I am impressed. Upsampling and rendering the content in the source component and bypassing the AD of a processor and or JVC resizing is incredible quality improvement. These MadVR systems are a transient technology that is going from analog to digital and back. Imagine Lawrence of Arabia in native 21:9 with the Panamorph lens sounds amazing. We just need to nudge Apple to making a Apple TV pro based on a Mac Mini M4 platform with Native bistream audio could be a killer app. Mabye with a dongle for splitting HDMI audio and video outputs too.
I'm TBD on whether I'll stick to the madVR or use the ATV native processing for my anamorphic control. The cool thing is madVR has profiles and Control4 makes it easy to switch.
Thanks for the insightful content. Is this the year you’ll be upgrading your living room TV? If so, are you considering the MLA-OLED from LG or the QD-OLED from Sony or Samsung? I’m leaning towards the Samsung 77" S95D, upgrading from a 65" LG CX, mainly because of the amazing cable management Samsung offers with the One Connect Box. I guess Dolby Vision will be a trade-off for convenience and design.
Thanks! I don't think anything more will be happening in the living room for 2024, but hopefully in 2025. I need to get the front wall rebuilt to fit a 97". I'd be looking towards the 97" G4, ideally. I'm not feeling any major drive to upgrade from G2 to G4 at the same size or even to go from 83" G2 to 85" Bravia 9, but those would be the sets I would consider. Of course, we'll see what's new at CES in a few weeks. I can sell all these TVs now, FYI, so if I can help you, reach out to jaremy@techthusiasm.net. Thanks!
This video was super well done. If this feature gets improved on in stable releases, will you opt to let the Apple TV handle the anamorphic squishing now that playback wheels and other UI elements fit better?
Good video but you need to note that this also is only useful for iTunes or Apple TV plus content. If you watch a Netflix movie (or any non Apple content) in 2.4 aspect, you will have black bars on all 4 sides when apple does the processing. So really you need to go back to the projector to do the anamorphic processing to get a proper video for any non apple streaming widescreen content
I will often partially drop my screen just to where a 21:9 (or whatever wide aspect ratio) movie image is contained, and use the power lens shift to raise the image to where the black bars are projected above and below the white part of my screen. I’m thinking I may be able to utilize this wide aspect feature then have my projector do some digital anamorphic correction to counteract the Apple TV’s “squished” image. In theory this would keep the UI and subtitles all within the intended viewable area, whereas currently the Apple TV UI bleeds above and below the projector screen and occasionally subtitles will dip in to the lower black bar (thus below my screen). It would be nice if Apple added an option to reconfigure the UI and subtitles to fit the wider aspect ratio, but NOT perform the anamorphic distortion.
Oops, I jumped the gun :) you mention this near the end of the video… and much more concisely than my blather! Any thoughts on my theory that the projector might be able to undo the squeeze? I’m running an Epson 5040. I also have an Oppo 203… perhaps this can be accomplished via the Oppo’s HDMI pass through processing.
@ the Oppo does offer several aspect ratio correction settings which can be applied to the HDMI input. I’ll have to look over them again to see what they are specifically.
A bit of a digression from the new AppleTV feature, but do you think the adding the anamorphic lens to your JVC makes a “wow” level of difference or is it more subtle comparison to zoom/shift lens memory? I have an NZ7 (only 115" diagonal at 2.35) and usually watch from 16 feet away from the screen. Just not sure how high on my upgrade list an anamorphic lens should be? Do you have a video on this?
There are a few videos about the Panamorph on the channel, yes. The lens is really adding light, and I very much appreciate the 20% or so extra light it gives in my setup. I also have the madVR to offset the distortion the lens adds. I would not want to use my system with the active distortion, so in that case an Alpha lens would have been preferred over the DCR. If you have plenty of light and getting good nits, you could skip the lens. Reach out to jaremy@techthusiasm.net and let's talk about it directly. I am a dealer for Panamorph, but there is a lot to consider with the lens we can go over.
