Editor:
I’m writing in response to Jared Whitley’s Nov. 13 column, “TV Format Is Meant For Squares?Not Boxed Rectangles.”
I am disgusted with the lack of knowledge of television technology Whitley had when he wrote.
Whitley referred to letter-boxing as having the image “squashed between two long black boxes,” and later quotes a “chump network guy” (in reference to putting TV shows on DVD) saying, “Let’s destroy one-third of the original image to fool people into thinking they’re watching a movie!”
First of all, nothing is “squashed” or “destroyed.” Typical televisions display images with a 4:3 ratio, whereas wide-screen televisions display at 16:9 ratio. Nothing is lost when you display 16:9 ratio on a 4:3 ratio screen. Simply put, there is even MORE image displayed when using 16:9 on 4:3.
Just because Whitley lacks the technology to properly view the video doesn’t mean he has to take an entire column to complain about it.
Second, if Whitley had done his research beforehand, he would know that the 16:9 format is the standard for today.
Stop living in the past!
Using better video recording technology is not a way to increase the amount of dignity that goes with watching a movie?it’s a way to increase the amount of viewable video.
Outside of the feature film context, the letter-box is not utterly senseless. Technology is moving forward, not only in feature films, but also in your day-to-day TV shows.
When you buy a TV show’s season on DVD, the “chump network guy” wants to give you everything, not just what you saw on TV. Soon enough, all TV broadcasts will be in letter-box format.
Whitley stated, “Letter-boxing: it’s not just a poor directional decision, it’s a crime. Let the revolution begin.”
FYI, the revolution has already begun?to wide screen. Get with the program!
Andrew Lu
Sophomore, Economics