Changeset 21089 - Initial support for High Definition Media Flagging in PM3.HD Skin?

With reference to this changeset, I just wanted to point out that the only 16:9 aspect ratio is 1.78. 1.85 is its own aspect ratio, different from 16:9 and used in several movies.

I haven't followed the development of the media flags, so maybe differentiating between the two is not possible (it'd be a shame but nothing to cry about, honestly).

It is possible to tell the difference but I honestly didn't want to go and add in a bunch of technical type icons when the main ones would be pretty much the same.
If people can show me that they arn't 16x9 I'm happy to make its own icon but I thought things like this were a little un user freindly for general public (lower right)
http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/83/screenshot035i.jpg

P.S the text at the top is just test debug stuff and not in the skin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_ratio_(image)

2.35:1 (a.k.a. CinemaScope) is immensely different from 16:9, ...and 1.85:1 has small black bands on top and bottom on a 16:9 screen.

I would say that people who care about aspect ratio-info, care about correct info. But I might be wrong, obviously, as I don't have any kind of statistical data to back this up.

Given the choice of reporting a right information or a wrong one, though, what would you choose?

Thanks for your interest in this, by the way!

often the cropping error of thefiles are of the same order as the difference between 1.85 and 1.78...

I know 2.35:1 is really different it was an example of the info shown and how it is displayed I just personally think that having a general 16x9 is better and more understandable than 1.85:1 and so on
If someone could get me a common term for the letterbox format I would use that instead of 2.53:1 as well

And honestly after looking at this image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aspect_ratio.PNG
the difference is so small it may as well be 16x9 IMO

Jezz, if you are referring to 16:9 vs. 1:85 I might agree. As long as 2:35 is differentiated we could be ok.

On the other hand, just for the sake of discussion, I don't see the advantage of displaying the wrong information. Lots of DVDs report 1.85:1 as aspect ratio and consumers have been exposed to them for years.

Spiff, you might be right (you actually are ) but still I don't think one should create something based on other's mistakes.

I'm the only "simple user" in the discussion here, maybe others will pipe in.

There is a huge difference between 2.35:1 (a.k.a. "CINEMASCOPE" or "2.35 WIDESCREEN") and 16:9 (a.k.a. normal "WIDESCREEN") so I definitely think those needs to be separated.

2.35:1 even got its own fanbase that buy special anamorphic lenses (and screens) for their projector to run all their 2.35:1 (and 2.37:1) movies in anamorphic zoom mode so they do not get any black bars when playing those through the projector, checkout:
http://www.projectorcentral.com/235_home_theater.htm
and:
http://cavx.blogspot.com/2006/11/marks-h...s-cih.html



...you can also try googling "2:35:1 verses :1:85:1"

jezz_x, the layman term is 'cinemascope' or 'anamorphic'. none fit very well so i'd go with a numeric logo

nobody was ever suggestion batching 16:9 and cinema, just 16:9 and 1.85 etc

Look if you really want to see what I did click the pretty icons for each one
https://xbmc.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot...spectratio