[Demon Esq.]

At long last!

It's always bugged me, a little that, BEFORE widescreen TV was implemented, 2.35:1 was already a well-know and well-used aspect ratio for film makers.
So, I was rather gutted that when widescreen TV ws finally announced in the early 90's, it's chosen aspect ratio was 1.85:1 (16:9)!

OK, ok, i know. I do remember a lot of people being very happy with their 1.33:1 (4:3) full screen tv's.
Saying 'what's the point' etc. 2.35:1 may have been TOO big of a leap, i suppose?!

Anyhow, fast forward to 2009. Now everyone is home cinema crazy.
Philips have finally announced the arrival of the first ever 21:9 ultra widescreen display (available to buy, in the spring.
It's a shame it's LCD and not plasma but, beggars can't be choosers.
What's important to know is that this model is capable of displaying 2.35:1 movies in their native aspect ratio.
No stretching or jiggery-pokery! And, no black bars either!

What about non-21:9 films? Not to worry (much). Apparently, 16:9 pictures will be "adapted" to fill the screen.
I assume via some form of intelligent ZOOM when 1.85:1 is detected? Got to admit, 1.33:1 will look silly on this!!

Philips to unveil world's first 21:9 ratio LCD TV on January 29 *Updated* | Home Cinema Choice

Philips: Cinematic Viewing Experience

Here are some rough figures of available dvd releases and their respective aspect ratios:

2.35 : 1 - 2,995
1.85 : 1 - 6,408
1.33 : 1 - 11,395

The screen still won't be able to 'properly' display these films though...!

"How The West Was Won" (1962) OAR: 2.59:1
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...screenshot.png
"The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm" (1962) OAR: 2.59:1
"Ben Hur" (1959) OAR: 2.76:1
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ariot_race.jpg
Abel Gance's Napoléon (1927) OAR: 4.00:1

Finally, here are some of the biggest films of all time that were filmed in their Original Aspect Ratio of 2.35:1.
We can all look forward to seeing these films in our homes (finally) as they were meant to be

Star Wars (1977)
The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Return of the Jedi (1983)
The Phantom Menace (1999)
Attack of the Clones (2002)
Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Blade Runner (1982)
The Fifth Element (1997)
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
Minority Report (2002)
Mission: Impossible (1996)
Mission: Impossible II (2000)
Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (2001)
Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life (2003)
Wanted (2008)
Pirates of the Caribbean: ALL
The Lord of the Rings: ALL
Harry Potter: ALL
The Matrix: ALL
X-Men: ALL
Star Trek: ALL
Spider-Man 2 (2004)
Spider-Man 3 (2007)
King Kong (2005)
Independence Day (1996)
Armageddon (1998)
Twister (1996)
Batman Begins (2005)
The Dark Knight (2008)
Quantum of Solace (2008)
WALL·E (2008)
Titanic (1997)
The Abyss (1989)
True Lies (1994)
Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)
Conan the Barbarian (1982)
Alien (1979) OAR: 2.35:1
Kingdom of Heaven (2005)
Black Rain (1989)
Gladiator (2000)
Black Hawk Down (2001)
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
Romeo + Juliet (1996)
Forrest Gump (1994)
Ghost Busters (1984)
Road to Perdition (2002)
Apollo 13 (1995)
The Polar Express (2004)
Transformers (2007)

I"m glad I didn't buy a 16:9 plasma this Christmas, after all!

[Alan CD]

Hi

That means we get the black bars at the sides instead of top and bottom.

Hehe
Alan

[tausifs]

Mod Comment: no need to quote the original post

Interesting, but what motivated you to post this at 4.30 in the morning ? In a different time zone ?

[YellowSphere]

As I've already posted, there are too many technical hurdles to overcome with this. The best way to show 2.35:1 Blu-Ray content is with a resolution of 1920x800, which means you'll lose detail on 16:9 material.

The Panasonic PT-AE3000 projector is a much more convincing option for a constant height setup.

[Syphonic]

Somehow I can't see this taking off, especially since it's coming from Philips.

Cinema 21:9 will be available with a screen measuring 56in diagonally. It will be bolstered by a three-sided Ambilight Spectra system

It's probably going to be about £4000 then? lol

What about the vast majority of widescreen TV that's watched...we'll need to watch it with bars at the side? No thanks....

As YellowSphere said, a CIH setup is a much better alternative (plus with a projector size screen it will be much more like being in the cinema).