How did it handle 16:9 content and subtitles on wide formats where part of the subtitles are usually put in the black bar at the bottom of a 16:9 screen? Did it just crop a 16:9 video or do black bars on the left and right?
It handles all the ratios well. It does proper anamorphic to preserve them, which is what you want. If you watch the video when that ATV home screen is showing, that is 16:9 content being displayed properly through the processing and the lens.
Of course it woudln't replace the madVR, because you likely aren't using that for JUST screen aspect automatic adjustment, add even if you were, it would still be better then the ATV becasue of things like non linear stretch and subtitle relocation , but It's also likely most of what the benefit for the MadVR is for you is the tone mapping optimization which isn't really part fo the apple tv at all, not in the same real time frame adapt sense for all content anyway
This feature certainly cannot replace the madVR, no. Anamorphic processing is just one of several important functions the Envy performs in my theater setup. Tone mapping, owning a JVC NZ900, is actually a little further down my priority list. I plan to make a video on this subject soon.
@@TechthusiasmI knew the JVC had industry leading tone mapping but I still thought the envy did it better and more completely? Guess we'll find out in that video.
I wonder if the narrower image coming out of the Apple TV with these settings means we’re losing pixels that are taken by the black bars on the sides. I would imagine that’s the case, but don’t know the technical details of how it’s working.
That's a great point. I almost guarantee it's compressing the image down and thus using less vertical lines of resolution. I'm a big proponent of trying to maintain a perfect 1:1 pixel mapping from source to display.
@@jkenefake, agreed. With my current setup using a Lumagen, I'm starting, at least, with the full 3840x2160 pixels from the Apple TV. I'd be curious to see a close-up side-by-side comparison to see if there's really a discernable difference. Even if not, just knowing that pixels are being lost might bug me. :) I'll do some experimenting.
Yes and no, and it depends on the aspect ratio of the content. Anamorphic pre-processing definitely squishes an image down in terms of horizontal scaled pixels but then get back lost vertical pixels when handling an actual ultra-widescreen image. If you zoom and letterbox, you are losing many pixels above and below the screen.
What I want is to be able to organize my movie collection in order instead of being organized in alphabetical order so I can organize my movies in the order I want
Thanks. -I don't understand why Apple don't have a zoomed option. -And if 21:9 is for DCR they should call it DCR. As this option is specifically for dcr lens with a JVC 4k (4096) -Further they should have an option they call ordinary anamorphic-lens mode or something like that for (3840)
Yes, it needs a letterbox/zoom option very much. 21:9 is a 2.35:1 screen setting which is different than the DCR option. You are right though, DCR is 4096 4K.
You can usually have the image “fill screen” by double tapping the center button on the remote (that’s a tap, not a click). This of course chops the sides off, but occasionally the feature comes in handy.
I believe Apple not reconfiguring the main Apple TV UI to fit wider aspect ratios is because their app partners provide preview footage (what you see above the grid of apps) that is sized to fit a 16:9 space. If they proportionately sized it for a wider width, the top, bottom, or both would get cut off. I wouldn’t be surprised if they eventually change their guidelines to require alternate wide ratio versions of those short previews and static headline features. This sill doesn’t let them off the hook for not implementing a full width UI for the settings menu, however.
Well that's just disappointing and kinda weird. Like who is this even for? I can't fathom a use case of someone that can afford a set up that requires and uses an anamorphic lens that isn't buying a projector that can already do it or a dedicated video processor. I guess it's really just for the UI. But thank you for checking it out for us.
So this only works if you have a anamorphic lens??? That's kinda dumb. I mean it's neat for you, but why would Apple spend time on this feature that will benefit so few people. I would say close to 99% of people with scope screens don't run an anamorphic lens.
I thought the same thing. There can't be a huge percentage of people rocking an anamorphic lens. I'm glad to have the feature, but it seems weird that they would implement it in the first place. Now if they added the option to get the menu interface and other 16:9 areas so span the full wide aspect ratio, that would be a cool feature.
