software assumes "square" pixels. Just for comparison, the SD resolutions: 720/576=1.25 (differs from 4/3 by 6%) 720/486=1.4815 (differs in the other direction by 11%) Richard
_______________________________________________ mythtv-users mailing list [email protected] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
