https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Talk%3A1187%3A_Aspect_RatioTalk:1187: Aspect Ratio - Revision history2026-05-23T10:36:58ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.30.0https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1187:_Aspect_Ratio&diff=310852&oldid=prev172.68.50.18 at 04:47, 21 April 20232023-04-21T04:47:32Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr style="vertical-align: top;" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 04:47, 21 April 2023</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l1" >Line 1:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 1:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Oh man, I haven't read Animorphs since I was a pre-teen.  That takes me back.  The aspect-ratio joke made me giggle mildly, but that was secondary to me. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 06:10, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Oh man, I haven't read Animorphs since I was a pre-teen.  That takes me back.  The aspect-ratio joke made me giggle mildly, but that was secondary to me. [[Special:Contributions/76.106.251.87|76.106.251.87]] 06:10, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>- The problem I see here is that the vertical black bars are pillarbox and not letterbox. How did Randall manage to goof on this? [[User:Cybertronic|Cybertronic]] ([[User talk:Cybertronic|talk]]) 06:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>- The problem I see here is that the vertical black bars are pillarbox and not letterbox. How did Randall manage to goof on this? [[User:Cybertronic|Cybertronic]] ([[User talk:Cybertronic|talk]]) 06:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
</table>172.68.50.18https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1187:_Aspect_Ratio&diff=30778&oldid=prev108.20.104.153 at 20:22, 22 March 20132013-03-22T20:22:27Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr style="vertical-align: top;" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 20:22, 22 March 2013</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l22" >Line 22:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 22:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Oh, and others are correct: the comic very specifically refers to "rescaled" video--that is, in fact, the practice of distorting the video to the new aspect ratio, and '''not''' adding matting bars on any side. It used to be actually done--though I've never seen it for a whole movie, only select scenes in a movie--and it's horrible. [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Oh, and others are correct: the comic very specifically refers to "rescaled" video--that is, in fact, the practice of distorting the video to the new aspect ratio, and '''not''' adding matting bars on any side. It used to be actually done--though I've never seen it for a whole movie, only select scenes in a movie--and it's horrible. [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">In this case, </del>"letterbox" is <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">not so much an error as it is </del>unnecessary. If the offensive video started off as letterboxed (i.e. black bands on top and bottom) <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">and were then resized to </del>4:3<del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">, and then </del>the <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">results of that were displayed within a 16:9 screen </del>the <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">result </del>would: <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">(a</del>) <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">have black bands on all four sides and (b) be distorted by unnatural compression along </del>the <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">horizontal. One could achieve a result closer </del>to <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">Randall's drawing </del>taking <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">an unletterboxed </del>16:9 <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">original and resize </del>it to 4:3. In the end, the Randall's objection has much more to do with the unnatural distortion than the <del class="diffchange diffchange-inline">black space</del>. [[Special:Contributions/108.20.104.153|108.20.104.153]]just somebody</div></td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">The word </ins>"letterbox" <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">in the caption </ins>is <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">inaccurate and </ins>unnecessary <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">to the joke</ins>. If the offensive video started off as letterboxed (i.e. black bands on top and bottom) <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">it would already be in a </ins>4:3 <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">ratio (</ins>the <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">wide-aspect picture plus </ins>the <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">letterbox bands </ins>would <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">total out to a 4</ins>:<ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">3 picture</ins>)<ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">. The scene depicted in </ins>the <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">cartoon is analogous </ins>to taking <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">content with a </ins>16:9 <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">raster, squeezing </ins>it to <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">fit in a </ins>4:3 <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">frame <i>without</i> letter-boxing, and then displaying it in a 16:9 frame (i.e. pillarboxing). I see this on YouTube frequently, but I don't know if that's because YouTube is doing something wrong automatically or the people uploading are doing something wrong</ins>.In the end, the Randall's objection has much more to do with the unnatural distortion than the <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">"boxing". (NOTE: edited this comment since I first posted it earlier today because I got it substantially wrong back then..</ins>.<ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">) </ins>[[Special:Contributions/108.20.104.153|108.20.104.153]]just somebody</div></td></tr>