@traviswcarney I'm thinking someone at Apple didn't understand the assignment. Just render everything in a wide-screen aspect ratio and it would work perfect for non anamorphic scope setups. Maybe they will realize it and add a toggle for whether an anamorphic lens is being used or not.
Correct. It really needs a letterbox mode. And it needs a full UI/menu/home screen scaling screen fill as well. I agree 100%, the requirements of the project were not fully realized.
Apple generally provides features that are useful for most people most of the time. This feature doesn't do it for most projector owners. Most widescreen projector owners use lens memories or a video processor like madVR or Lumagen. IMO Anamorphic lens is used far less than video processors. And among those with anamorphic lenses, I wonder if most of them also have a video processor? A video processor is much more useful than an anamorphic lens if you only had to get one or the other. I have a 2.40:1 aspect ratio screen with madVR Envy. It would be nice to have all UI elements for within the video image so even madVR wouldn't have to automatically readjust the picture whenever UI elements come up. So, if I understand this feature, it's useless for those without an anamorphic lens. Is it somewhat useful to use DCI 4K for JVC projector owners who don't have an anamorphic lens (given that JVC is 4096)?
Keep it up man, you are the only one out there I have seen talking about how this actually works
Thanks!
Awesome video. Do you think they will ever add support for zoomed implementations?
I really hope so!
Appreciate theJVC anamorphic info. Didn't know I had those options. Thanks.
Glad to help!
I'm running 18.2 beta, but I don't have the Aspect Ratio option. Anyone have any idea why?
Great video. I’m on that exact build however I do not see Aspect Ratio
Other folks have said that too. I'm not sure why that is.
@ the model I have is the A2169 which is my newest one. Not sure if there is a newer model
I’ve discovered even though my settings menu doesn’t show the aspect ratio, Infuse does in its drop down menu. Yay
I am impressed. Upsampling and rendering the content in the source component and bypassing the AD of a processor and or JVC resizing is incredible quality improvement. These MadVR systems are a transient technology that is going from analog to digital and back.
Imagine Lawrence of Arabia in native 21:9 with the Panamorph lens sounds amazing. We just need to nudge Apple to making a Apple TV pro based on a Mac Mini M4 platform with Native bistream audio could be a killer app. Mabye with a dongle for splitting HDMI audio and video outputs too.
I'm TBD on whether I'll stick to the madVR or use the ATV native processing for my anamorphic control. The cool thing is madVR has profiles and Control4 makes it easy to switch.
So this does nothing for ultrawide computer monitors? 😓
Correct, unless the monitor has a setting or menu option for anamorphic input. I'm guessing that most don't.
Thanks for the insightful content. Is this the year you’ll be upgrading your living room TV? If so, are you considering the MLA-OLED from LG or the QD-OLED from Sony or Samsung? I’m leaning towards the Samsung 77" S95D, upgrading from a 65" LG CX, mainly because of the amazing cable management Samsung offers with the One Connect Box. I guess Dolby Vision will be a trade-off for convenience and design.
Thanks! I don't think anything more will be happening in the living room for 2024, but hopefully in 2025. I need to get the front wall rebuilt to fit a 97". I'd be looking towards the 97" G4, ideally. I'm not feeling any major drive to upgrade from G2 to G4 at the same size or even to go from 83" G2 to 85" Bravia 9, but those would be the sets I would consider. Of course, we'll see what's new at CES in a few weeks.
I can sell all these TVs now, FYI, so if I can help you, reach out to jaremy@techthusiasm.net. Thanks!
I’m on version 18.2 but no aspect ratio options 😢
A couple other folks have mentioned that. I'm not sure why that is. Are you in the developer program?
@ yeah I am (as of last night), though I am in the UK if that matters.
This video was super well done. If this feature gets improved on in stable releases, will you opt to let the Apple TV handle the anamorphic squishing now that playback wheels and other UI elements fit better?
I may. I need to play around with madVR profiles and Control4 to make it work with my other sources though.
Good video but you need to note that this also is only useful for iTunes or Apple TV plus content. If you watch a Netflix movie (or any non Apple content) in 2.4 aspect, you will have black bars on all 4 sides when apple does the processing.
