Difference between 16:9 and 16:10 ?

What are the difference when both of these aspects are in a 17 inch with 1920x1080 while watching movies and gaming? Which gives you bigger black bars?

 

The 1920x1080 resolution you're stating 'is' 16:9 aspect ratio; therefore no black bars.

As for the 16:10... you would need a resolution of 1920x1200 to achieve that aspect ratio... and, I don't get the question you're asking really... but if your monitor is 1920x1080 native resolution; playing back 16:10 aspect ratio content would give you black bars with this combination.

 

As tiller said, 1920x1080 is a 16:9 aspect ratio resolution, which is designed to be compatible with a number of films. This means there will be no black bars at the top and bottom of the screen if the film was shot in 16:9 aspect ratio. If the film was shot in a different aspect ratio, there will still be black bars on the top and bottom of the screen (or on the sides of the screen, if you're viewing older television content). 1920x1200 is a 16:10 aspect ratio resolution, and as most movies are not filmed at this aspect ratio, there are likely to be black bars on the top and bottom of the screen (or on the sides) for almost any video.

Games, however, work differently. In game options, the aspect ratio as well as the specific screen resolution can be selected, which allows the game to completely fill the screen no matter what the resolution (as long as the correct resolution is available in settings). Games typically fill the entire screen even if the correct resolution is not listed, but when set for a different resolution, and especially a different aspect ratio, images can appear blurry, distorted, or stretched.

 

Well to summarize, the 16:9 ratio comes from the TV industry; and is the agreed upon standard for widescreen production. It was designed so that movie producers could create movies, that when viewed on TV screens would produce no bars across the top and bottom of the screen.

Even so, movie producers still produce in theatrical widescreen (yes, there are many widescreens) of 1.85:1 or 2.39:1 . In which case, they still produce bars, but with less impact than with the now obsolete 4:3 TV display.

If all this ratio gobbledygook seems confusing (especially when it switches between measurements i.e., 16:9 is also 1.78:1) it should. But the 16:9 ratio was in part designed to clear a lot of that up.

Still, it does not satisfy everyone. Which explains the resistance to leave the old 16:10 computer monitor standard -- which adds a bit more vertical height to the screen (preferred for text based use).

The strange thing is, these monitors are still made, and widely available, just not in laptop form.

 

letterbox ...

 

One's slightly taller than the other. That about sums it up (in addition to the previous comments).

 

About 10%.

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/Vector_Video_Standards4.svg

A picture is sometimes worth a million words

Old school people like me prefer 16:10 for a monitor but 16:9 would be what I would get for a TV.