</table>108.20.104.153https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1187:_Aspect_Ratio&diff=30764&oldid=prev108.20.104.153 at 17:10, 22 March 20132013-03-22T17:10:02Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr style="vertical-align: top;" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 17:10, 22 March 2013</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l21" >Line 21:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 21:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Oh, and others are correct: the comic very specifically refers to "rescaled" video--that is, in fact, the practice of distorting the video to the new aspect ratio, and '''not''' adding matting bars on any side. It used to be actually done--though I've never seen it for a whole movie, only select scenes in a movie--and it's horrible. [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Oh, and others are correct: the comic very specifically refers to "rescaled" video--that is, in fact, the practice of distorting the video to the new aspect ratio, and '''not''' adding matting bars on any side. It used to be actually done--though I've never seen it for a whole movie, only select scenes in a movie--and it's horrible. [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">In this case, "letterbox" is not so much an error as it is unnecessary. If the offensive video started off as letterboxed (i.e. black bands on top and bottom) and were then resized to 4:3, and then the results of that were displayed within a 16:9 screen the result would: (a) have black bands on all four sides and (b) be distorted by unnatural compression along the horizontal. One could achieve a result closer to Randall's drawing taking an unletterboxed 16:9 original and resize it to 4:3. In the end, the Randall's objection has much more to do with the unnatural distortion than the black space. [[Special:Contributions/108.20.104.153|108.20.104.153]]just somebody</ins></div></td></tr>
</table>108.20.104.153https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1187:_Aspect_Ratio&diff=30676&oldid=prev74.215.2.247 at 23:53, 21 March 20132013-03-21T23:53:56Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr style="vertical-align: top;" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 23:53, 21 March 2013</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l15" >Line 15:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 15:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Quibble: I'm pretty sure that the term "fullscreen" as a description for a 4:3 aspect-ratio screen is a rarely-used back-formation. It was originally a marketing term for video sources (such as a recording of a movie), coined to describe wider-ratio films that had been chopped, compressed, or otherwise modified to fit on a 4:3 TV without letterboxing, thus filling the full screen. My impression was that it was partly about having a succinct label (to differentiate from letterboxed videos); partly about trying to disempower  cinephiles and movie reviewers, who generally lambasted studios for releasing a different version to home video than had been shown in the theater; and partly about newspeak, trying to obscure the fact that it was in fact letterboxing that gave you the whole film by pretending that you were getting "more movie" with fullscreen versions. I'd never heard the term "fullscreen" used to describe a physical screen, only its use, prior to this explanation. Wikipedia/wiktionary seem to concur that using it to describe the physical screen is a new thing (based on its absence in the wiktionary entry, and existing only as a redirect in wikipedia). [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:41, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Quibble: I'm pretty sure that the term "fullscreen" as a description for a 4:3 aspect-ratio screen is a rarely-used back-formation. It was originally a marketing term for video sources (such as a recording of a movie), coined to describe wider-ratio films that had been chopped, compressed, or otherwise modified to fit on a 4:3 TV without letterboxing, thus filling the full screen. My impression was that it was partly about having a succinct label (to differentiate from letterboxed videos); partly about trying to disempower  cinephiles and movie reviewers, who generally lambasted studios for releasing a different version to home video than had been shown in the theater; and partly about newspeak, trying to obscure the fact that it was in fact letterboxing that gave you the whole film by pretending that you were getting "more movie" with fullscreen versions. I'd never heard the term "fullscreen" used to describe a physical screen, only its use, prior to this explanation. Wikipedia/wiktionary seem to concur that using it to describe the physical screen is a new thing (based on its absence in the wiktionary entry, and existing only as a redirect in wikipedia). [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:41, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:It's not so much a back-formation I think, as an incorrect, semi-logical extension of prior terminology.  Most people's experience with the terms 'fullscreen' and 'widescreen' in this context is, as you note, on commercial movie releases.  Back in the olden days, when all pretty much were 4:3 (with the occasional rare 5:4 model), and VHS ruled the market, it was not uncommon at all for movies to be released in two formats:  a letterboxed format preserving the original aspect ratio via matte bars, nigh-universally labeled 'Widescreen'; and a Pan-and-Scan (that's the technical term) version filling the entire screen by chopping parts of the image off, generally either unlabelled (as it this was considered the 'normal' format at the time) or labeled 'Fullscreen' (as it filled the entire screen).  