Non-square-pixel displays.

[stanger89]

This is as much for others as myself but here goes.

I know Sage has AR controls, but they seem to be firmly based on the resolution you are running, here's what I mean.

I have a HDTV which I run at 1280x1024i. The TV is 4:3 but the resolution is 5:4, to get the correct aspect ratio, the video should be stretched ~6% vertically. If I adjust any of the aspect ratios to be 6% greater vertically than horizontally then Sage does stretch the video, however it does not change the absolute size of the window the video is displayed in.

Example, for 4:3 video at default settings there are very small black bars at the top and bottom of the screen. If I adjust the zoom settings I can stretch the video but the bars remain.

Fill eliminates the bars but does not work for both standard and anamorphic content. Source mode works great with the exception that I can't eliminate the bars.

I think what we need is a way to specify the AR of the display device. There are really only three sizes 4:3, 16:9, and 16:10 (widescreen PC monitors). That way Sage would base its AR calculations off the AR of the screen not the resolution.

I started this thread since I've played a little with it but not enough to be sure I'm not doing something wrong. I haven't tried harder since it's not that bad in my setup, but it could be for people that use plasmas with non-square pixels (1024x768 or 1024x1024i on a 16:9 display), or for people who use anamorphic lenses on front projectors (4:3 projector w/ lense for 16:9 picture or 16:9 projector / lense for 2.35:1 picture).

I was all ready to submit a bug/feature request but figured I should make sure I wasn't doing something wrong, and/or get some support I could link to.

[ErsatzTom]

You should add another option for Profoundly confused.

[stanger89]

It seems like I have a tendency to do that better than explain myself. Let me give it another try.

The biggest problem is on 16x9 displays with 4:3 resolutions like some plasmas. For example the physical display is 16x9, but the resolution of the display is 1024x768. The problem here is that Sage thinks you are using a 4:3 display because 1024x768 is a 4:3 resolution. Because of this the Force 4x3 AR will result in a stretched picture filling the display, and the Force 16x9 AR wil result in a letterboxed picture (instead of filling the screen). This also causes problems with the Use Source AR, 4x3 material is displayed stretched and 16x9 material is letterboxed (bad on a 16x9 display).

[ErsatzTom]

Gotcha. I probably could have figured that out from your original post, I was just being lazy. Plus, currently living in SD land, and even my HD dreams consisting of a 4:3 direct view set, I haven't really paid much attention to the various AR weirdness that others have to deal with.

t

[etk29321]

Posting my vote for non-square pixel support. I'm the owner of a 4x3 pj with an anamorphic lens, and would very much like to be able to show any material in it's correct AR.

[Crashless]

can't you just set the signal interpret to zoom, or zoom stretch, then resize your GUI to fit? I know most HDTVs can change the way they resize the picture a couple of different ways.

If not using that, why not your video card? Most can adjust the signal output.

[etk29321]

We're talking front projection displays here... I've got a lt150 with a 1024x768 dlp panel (4x3 AR). I have to maintain a 1-to-1 pixel mapping between the panel and the computer or else the pj uses it's internal scaler (which is crap). The anamorphic stretch is actually done optically to fit my 16x9 screen. So.. no.. setting the pj to "zoom" defeats the purpose of using the HTPC as a scaler.

Bascially, I'd be nice if sage's aspect ratio controls worked more like Theatertek -- let you scale the image any way you feel like, then assign it the AR.

[stanger89]

Even on HDTVs the AR adjustments are seriously limited if the set detects 480p+ input.

The issue is not the GUI it's the video, on my display the GUI fit's the screen perfectly, but the video has small bars at the top and bottom. That is displaying 4x3 video on a 4x3 display, but the resolution is 5x4 so Sage adds bars that are unnecessary.

[salsbst]

I've got a 4x3 sized TV that supports 1920x1080i (I use the overscan-reducing 1776x1000) by squeezing it into 4x3. I didn't notice SageTV having a problem with this on the video side of things. It, like most programs, does end up with slightly skinny fonts, but I don't mind.

I voted "yes" more as a general voice for better and more aspect ratio control and zoom control.

[stanger89]

What AR setting are you using. By defult Sage seems to stretch the UI to fit the screen, this is fine. In your example the problem is that if you set the AR to anything but Fill, then the AR will be wrong, 4x3 should result in a pillarboxed picture (should be fullscreen), 16x9 should result in a full screen (should be letterbox), and source will leave 4x3 content pillarboxed (instead of fullscreen) and 16x9 content fullscreen (should be letterbox).

If this is not how they work for you let me know.

[salsbst]

I don't yet have a new server to which the client would connect, so I will not be able to test these for a couple more days.

I think my AR was set to fill. I think your description of what SageTV does is correct, and I guess that if I had an additional option to tell Sage that my 16x9 res is being displayed on a 4x3 set, that it could allow for your parenthisized wishes.

Actually one of the reasons I went with a 4x3 TV was the lack of sophisticated 4x3 to 16x9 stretch controls in SageTV.

[stanger89]

Well it would definitely be a good feature, it would be great feather in Sage's cap to have some of the Videophile features available in things like ZP and TT, especially since we've always pointed to Sage's superior PQ as one of it's greatest aspects.