Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > DVD Video > Richard C is a Screen-Filler!

Reply
Thread Tools

Richard C is a Screen-Filler!

 
 
max christoffersen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-24-2003
After years of belittling those who wanted their screens filled, Richard C
today joined their ranks:


> See...you did miss the point. If it were anamorphic it would<
> appear to fill the screen of a 1.78:1 set - just as 1.85:1 <
> appears to. < Richard C



Priceless.

Simply priceless.


Max Christoffersen
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Richard C.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-25-2003

"Sammy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
: In article <bda78l$tpg$(E-Mail Removed)>,
: "max christoffersen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: > <<<<<<blather>>>>>>>>>>
: > Max Christoffersen
:
: It's bad enough that you're a complete idiot. What's even worse is the
: way you blatantly distort what others say to get that infamous maxie
: punch in. You are so low that there isn't even an adjective that could
: begin to describe how low you are. Miserable **** comes close, but even
: worse than that.

=================
You are being too kind to him....................


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Richard C.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2003

"max christoffersen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bdctfg$jhu$(E-Mail Removed)...
:
: > : > See...you did miss the point. If it were anamorphic it would<
: > : > appear to fill the screen of a 1.78:1 set - just as 1.85:1 <
: > : > appears to. < Richard C
: > :
: > :
: > : Priceless.
: > :
: > : Simply priceless.
: > :
: > :
: > ======================
: > You just don't get it at all max.
: > The aspect ratio would NOT be altered to fill the screen.
: > Do you even understand what anamorphic DVDs do on a 16:9 screen?
: > It sounds like you are as dumb as a stump.
:
:
: We all understand what you are trying to do Richard.
:
: Simply: It is you want to fill your screen because it looks better.
:
: Deny it.
:
=======================
I deny it.
I want the original aspect ratio - ALWAYS.
But I want it as large as possible on my screen.
QED.

I do NOT want my screen filled by cropping a 2.35:1 movie, because that would NOT
look better.

Denial completed.

You are an ASS

Deny it.


 
Reply With Quote
 
max christoffersen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2003

> : Simply: It is you want to fill your screen because it looks better.
> :
> : Deny it.
> :
> =======================
> I deny it.
> I want the original aspect ratio - ALWAYS.
> But I want it as large as possible on my screen.
> QED.


Because it looks better.

Deny it.

> I do NOT want my screen filled by cropping a 2.35:1 movie, because that would
> NOT look better.
>
> Denial completed.



Not even close.

No one is talking about cropping.

We are talking about screen filling.

You want it.

End of story.

Hypocrtite.

Max Christoffersen
 
Reply With Quote
 
DarkMatter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2003
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 14:40:18 +1200, "max christoffersen"
<(E-Mail Removed)> Gave us:

>
>> : Simply: It is you want to fill your screen because it looks better.
>> :
>> : Deny it.
>> :
>> =======================
>> I deny it.
>> I want the original aspect ratio - ALWAYS.
>> But I want it as large as possible on my screen.
>> QED.

>
>Because it looks better.
>
>Deny it.
>
>> I do NOT want my screen filled by cropping a 2.35:1 movie, because that would
>> NOT look better.
>>
>> Denial completed.

>
>
>Not even close.
>
>No one is talking about cropping.
>
>We are talking about screen filling.
>
>You want it.
>
>End of story.
>
>Hypocrtite.
>
>Max Christoffersen



You're retarded. End of story. No denying it.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard C.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2003

"max christoffersen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bddmqk$ps8$(E-Mail Removed)...
:
: > : Simply: It is you want to fill your screen because it looks better.
: > :
: > : Deny it.
: > :
: > =======================
: > I deny it.
: > I want the original aspect ratio - ALWAYS.
: > But I want it as large as possible on my screen.
: > QED.
:
: Because it looks better.
:
: Deny it.
:
: > I do NOT want my screen filled by cropping a 2.35:1 movie, because that would
: > NOT look better.
: >
: > Denial completed.
:
:
: Not even close.
:
: No one is talking about cropping.
:
: We are talking about screen filling.
:
: You want it.