Originally the 'Widescreen' releases were semi-rare, as the general perception was that people didn't LIKE those black bars at the top and bottom of the screen (and indeed, some people quite vehemently hated them).  They grew in popularity and got more common as time went on, which was probably one of the reasons why flat panel televisions ended up being 16:9 rather than 4:3 when they appeared.  The twin releases continued, however, as a lot of people still had 4:3 televisions, and some of them still really hated letterboxing.  Even after DVDs showed up, this continued, with the Pan and Scan release more and more commonly being labeled (almost always as 'fullscreen').</ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:If I had to guess, someone that didn't know the proper terminology, having observed that 16:9 televisions were commonly referred to as 'Widescreen', the same as on the movies they've bought or seen in stores, might assume thusly that the terminology would ALSO match when talking about a 4:3 television.  This would be reinforced by the fact that an old 'fullscreen' video/DVD, labeled as such, would show up on a widescreen television as a 4:3 image with matte bars on either side.  So they conclude that 'fullscreen' equals '4:3 screen ratio', when it's really just an outdated expression from a bygone age.  -Graptor [[Special:Contributions/74.215.2.247|74.215.2.247]] 23:53, 21 March 2013 (UTC)</ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Oh, and others are correct: the comic very specifically refers to "rescaled" video--that is, in fact, the practice of distorting the video to the new aspect ratio, and '''not''' adding matting bars on any side. It used to be actually done--though I've never seen it for a whole movie, only select scenes in a movie--and it's horrible. [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Oh, and others are correct: the comic very specifically refers to "rescaled" video--that is, in fact, the practice of distorting the video to the new aspect ratio, and '''not''' adding matting bars on any side. It used to be actually done--though I've never seen it for a whole movie, only select scenes in a movie--and it's horrible. [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td></tr>
</table>74.215.2.247https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1187:_Aspect_Ratio&diff=30632&oldid=prev129.176.151.14 at 22:46, 20 March 20132013-03-20T22:46:17Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr style="vertical-align: top;" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 22:46, 20 March 2013</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l15" >Line 15:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 15:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Quibble: I'm pretty sure that the term "fullscreen" as a description for a 4:3 aspect-ratio screen is a rarely-used back-formation. It was originally a marketing term for video sources (such as a recording of a movie), coined to describe wider-ratio films that had been chopped, compressed, or otherwise modified to fit on a 4:3 TV without letterboxing, thus filling the full screen. My impression was that it was partly about having a succinct label (to differentiate from letterboxed videos); partly about trying to disempower  cinephiles and movie reviewers, who generally lambasted studios for releasing a different version to home video than had been shown in the theater; and partly about newspeak, trying to obscure the fact that it was in fact letterboxing that gave you the whole film by pretending that you were getting "more movie" with fullscreen versions. I'd never heard the term "fullscreen" used to describe a physical screen, only its use, prior to this explanation. Wikipedia/wiktionary seem to concur that using it to describe the physical screen is a new thing (based on its absence in the wiktionary entry, and existing only as a redirect in wikipedia). [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:41, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Quibble: I'm pretty sure that the term "fullscreen" as a description for a 4:3 aspect-ratio screen is a rarely-used back-formation. It was originally a marketing term for video sources (such as a recording of a movie), coined to describe wider-ratio films that had been chopped, compressed, or otherwise modified to fit on a 4:3 TV without letterboxing, thus filling the full screen. My impression was that it was partly about having a succinct label (to differentiate from letterboxed videos); partly about trying to disempower  cinephiles and movie reviewers, who generally lambasted studios for releasing a different version to home video than had been shown in the theater; and partly about newspeak, trying to obscure the fact that it was in fact letterboxing that gave you the whole film by pretending that you were getting "more movie" with fullscreen versions. I'd never heard the term "fullscreen" used to describe a physical screen, only its use, prior to this explanation. Wikipedia/wiktionary seem to concur that using it to describe the physical screen is a new thing (based on its absence in the wiktionary entry, and existing only as a redirect in wikipedia). [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:41, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Oh, and others are correct: the comic very specifically refers to "rescaled" video--that is, in fact, the practice of distorting the video to the new aspect ratio, and '''not''' adding matting bars on any side. It used to be actually done--though I've never seen it for a whole movie, only select scenes in a movie--and it's horrible. [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</ins></div></td></tr>