[Demon Esq.]

I don't why but, it still surprises me when people, either, don't ready properly or decide to shoot something down before it's happened.
Such astounding negativity!

Anyway, with regard to the comments above...

a) I awake at 10am everyday. I go to sleep at 6am (apart from Saturday & Sunday - sleep catch up time).
Posting this article at 4:30am GMT is not a problem for me, as I'm usually finishing up around that time.
Most of my clients in L.A. are 8 hours behind GMT and the ones in the East are VERY ahead!

b) If you read the article closely, you will notice Philips have devised a technique for some intelligent zooming/stretching of 16:9 (1.85:1) pictures for this screen - So, no black bars. Only time will tell if this method works well and, only time will tell if the picture is any good too!

c) Someone, mentioned a projector. Yes, this has always been possible. I (and a few other friends) have our own custom made 2.35:1 screens for viewing films this way. Good fun but, slightly impractical because of sitting in blacked out rooms, expensive bulbs etc etc.

As far as this unit is concerned....
Seeing is believing.
So, i think it's best if judgement is reserved until you and I actually witness this beast in person.

However, it'll be interesting to see if Panasonic and Pioneer offer up a 21:9 screen in the near future, too.
Ultra-Widescreen here we come.... hopefully

[karoloydi]

I dont think theres any need for intelligent zooming. The tv resolution is probably going to be 1920x816. So is theres a 1920x1080 (16:9) movie being played on it its just going to crop 1080-816=264 pixels. 132 pixels from the top and 132 pixels from the bottom of the movie so that it will fit the screen. Its more of intelligent cropping than intelligent zooming.

[YellowSphere]

The whole point of having a 2.35:1 ratio screen is to show all material at the same height without cropping. That's the idea anyway.

It's a point of fact that you will have to compromise the quality of either 2.35:1 content or 1.78:1 HD content to display it at a constant height on this panel or indeed any 2.35:1 pixel based display.

If you enjoy movies enough to want constant height, then I don't see why blacking out and bulb replacements every year or two are a bigger problem than fundamental resolution issues.

Also, I believe saying 16:9 images will be adapted either refers to the storing of 2.35:1 movies within a 16:9 frame (i.e. "zooming" to remove the black bars from the image) or just the fact that 16:9 would then need to be scaled.

[Demon Esq.]

Yes.
I think what Philips are essentially saying is
2.35:1 (21:9) will be a straight translaition.
1.85:1 (16:9) will be a crop/zoom/stretch - however they want to word it!
1.33:1 (4:3) will be hilarious.

The launch for the website is Thursday Jan 29th.
Philips: Cinematic Viewing Experience: Product Information

Comments and views.
Philips Cinema TV with 21:9 Aspect Ratio

Guess we'll have to wait and see

[chicote69]

29th January

Any news???

[jet_andy]

Love the idea of screens with this ratio.

I'd sooner have black bars down the side for 16:9 trasmissions. You'd still be getting the same picture size as a 42" 16:9 screen. I just hate stretched images. There may be something they could do along the lines of an ambilight effect down the sides instead of blacks bars though.

[J4CK DANIELS]

I would LOVE one of these.... BUT, only if i could afford one for a cinema room, this is a fantastic idea but i can't imagine that i'd ever want to have it in my front room!! Just seems that Phillips, once again, seem to be 'addressing' a smaller portion of the TV market...

oh well... could be worse... could have coloured lights plastered all around it?!??!....

[Gumpy Joe]

Originally Posted by chicote69

29th January

Any news???

Link

Mod Comment: Please don't hotlink to images you don't have permission to that are hosted on 3rd party servers

[jet_andy]

Originally Posted by chicote69

29th January

Any news???

More here

[Tech Man]

More info here...

Philips: TV picture quality more important than cost | News | TechRadar UK

...Discusses 21:9 content with blu-ray and adoption of the format from other companies!

[marty2005]

Response time of 0.1ms. Why couldn't they fix the lag on previous models?

Knowing Philips prices it'll be too expensive for the average buyer so how can they persuade studios to produce bluray disks just for their niche tv.

[chicote69]

I like this set, but...

1.- CCFL backlight ??? Has Philips listened anything about LED backlight?? I don't win anything if the black bars disappear, but in a dark scene the blacks are grey

2.- This set is make to hang in a wall. Why isn't it ultraslim like all new sets from other compannies (samsung, lg, sony, pana...) ???

