Philips 21:9 tv's in the US (2.35:1 aspect ratio) - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 18 Old 12-09-2011, 08:07 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Greyimporter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi all

I am thinking of bringing a container of the 58 inch Philips 21:9 aspect ratio TV's into the US.

I am going to buy 1000 of them in Europe and wanted to gauge interest.

Does anyone have a view on if there would be a market for them here. I think I could sell them for $4000 delivered with 3d glasses anywhere in the US.

Thoughts?
Greyimporter is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 18 Old 12-09-2011, 10:25 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,066
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 384
I think there is certainly some interest in those TVs.

This being the CIH forum full of CIH projection set ups, my own feelings are that I'm not terribly interested in a 21:9 AR TV. If I want to watch a cinemascope movie in it's original AR, like most here, I would be watching it on the Big Screen in the home theater, not on the tinier TV screen.
The main impetus for building CIH home theaters is the immersion and cinematic experience, which a small TV doesn't do.

And then the xtra wide AR of the philips TV would simply mean that I'd have to be watching most TV content with big black bars of unused screen space on the sides...making the TV a combination of mostly useless and annoying for most daily use.

Other people watch more movies on their TVs I suppose, so they may be more interested.
R Harkness is online now  
post #3 of 18 Old 12-09-2011, 11:12 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Greyimporter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I agree with all your points Rich.

The 21:9 tv's have no value to people who are already running a projector set-up in a dedicated home theater room. Albeit, most projectors don't offer 2.35:1 without an additional and expensive lense.

I live in an apartment in Manhattan. I don't have space for a dedicated set-up. I watch more movies than TV shows. I have the choice of borders on my movies or borders when the Mrs is watching Grey's Anatomy.

I have also started noticing that more and more regular TV shows are broadcast in 21:9 giving me black bars or cutting part of the picture. Even the news is in 21:9.... As is House, criminal minds and Top Gear.

I was thinking there may be a market for people who want to watch movies as the director intended but don't have space for a dedicated room or don't want to spend $10,000 for a decent projector. I haven't seen many passive 3D projectors that I can afford. Or maybe they want to watch in a room that isn't dark all the time.

The Philips TV is also really high-end with great resolution - better than most projectors.

I have a 50 inch plasma. I get a little annoyed that it's like watching a 35 inch screen sometimes. I hate black bars!
Greyimporter is offline  
post #4 of 18 Old 12-11-2011, 03:29 PM
Newbie
 
alexp120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Speaking as a person who can't afford the expense of a projector at this time, I welcome the purchase of a 21:9 HDTV set.
  • It would be quicker to set-up then installing a projector.
  • I don't have to worry about spending a lot of money on HDMI cables for a projector that are going to be obsulte in a few years.

If I want to watch my show that I regularly tune in--sitcoms, game shows, news--I'll go to my other 20' 16:9 set. I'll use the 21:9 set just for watching movies.

By the time I can afford a projector, the models for 3D would be profected.
alexp120 is offline  
post #5 of 18 Old 12-11-2011, 07:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
coolscan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 105
A 21:9 58" TV has about the same image height as a 42" 'ish 16:9 TV.
So it is not so much to gain going from a 50" 16:9 TV with letterboxed image to a 58" 21:9 TV.

And that is one of the problems with selling 21:9 TV's, they are just too small.
If Phillips had made a 21:9 TV based on the image hight of a 60-70" 16:9 TV, without raising the price too much, they would have some more success with 21:9 TV's.

Vizio showed 21:9 TV's at CES in January for release in the US, but they haven't showed up yet.
coolscan is offline  
post #6 of 18 Old 12-11-2011, 11:13 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Greyimporter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
That's not totally accurate.

The 58 inch is about the same height as a 42 inch 16:9 but is about a third wider.