</table>129.176.151.14https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1187:_Aspect_Ratio&diff=30631&oldid=prev129.176.151.14 at 22:41, 20 March 20132013-03-20T22:41:44Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr style="vertical-align: top;" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 22:41, 20 March 2013</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l13" >Line 13:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 13:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>I'm new to this wiki editing.  Love this site; love XKCDs comics.  I believe that there is a typo in the description, "...denoted in a radio of..." should be "...denoted in a ratio of...". {{{unsigned|66.60.247.180}}</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>I'm new to this wiki editing.  Love this site; love XKCDs comics.  I believe that there is a typo in the description, "...denoted in a radio of..." should be "...denoted in a ratio of...". {{{unsigned|66.60.247.180}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Quibble: I'm pretty sure that the term "fullscreen" as a description for a 4:3 aspect-ratio screen is a rarely-used back-formation. It was originally a marketing term for video sources (such as a recording of a movie), coined to describe wider-ratio films that had been chopped, compressed, or otherwise modified to fit on a 4:3 TV without letterboxing, thus filling the full screen. My impression was that it was partly about having a succinct label (to differentiate from letterboxed videos); partly about trying to disempower  cinephiles and movie reviewers, who generally lambasted studios for releasing a different version to home video than had been shown in the theater; and partly about newspeak, trying to obscure the fact that it was in fact letterboxing that gave you the whole film by pretending that you were getting "more movie" with fullscreen versions. I'd never heard the term "fullscreen" used to describe a physical screen, only its use, prior to this explanation. Wikipedia/wiktionary seem to concur that using it to describe the physical screen is a new thing (based on its absence in the wiktionary entry, and existing only as a redirect in wikipedia). [[Special:Contributions/129.176.151.14|129.176.151.14]] 22:41, 20 March 2013 (UTC)</ins></div></td></tr>
</table>129.176.151.14https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1187:_Aspect_Ratio&diff=30600&oldid=prevDavidy22 at 15:02, 20 March 20132013-03-20T15:02:16Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr style="vertical-align: top;" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 15:02, 20 March 2013</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l12" >Line 12:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 12:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::Having thought about it a bit while microwaving dinner, I thought of another explanation that makes more sense, and I can recall seeing this one on youtube.  Rather than just adding matte bars to the top and bottom to the original 16:9 video to make it fit in 4:3... they actually rescale it to 4:3.  This compresses the horizontal axis and makes everything look a bit squeezed.  In numerical terms, you'd be taking, say, a 1920x1080 video, and crushing it down to 1436x1080, and not by chopping the sides off.  You just compress the whole image down to fit, and the end result looks terrible.  Like the car.  -Graptor [[Special:Contributions/74.215.2.247|74.215.2.247]] 22:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::Having thought about it a bit while microwaving dinner, I thought of another explanation that makes more sense, and I can recall seeing this one on youtube.  Rather than just adding matte bars to the top and bottom to the original 16:9 video to make it fit in 4:3... they actually rescale it to 4:3.  This compresses the horizontal axis and makes everything look a bit squeezed.  In numerical terms, you'd be taking, say, a 1920x1080 video, and crushing it down to 1436x1080, and not by chopping the sides off.  You just compress the whole image down to fit, and the end result looks terrible.  Like the car.  -Graptor [[Special:Contributions/74.215.2.247|74.215.2.247]] 22:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'>−</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>I'm new to this wiki editing.  Love this site; love XKCDs comics.  I believe that there is a typo in the description, "...denoted in a radio of..." should be "...denoted in a ratio of...".</div></td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>I'm new to this wiki editing.  Love this site; love XKCDs comics.  I believe that there is a typo in the description, "...denoted in a radio of..." should be "...denoted in a ratio of...". <ins class="diffchange diffchange-inline">{{{unsigned|66.60.247.180}}</ins></div></td></tr>
</table>Davidy22https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1187:_Aspect_Ratio&diff=30598&oldid=prev66.60.247.180 at 14:41, 20 March 20132013-03-20T14:41:59Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr style="vertical-align: top;" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 14:41, 20 March 2013</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l11" >Line 11:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 11:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::Having thought about it a bit while microwaving dinner, I thought of another explanation that makes more sense, and I can recall seeing this one on youtube.  Rather than just adding matte bars to the top and bottom to the original 16:9 video to make it fit in 4:3... they actually rescale it to 4:3.  This compresses the horizontal axis and makes everything look a bit squeezed.  In numerical terms, you'd be taking, say, a 1920x1080 video, and crushing it down to 1436x1080, and not by chopping the sides off.  You just compress the whole image down to fit, and the end result looks terrible.  Like the car.  -Graptor [[Special:Contributions/74.215.2.247|74.215.2.247]] 22:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>::Having thought about it a bit while microwaving dinner, I thought of another explanation that makes more sense, and I can recall seeing this one on youtube.  Rather than just adding matte bars to the top and bottom to the original 16:9 video to make it fit in 4:3... they actually rescale it to 4:3.  This compresses the horizontal axis and makes everything look a bit squeezed.  In numerical terms, you'd be taking, say, a 1920x1080 video, and crushing it down to 1436x1080, and not by chopping the sides off.  You just compress the whole image down to fit, and the end result looks terrible.  Like the car.  -Graptor [[Special:Contributions/74.215.2.247|74.215.2.247]] 22:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">I'm new to this wiki editing.  Love this site; love XKCDs comics.  I believe that there is a typo in the description, "...denoted in a radio of..." should be "...denoted in a ratio of...".</ins></div></td></tr>