3.- 0,1 ms. I want to see in person. I think that if this is not true, in my opinion it looks a "trick" of a cheap mark(brand). I think that philips wouldn't need to lie with it.

[Jeffa256]

Toshiba have recently used the Adaptive Backlight in their ZV 55 series and it works quite well. If you didn't have backlight on an LCD you would lose the contrast ratio and a lot of depth of field.
I have heard a lot of people complain about the backlight on an LCD one moment but boast about the contrast ratio the next. Plasma has its problems too which stem from over gassing. Traditionally the first 6 months of a Plasma Tv's life are the most strained.

[marty2005]

It might be wide but the height is the same as a 42" tv.

[jet_andy]

Originally Posted by marty2005

Response time of 0.1ms. Why couldn't they fix the lag on previous models?

Knowing Philips prices it'll be too expensive for the average buyer so how can they persuade studios to produce bluray disks just for their niche tv.

You're missing the point - they don't need to produce special blu-rays, most are produced in 2.35:1 anyway which is why there are black bars above and below the picture on a 16:9 set. This would show them filling the entire screen with no bars or stretching.

[marty2005]

So why are Philips trying to persuade studios to change?

[jet_andy]

I wouldn't be too keen on this particular model, being LCD, but I hope other manufacturers might follow the lead, maybe in Plasma, or in time, OLED.

[jet_andy]

Originally Posted by marty2005

So why are Philips trying to persuade studios to change?

No idea, but the vast majority of the discs I already own would be perfect on a 21:9 screen.

[Goose74]

Hey guys just wondered if anyone else has seen this:

Philips: Cinematic Viewing Experience: Product Information

YouTube - Philips Cinema 21:9 Demo Film

56" at a 2.39:1 ratio with 2560 × 1080 pixels out in spring (in UK and a few other European countries). Pricing is coming soon.
Any thoughts?

[Tef]

did some basics maths, i found that the screen size of "fully-filled" 21:9 56" is same as the ones on "bar-ed" 16:9 60", so even at 3000 pounds... it will be diffcult.

[Houldey]

What, is this for super hi def., as I thought a 1080p blueray in 2.35:1 ratio (which they pretty much all are) was 1920 horizontally and then 16/21 * 1080 high? I.e. for 720p in 2.31:1 it is 1280x544 ish. Therefore, which your standard Blu-Ray this screen will have to scale the image. Seems a bit silly. I suppose they have done it so that a 16:9 1080p source is not scaled down. Either way, you can't win basically.

Also, watching HDTV when it takes off properly you will have black bars horizontally.

Hmm, bizarre. Just make movies in 16:9 damn it!

[Goose74]

Just wondering if this could be used as a monitor for editing RED / Scarlet 2k footage etc ?

Does anyone know if you can get 2560 × 1080 resolution over hdmi? If not then I guess 1:1 mapping might not be possible with this set?

[Jim 2.0]

Blu ray 2.35:1 films would not automatically suit this new tv ratio. I believe the black bars above and below the picture are hard encoded, so the image has a 16:9 ratio to match current widescreen tv's. The image from a Blu Ray disc would have to be expanded horizontally and vertically to fit this new tv, resulting in a loss of resolution. This is why Phillips are talking to movie studios.

[Bobby]

I have not seen this posted in this thread, so here goes.

A "real life" photo of the Philips Cinema 21:9 can be seen here Philips Cinema 21:9 , with the ambilight on, it looks very nice.

I know it might not be great for everyday TV watching etc, but if I had a media room etc, I would be very tempted by this TV.

Mod Comment: Image removed

[ApoJapo]

Originally Posted by Tef

did some basics maths, i found that the screen size of "fully-filled" 21:9 56" is same as the ones on "bar-ed" 16:9 60", so even at 3000 pounds... it will be diffcult.

But on a 60inch screen you are using 74% of the screen hight which means also the amount of pixels. On this screen you will use all the pixels

A movie with a 2.40:1 screen ratio would have some small black bars but will be stretched out in height or the total picture would be zoomed so you miss a small part on the side parts. I hope they make a 'exact scan' option.

But a movie in 1.78:1 (16:9) or 1.85:1 will give the same PQ on a 42inch because off the extra resolution the screen have.

Also the subtitles could be a problem which are often located in the black bars below. And don't forget your console.