============================
Prove it!
=========================
:
: End of story.
:
: Hypocrtite.
:
: Max Christoffersen


 
Reply With Quote
 
max christoffersen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2003

>> Not even close.
>>
>> No one is talking about cropping.
>>
>> We are talking about screen filling.
>>
>> You want it.
>>
>> End of story.
>>
>> Hypocrtite.
>>
>> Max Christoffersen

>
> Well lets see...there is a big difference...huge...between a 16:9 film
> filling the screen of a 16:9 set (regardless of size) as it was
> intended to, and a 16:9 film being cropped and chopped and panned and
> scanned to fill the screen of 4:3 set...as it was NOT intended


What has this got to do with anything?

This isn't what's being discussed.

> Also a 2:35 or 1:85 still does not "Fill" a 16:9 TV's screen, unless
> the disc was anamorphically enhanced (Ill have to check with that -
> I'm still a little fuzzy on the whole anamorphic thing myself) There
> are still bars only far less pronounced, and aspect ratio is still (as
> it almust must be) maintained.


Read what Richard has said.

He has the original aspect ratio - he's bitching that it doesn't fill his
screen because it is not anamorphic.

Richard is a screen filler.


Max Christoffersen





 
Reply With Quote
 
max christoffersen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2003
Roget said:

> "No,(Richard), YOU don't get it!! SIZE *AND* ASPECT RATIO are
> **absolutely** related -- to YOUR ENJOYMENT of a THEATRICAL
> PRESENTATION IN your HOME on a TV..." <



Richard said:

>>> You are 100% WRONG when you make such a statement. <<<
>>> Richard C october 2001 <<<



Today Richard agrees.

Size and aspect ratio are related (see his whines about the non-anamorphic
Giant DVD being too small on his screen).

It only took Dick-wit two years to catch up.

Flip-flop.

Priceless about face.


Max Christoffersen


 
Reply With Quote
 
DarkMatter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-26-2003
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 07:56:02 +1200, "max christoffersen"
<(E-Mail Removed)> Gave us:

>Roget said:
>
> > "No,(Richard), YOU don't get it!! SIZE *AND* ASPECT RATIO are
> > **absolutely** related -- to YOUR ENJOYMENT of a THEATRICAL
> > PRESENTATION IN your HOME on a TV..." <

>
>
>Richard said:
>
> >>> You are 100% WRONG when you make such a statement. <<<
> >>> Richard C october 2001 <<<

>
>
>Today Richard agrees.
>
>Size and aspect ratio are related (see his whines about the non-anamorphic
>Giant DVD being too small on his screen).
>
>It only took Dick-wit two years to catch up.
>
>Flip-flop.
>
>Priceless about face.
>
>
>Max Christoffersen
>



You're a goddamned idiot, Max.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard C.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-27-2003

"max christoffersen" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bdfjgm$9a4$(E-Mail Removed)...
: Roget said:
:
: > "No,(Richard), YOU don't get it!! SIZE *AND* ASPECT RATIO are
: > **absolutely** related -- to YOUR ENJOYMENT of a THEATRICAL
: > PRESENTATION IN your HOME on a TV..." <
:
:
: Richard said:
:
: >>> You are 100% WRONG when you make such a statement. <<<
: >>> Richard C october 2001 <<<
:
:
: Today Richard agrees.
:
: Size and aspect ratio are related (see his whines about the non-anamorphic
: Giant DVD being too small on his screen).
:
: It only took Dick-wit two years to catch up.
:
: Flip-flop.
:
: Priceless about face.
:
:
: Max Christoffersen
:
================================
Context is everything.
You do not understand that.

You are simply a putz.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
avoid the advice of Richard the stupid ghoul HTML 4 01-21-2005 02:27 PM
Question for Richard Fat Sam HTML 1 01-11-2005 06:51 AM
Please ignore "Richard" and his bleatings, thanks. Alexander Cain HTML 4 01-26-2004 10:20 AM
Richard Deal Tired of Author apathy MCSD 3 11-14-2003 06:00 PM
Richard Grimes' book "Developing Applications With Visual Studio.NET" Andy Turner ASP .Net 6 11-03-2003 02:19 PM



Advertisments