So really you need to go back to the projector to do the anamorphic processing to get a proper video for any non apple streaming widescreen content
I need to do a follow up trying other apps, for sure.
I will often partially drop my screen just to where a 21:9 (or whatever wide aspect ratio) movie image is contained, and use the power lens shift to raise the image to where the black bars are projected above and below the white part of my screen. I’m thinking I may be able to utilize this wide aspect feature then have my projector do some digital anamorphic correction to counteract the Apple TV’s “squished” image. In theory this would keep the UI and subtitles all within the intended viewable area, whereas currently the Apple TV UI bleeds above and below the projector screen and occasionally subtitles will dip in to the lower black bar (thus below my screen). It would be nice if Apple added an option to reconfigure the UI and subtitles to fit the wider aspect ratio, but NOT perform the anamorphic distortion.
Oops, I jumped the gun :) you mention this near the end of the video… and much more concisely than my blather! Any thoughts on my theory that the projector might be able to undo the squeeze? I’m running an Epson 5040. I also have an Oppo 203… perhaps this can be accomplished via the Oppo’s HDMI pass through processing.
I don't think any processing with remove the squeeze. Not in any devices I'm aware of. Most projectors would be performing the squeeze.
@ the Oppo does offer several aspect ratio correction settings which can be applied to the HDMI input. I’ll have to look over them again to see what they are specifically.
A bit of a digression from the new AppleTV feature, but do you think the adding the anamorphic lens to your JVC makes a “wow” level of difference or is it more subtle comparison to zoom/shift lens memory? I have an NZ7 (only 115" diagonal at 2.35) and usually watch from 16 feet away from the screen. Just not sure how high on my upgrade list an anamorphic lens should be? Do you have a video on this?
There are a few videos about the Panamorph on the channel, yes. The lens is really adding light, and I very much appreciate the 20% or so extra light it gives in my setup. I also have the madVR to offset the distortion the lens adds. I would not want to use my system with the active distortion, so in that case an Alpha lens would have been preferred over the DCR. If you have plenty of light and getting good nits, you could skip the lens. Reach out to jaremy@techthusiasm.net and let's talk about it directly. I am a dealer for Panamorph, but there is a lot to consider with the lens we can go over.
How did it handle 16:9 content and subtitles on wide formats where part of the subtitles are usually put in the black bar at the bottom of a 16:9 screen? Did it just crop a 16:9 video or do black bars on the left and right?
It handles all the ratios well. It does proper anamorphic to preserve them, which is what you want. If you watch the video when that ATV home screen is showing, that is 16:9 content being displayed properly through the processing and the lens.
Of course it woudln't replace the madVR, because you likely aren't using that for JUST screen aspect automatic adjustment, add even if you were, it would still be better then the ATV becasue of things like non linear stretch and subtitle relocation , but It's also likely most of what the benefit for the MadVR is for you is the tone mapping optimization which isn't really part fo the apple tv at all, not in the same real time frame adapt sense for all content anyway
This feature certainly cannot replace the madVR, no. Anamorphic processing is just one of several important functions the Envy performs in my theater setup. Tone mapping, owning a JVC NZ900, is actually a little further down my priority list. I plan to make a video on this subject soon.
@@TechthusiasmI knew the JVC had industry leading tone mapping but I still thought the envy did it better and more completely? Guess we'll find out in that video.
Oh, I still use the Envy tone mapping, for sure.
I wonder if the narrower image coming out of the Apple TV with these settings means we’re losing pixels that are taken by the black bars on the sides. I would imagine that’s the case, but don’t know the technical details of how it’s working.
That's a great point. I almost guarantee it's compressing the image down and thus using less vertical lines of resolution. I'm a big proponent of trying to maintain a perfect 1:1 pixel mapping from source to display.
@@jkenefake, agreed. With my current setup using a Lumagen, I'm starting, at least, with the full 3840x2160 pixels from the Apple TV. I'd be curious to see a close-up side-by-side comparison to see if there's really a discernable difference. Even if not, just knowing that pixels are being lost might bug me. :)
I'll do some experimenting.
