So, next, I tried out an older, standard DVD formatted disc (Dances with Wolves), which I thought had an improved appearance that came surprisingly close to that of the two higher definition discs. This led me to the question of whether it also would appear to improve the definition of some DVDs that I produced and burned myself, for a letterbox type of widescreen appearance (which used to fill the complete screen of my widescreen TV’s 1.78 x 1 aspect ratio, with the TV changing to its Wide-Zoom mode). But, this is where the “bad news” began, in my experience with this player.

Apparently because of the HDMI cable connection that I am using (connecting both video and audio to the player in a single cable, supposedly to achieve the best definition and quality for each), the wide-zoom mode on my TV became disabled. Instead, the entire 4 X 3 ratio of my DVD’s recorded image, which includes the black, horizontal top and bottom borders, became stretched horizontally to fit that 4 X 3 image onto the wider, 1.78 X 1 screen. This resulted in a display that has letterbox black strips at the top and bottom and a horizontally stretched picture area where all the people look exceptionally short and fat, etc.

So, next, I grabbed one of my favorite commercially manufactured, standard format DVDs that uses a same-as-my-screen, 1.78 X 1 aspect ratio format (the CLOUD: Wild Horse program from the PBS Nature series) and the same thing happened (only, in the virtual absence of human subjects, it was the wild horses who looked extra fat, if they were running toward or away from the camera, and exceptionally long bodied if they were viewed horizontally). After that, I finally got rid of at least the letterbox format type of horizontal top and bottom borders, when I popped in a standard DVD formated, “full screen” (4:3 ratio) disk. But, here again, it stretched the whole thing horizontally, so that I was looking at more squashed and fattened people.

Then, something occurred to me about that HDTV-TV formatted disc of The Sting, that I had tried out. I remembered checking on its aspect ratio before buying it, to insure that it preserved it’s Hollywood type of widescreen appearance, which is wider than a wide-screen TV, and reading that it did, indeed, have an aspect ratio of 1.85 X 1 (meaning that it should display slight letterbox borders, even on my 1.78 X 1 TV. But, it wasn’t doing that. It was, instead, filling the complete screen, apparently clipping the sides of the full image. And, the complete screen even was filled when I next clicked onto the “Special Features” interviews. Only, I was back to another return of horizontally overstretched people. (I’m guessing that those interviews were produced at a less costly 4 X 3 aspect ratio.) AND, THIS IS WITH AN HDTV-DV FORMATTED DISC PLAYING ON A DEVICE THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN HDTV-DV FORMATTED PLAYER!

My quick-fix solution to all this, until I possibly can come up with a better idea, has been to leave my new player connected the way it is (for apparently best definition and quality in viewing the actually higher definition main features, while replacing on the shelf my old, standard format DVD player, reconnecting it with its three component video and two audio channel cables, for use most frequently with “Full Screen” DVDs. (For some reason, the new player so far has been producing absolutely gorgeous letterbox displays on most of my standard DVD recordings of the really widescreen, Hollywood type movies. Apparently, where that extended widescreen look is concerned, my new high definiation players only has a problem with my new HDTV-DV copy of The Sting. Go figure!)

So, I still do not know how it would perform and I have DVD’s that I can not watch.