BBC 'Safe Areas'

Well I was responding to Stuart who suggested it was personal choice that people sometimes don't get the full picture so to speak. My point was that most people actually don't know, understand or want to know how to adjust their pictures.

That's very difficult with movies, which are the main culprits (usually just their opening titles)



If you have a recent HD panel and an HD set-top box or an HTPC then you can usually output in 1080i or 1080p and go for Full Pixel/1:1/Just etc. which have no overscan.

If you have a CRT TV then sometimes it is possible to get into the engineering menu.s ONLY DO THIS IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING... I tweaked my old Sony WEGA 16:9 CRT to significantly reduce the overscanning and the 4:3 pillarbox blanking that was added left and right in pillarbox mode - however I didn't totally reduce the overscan as I didn't want to see the blanking errors and DVE/Wipe transition stuff that you inevitably used to see (though this has improved a lot over the last few years)

If such a large number of TVs are incorrectly set up, then surely the fault lies with the manufacturers. Why are broadcasters having to accommodate improperly set up TVs?

If someone has a TV which shows the same as the OP:

http://i48.tinypic.com/1zftwdj.jpg

then it's clearly not set up properly. That's how my new TV looked in 2005. If I hadn't worked out how to fix it myself, then I'd have simply taken it back to the shop and told them to do it. It was faulty!

I'm not talking about putting information within a few pixels of the edge of the broadcast picture, just moving to 16:9 safe areas instead of 4:3 safe.

I don't think it is a personal choice in every case. Some displays can't have their overscan reduced, most users won't know about the engineering menus that are required for some displays (and many engineering menus shouldn't be used by those who aren't fully across what they are doing). Also - there are still 4:3 displays on sale, and televisions sold in the late 80s and early 90s are still in service.

The BBC can't expect people to replace their TVs for the sake of it. Those on low incomes - who also pay their licence-fee - deserve as good a service as anyone, and should perfectly good TVs be consigned to landfill for the sake of it?

Bottom line - 4:3 displays are still a fact of life - and you can't expect everyone to want to watch letterboxed, particularly on small displays and particularly when boxes default to 4:3 centre-cut...

I entirely agree - and until our TX system is universal, Safe Title Areas are the only way of ensuring text is read correctly on the screen - otherwise there's no point in putting it there in the first place.

Until when? The BBC News graphics haven't changed since the last relaunch, over two years ago, so if they've shifted on the OP's TV in the recent past, it's 100% definately a fault with their TV, not with the BBC's graphics. If they've been like this for two years, why has the OP only now decided to speak up.

As others have said, if the OP is experiencing the amount of overscan you indicated in their picture, their TV is at fault. Demanding that the BBC stick to universal safe title areas (which I'm under the impression they already do) will do no good, as their TV is not showing the whole safe title area.

ETA: There seems to be two arguments on this thread, those arguing we should have 16:9 safe areas vs 4:3 or 14:9 safe areas, and that by Fluffy Bunny Feet that the BBC is purposely not rendering graphics in any safe areas.

Edit: Altered references to Fluffy Bunny Feet and the OP as I'd gotten them confused. See below.

Hang on a minute.
I did not start this thread merely added my views along with others.
I've tried (obviously badly) to explain the reasons for Safe Title Areas.
At no pint have I suggested that the BBC purposely not rendering graphics in any safe areas and I resent your accusation.

Firstly, please accept my apoligies for confusing you with the OP, with the separate arguments about whether the BBC use safe areas and whether they should use 16:9, 14:9 or 4:3 safe areas, I'd gotten confused as to who started the thread, as you both share the same argument (compare "I expect broadcasters to be very aware of the safe area guidelines." by the OP to "You don't need one [a cutover between 4:3 safe and 16:9 safe areas] providing broadcasters use Safe Title Area Generators" by yourself).

However, your statements such as:




indicated to me that you did believe that broacasters were not using safe areas properly.