Cinema 21:9 LCD TV

[Claus Mueller]

Just found this:

http://www.cinematicviewingexperience.com/press.html

http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-38792.html#backToArticle=601157

 

[Michael Bravin]

Just found this:

http://www.cinematicviewingexperience.com/press.html

http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fotostrecke-38792.html#backToArticle=601157

1.85 pillar boxes arrrgh

 

[Wil Klassen]

holy jesus i want! now what to do with my DLP...

 

[Benni Diez]

Oh my. I think I just wet myself a little...
I've been thinking about a scope TV for years, but I never thought anyone would build one.
But how do they deliver full 2 1/2k content for it?
They should make sure to build a 3D capable version soon!

 

[XiaoSu Han]

want want want

 

[Petr Dvorak]

Oh my. I think I just wet myself a little...
I've been thinking about a scope TV for years, but I never thought anyone would build one.
...

ditto

 

[Craig Ryan]

How would they show a 16:9 bluray on that? I'm all for scope wide displays, but this seems like it could be just a gimmick....

Ideally, studios would start releasing 2.35:1 Blu-Rays with an anamorphic squeeze to fill the whole 1920x1080 image (no vertical res lost as we currently have), then a TV like this would just properly stretch the image out.

 

[Peter McCully]

I hear they're working on a 4x3 "imax" one. Hehehe.

 

[DRappazzo]

I would be curious about how much content would be able to properly fill a screen with those dimensions. And , as asked above, how would standard up-converted or current 16x9 blu-rays look when stretched to fit the aspect ratio. Great idea though, but I don t see how it could ever catch on for the majority of consumers.

 

[Zack Birlew]

I told everyone this would happen. Good one on Philips! The real question is whether it will catch on or not! =)

 

[Häakon]

How would they show a 16:9 bluray on that? I'm all for scope wide displays, but this seems like it could be just a gimmick...

How would they show a 4:3 program on a 16:9 TV? They pillarbox it, obviously.

The problem with having films shot in different aspect ratios is that no one TV can cover them all without some sort of pillarboxing or letterboxing. The best idea, then, is to buy the TV which fits the type of program you watch most often. For 2.35:1 movies, this new TV sounds like it would be awesome.

 

[Craig Ryan]

How would they show a 4:3 program on a 16:9 TV? They pillarbox it, obviously.

I guess my point was that unless this TV has greater horizontal resolution while maintaining 1080 lines of vertical resolution.

 

[Stefan Scherperel]

This is very cool, love to see one in person. What I think would drive me nuts though are the people that buy them and then let the TV stretch the aspect ratio to the full frame. most consumers hate seeing black on their screen no matter how short and fat people get. you think it's bad now going to a bar and watching a 4x3 broadcast stretched to 16:9, wait until you see 4x3 stretch to scope .

 

[Häakon]

I guess my point was that unless this TV has greater horizontal resolution while maintaining 1080 lines of vertical resolution.

Ah, I see. Well since the maximum consumer playback format available right now is limited to 1920x1080, I don't see that happening. I think it is more for this:

most consumers hate seeing black on their screen no matter how short and fat people get.

People want a screen that displays the full image of their content without any extra "black area." Like I mentioned, this is of course impossible for every situation as we film things in different aspect ratios.

There aren't any tech specs listed on the page, but you do bring up a good point. I guess my assumption would be that the TV has roughly a 823x1920 panel so that HD movies shot in a 21/9 ratio would natively fill the screen. Does Blu-ray have an anamorphic option? I haven't seen any information that would suggest it does.

 

[Petr Dvorak]

real resolution?.... any upscaling will kill quality