Yes and no, and it depends on the aspect ratio of the content. Anamorphic pre-processing definitely squishes an image down in terms of horizontal scaled pixels but then get back lost vertical pixels when handling an actual ultra-widescreen image. If you zoom and letterbox, you are losing many pixels above and below the screen.
Agree it is good apple is doing this. But very very few people have this type of setup. Then again, apple was able to domthis in a firmware update.
What I want is to be able to organize my movie collection in order instead of being organized in alphabetical order so I can organize my movies in the order I want
Thanks.
-I don't understand why Apple don't have a zoomed option.
-And if 21:9 is for DCR they should call it DCR. As this option is specifically for dcr lens with a JVC 4k (4096)
-Further they should have an option they call ordinary anamorphic-lens mode or something like that for (3840)
Yes, it needs a letterbox/zoom option very much. 21:9 is a 2.35:1 screen setting which is different than the DCR option. You are right though, DCR is 4096 4K.
You can usually have the image “fill screen” by double tapping the center button on the remote (that’s a tap, not a click). This of course chops the sides off, but occasionally the feature comes in handy.
I believe Apple not reconfiguring the main Apple TV UI to fit wider aspect ratios is because their app partners provide preview footage (what you see above the grid of apps) that is sized to fit a 16:9 space. If they proportionately sized it for a wider width, the top, bottom, or both would get cut off. I wouldn’t be surprised if they eventually change their guidelines to require alternate wide ratio versions of those short previews and static headline features. This sill doesn’t let them off the hook for not implementing a full width UI for the settings menu, however.
Yeah, I'm sure it's a lot of work, but hey, they need to do the work! 😊
@@Techthusiasm in this case it would be work for app developers, not Apple (aside from their own apps)
Very true, yes. Individual apps would need to make extra wide layouts.
Well that's just disappointing and kinda weird. Like who is this even for? I can't fathom a use case of someone that can afford a set up that requires and uses an anamorphic lens that isn't buying a projector that can already do it or a dedicated video processor.
I guess it's really just for the UI. But thank you for checking it out for us.
So this only works if you have a anamorphic lens??? That's kinda dumb. I mean it's neat for you, but why would Apple spend time on this feature that will benefit so few people. I would say close to 99% of people with scope screens don't run an anamorphic lens.
I thought the same thing. There can't be a huge percentage of people rocking an anamorphic lens. I'm glad to have the feature, but it seems weird that they would implement it in the first place. Now if they added the option to get the menu interface and other 16:9 areas so span the full wide aspect ratio, that would be a cool feature.
@traviswcarney I'm thinking someone at Apple didn't understand the assignment. Just render everything in a wide-screen aspect ratio and it would work perfect for non anamorphic scope setups. Maybe they will realize it and add a toggle for whether an anamorphic lens is being used or not.
Correct. It really needs a letterbox mode. And it needs a full UI/menu/home screen scaling screen fill as well. I agree 100%, the requirements of the project were not fully realized.
Apple generally provides features that are useful for most people most of the time. This feature doesn't do it for most projector owners. Most widescreen projector owners use lens memories or a video processor like madVR or Lumagen. IMO Anamorphic lens is used far less than video processors. And among those with anamorphic lenses, I wonder if most of them also have a video processor? A video processor is much more useful than an anamorphic lens if you only had to get one or the other.
I have a 2.40:1 aspect ratio screen with madVR Envy. It would be nice to have all UI elements for within the video image so even madVR wouldn't have to automatically readjust the picture whenever UI elements come up.
So, if I understand this feature, it's useless for those without an anamorphic lens.
Is it somewhat useful to use DCI 4K for JVC projector owners who don't have an anamorphic lens (given that JVC is 4096)?
@@Techthusiasm Great video though. Thanks a bunch for testing all this.
Your running the Apple beta, you must be rich....
I don't understand the relationship of those two concepts. Being a base Apple developer is free.
Thanks!💯🧑🏾🦲