If you are watching a movie, you get the same size picture as if you were watching a 60 -70 inch 16:9 tv except you would have better resolution and it looks way cooler. Black bars are ugly! As most tv shows are going 2.35:1, paying extra for a larger 16:9 tv is a waste. Well it is if you hate stretching the picture to fit the screen which is what this is all about.

The passive 3D is also more watchable. Active 3d glasses are really uncomfortable. There is an Active option with the Philips but it's more expensive.

Vizio have been saying they are releasing a 21:9 here for ages - it's never coming out.

I'm going to place my order for 300 in a few weeks. I'm probably going to order the gold version with passive 3d.
Greyimporter is offline  
post #7 of 18 Old 12-12-2011, 08:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tvted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 3,582
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyimporter View Post

I have also started noticing that more and more regular TV shows are broadcast in 21:9 giving me black bars or cutting part of the picture. Even the news is in 21:9.... As is House, criminal minds and Top Gear.

I don't know how you are watching the above, but I would venture that either your broadcaster has his output incorrectly set (unlikely) or the displays you are watching are not correctly set.

No series TV production is being shot 2.35 on a regular basis. A quick look at IMDB will confirm this, if you remain sceptical, rent the discs.. It is doubtful an industry still upgrading its infrastructure to 16:9 would push ahead with this.

News production? Sorry but their there are no studio or ENG cameras that are 2.35 capable, not to speak of the workflow changes that are involved.

ted
tvted is offline  
post #8 of 18 Old 12-12-2011, 10:52 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,340
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 504 Post(s)
Liked: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvted View Post

I don't know how you are watching the above, but I would venture that either your broadcaster has his output incorrectly set (unlikely) or the displays you are watching are not correctly set.

No series TV production is being shot 2.35 on a regular basis. A quick look at IMDB will confirm this, if you remain sceptical, rent the discs.. It is doubtful an industry still upgrading its infrastructure to 16:9 would push ahead with this.

News production? Sorry but their there are no studio or ENG cameras that are 2.35 capable, not to speak of the workflow changes that are involved.

I was about to say the same thing. House is absolutely a 16:9 show. There are no made-for-TV programs (certainly not the news!) shot at 2.35:1.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is online now  
post #9 of 18 Old 12-12-2011, 12:41 PM
Advanced Member
 
tezster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mississauga, Canada
Posts: 619
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 63
What's the display resolution of the TV? I'm assuming it would need to be higher than 1920x1080 (in order to achieve pixel-accurate mapping for 16:9 content).
tezster is offline  
post #10 of 18 Old 12-12-2011, 03:10 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,340
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 504 Post(s)
Liked: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by tezster View Post

What's the display resolution of the TV? I'm assuming it would need to be higher than 1920x1080 (in order to achieve pixel-accurate mapping for 16:9 content).

The Philips sets are 2560x1080.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is online now  
post #11 of 18 Old 12-12-2011, 07:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ABCTV99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,482
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:


I was about to say the same thing. House is absolutely a 16:9 show. There are no made-for-TV programs (certainly not the news!) shot at 2.35:1.

Though it should be noted that it is becoming trendy to see 2.39 letterboxed content on TV, where the letterboxing becomes a sort of vignette (this happened when 16:9 became common, people began to use letterboxing for artistic reasons). The tease for tonight's Monday Night Football on ESPN did this.

I've noticed a number of commercials and music videos doing this (some even going as far as to shoot anamorphic - I suspect in the next few years you might begin to see some TV shows experiment with this too).

But TV is specifically a 16:9 medium. As pointed out no one is producing a TV show in native 2.39. That would be beyond pointless.
ABCTV99 is offline  
post #12 of 18 Old 12-12-2011, 11:32 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Greyimporter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just because something is broadcast as a 16:9 image doesn't mean they don't add black bars to accommodate a wider shot.

My TV settings are correct and I have the option of both full screen and extra wide.