</table>66.60.247.180https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1187:_Aspect_Ratio&diff=30549&oldid=prev74.215.2.247 at 22:48, 18 March 20132013-03-18T22:48:09Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr style="vertical-align: top;" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 22:48, 18 March 2013</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l9" >Line 9:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 9:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:A hard matted letterbox, on the other hand, shows up the same on a 4:3 television as the anamorphic would, but when shown on a widescreen television, is still shown in 4:3, with additional matte bars (black or grey) on the sides, in addition to the 'hard' mattes on top and bottom.  This leaves your widescreen television showing a widescreen signal at only a fraction of the television's full size, with most of the screen wasted on needless matte bars. -Graptor [[Special:Contributions/74.215.2.247|74.215.2.247]] 22:29, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>:A hard matted letterbox, on the other hand, shows up the same on a 4:3 television as the anamorphic would, but when shown on a widescreen television, is still shown in 4:3, with additional matte bars (black or grey) on the sides, in addition to the 'hard' mattes on top and bottom.  This leaves your widescreen television showing a widescreen signal at only a fraction of the television's full size, with most of the screen wasted on needless matte bars. -Graptor [[Special:Contributions/74.215.2.247|74.215.2.247]] 22:29, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">::Having thought about it a bit while microwaving dinner, I thought of another explanation that makes more sense, and I can recall seeing this one on youtube.  Rather than just adding matte bars to the top and bottom to the original 16:9 video to make it fit in 4:3... they actually rescale it to 4:3.  This compresses the horizontal axis and makes everything look a bit squeezed.  In numerical terms, you'd be taking, say, a 1920x1080 video, and crushing it down to 1436x1080, and not by chopping the sides off.  You just compress the whole image down to fit, and the end result looks terrible.  Like the car.  -Graptor [[Special:Contributions/74.215.2.247|74.215.2.247]] 22:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</ins></div></td></tr>
</table>74.215.2.247https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1187:_Aspect_Ratio&diff=30548&oldid=prev74.215.2.247 at 22:29, 18 March 20132013-03-18T22:29:59Z<p></p>
<table class="diff diff-contentalign-left" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr style="vertical-align: top;" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: white; color:black; text-align: center;">Revision as of 22:29, 18 March 2013</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l5" >Line 5:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 5:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Hey, uhm, I'm not familiar with the format I'm supposed to use here or anywhere, but I'd like to point out that in the comic image, it looks like that car is being transformed from a 16:9 format to a 4:3 format, and the black poles on the ends are like the black parts a widescreen user would get while watching a 4:3 video. {{unsigned|62.65.213.175}}</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background-color: #f9f9f9; color: #333333; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #e6e6e6; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Hey, uhm, I'm not familiar with the format I'm supposed to use here or anywhere, but I'd like to point out that in the comic image, it looks like that car is being transformed from a 16:9 format to a 4:3 format, and the black poles on the ends are like the black parts a widescreen user would get while watching a 4:3 video. {{unsigned|62.65.213.175}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:Yeah, I got the impression this had to do with the 'Postage Stamp' problem.  Something that was originally made in widescreen is converted to 4:3 using a 'hard matte' process:  it's actually converted into a 4:3 signal, and the black bars are part of the signal.  This contrasts with the 'anamorphic widescreen' process, where the full widescreen signal is included, without the black matte bars, which are added by the television if needed, and only if needed.  An anamorphic widescreen video would show up on a 4:3 television letterboxed, with the black matte bars on top and bottom:  on a widescreen television, it would instead fill the TV, assuming the aspect ratio was the same</ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"></ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="color:black; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:A hard matted letterbox, on the other hand, shows up the same on a 4:3 television as the anamorphic would, but when shown on a widescreen television, is still shown in 4:3, with additional matte bars (black or grey) on the sides, in addition to the 'hard' mattes on top and bottom.  This leaves your widescreen television showing a widescreen signal at only a fraction of the television's full size, with most of the screen wasted on needless matte bars. -Graptor [[Special:Contributions/74.215.2.247|74.215.2.247]] 22:29, 18 March 2013 (UTC)</ins></div></td></tr>
</table>74.215.2.247