Lets not get off point though. Nobody invests in this kind of stuff to enhance Jersey shore. I only care about screen size because I love movies. All of which are also 16:9 by the time they make it to TV and have black bars added too.
Greyimporter is offline  
post #13 of 18 Old 12-13-2011, 08:25 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
stanger89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Posts: 17,494
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 173 Post(s)
Liked: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyimporter View Post

Just because something is broadcast as a 16:9 image doesn't mean they don't add black bars to accommodate a wider shot.

Having watched just about every episode of both House and Top Gear, I can say with certainty neither are produced in 2.35:1. Not beyond a possible rare scene that's letterbox.

See what an anamorphoscopic lens can do, see movies the way they were meant to be seen
stanger89 is offline  
post #14 of 18 Old 12-14-2011, 02:02 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,340
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 504 Post(s)
Liked: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyimporter View Post

Just because something is broadcast as a 16:9 image doesn't mean they don't add black bars to accommodate a wider shot.

Except that nobody is doing this. Maybe some TV commercials or music videos that are going for a "cinematic" effect, but certainly not the shows you cited.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is online now  
post #15 of 18 Old 12-14-2011, 04:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ABCTV99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,482
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:


Just because something is broadcast as a 16:9 image doesn't mean they don't add black bars to accommodate a wider shot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Except that nobody is doing this. Maybe some TV commercials or music videos that are going for a "cinematic" effect, but certainly not the shows you cited.

Nor does focal length have anything to do with the aspect ratio.
ABCTV99 is offline  
post #16 of 18 Old 01-02-2012, 04:28 PM
Newbie
 
21-9news's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

A 21:9 58" TV has about the same image height as a 42" 'ish 16:9 TV.
So it is not so much to gain going from a 50" 16:9 TV with letterboxed image to a 58" 21:9 TV.

And that is one of the problems with selling 21:9 TV's, they are just too small.
If Phillips had made a 21:9 TV based on the image hight of a 60-70" 16:9 TV, without raising the price too much, they would have some more success with 21:9 TV's.

Vizio showed 21:9 TV's at CES in January for release in the US, but they haven't showed up yet.

http://www.displaywars.com/58-inch-2...s-50-inch-16x9
->
http://www.displaywars.com/58-inch-2...,36-inch-235x1

Looks like quite a difference.

Plus you'd have CIH, so 2.35:1 films would always look wider (bigger) than 16:9 films, which they should.

I'd like them to be bigger for that price, though. A 71" 21:9 TV was demonstrated by Vestel a while ago (see an earlier thread), so they may make them that size soon

FYI that is equivalent in height to a 56,7" 16:9 screen
http://www.displaywars.com/71-inch-2...56,7-inch-16x9
which I also stated in that other thread for someone else back then
21-9news is offline  
post #17 of 18 Old 01-03-2012, 08:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolscan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,814
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21-9news View Post


FYI that is equivalent in height to a 56,7" 16:9 screen
http://www.displaywars.com/71-inch-2...56,7-inch-16x9
which I also stated in that other thread for someone else back then

Thank you. At last someone found a display calculator.


Of importing 21:9 TV's to the US. Maybe this Chinese made 71" 21:9 TV could be had for a much better price than the Phillips imported from Europe.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/08/a...panel-eyes-on/
coolscan is offline  
post #18 of 18 Old 01-21-2012, 02:53 AM
Newbie
 
squibber35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyimporter View Post

Hi all

I am thinking of bringing a container of the 58 inch Philips 21:9 aspect ratio TV's into the US.

I am going to buy 1000 of them in Europe and wanted to gauge interest.

Does anyone have a view on if there would be a market for them here. I think I could sell them for $4000 delivered with 3d glasses anywhere in the US.

Thoughts?

ill buy 1 ive been looking for a couple months no results in us. if your serious or no of any in us please email me at squibber35@gmail.com i think youl do great in us try Huppins VIDEO in Spokane WASHINGTON USA.
squibber35 is offline  
Reply 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Chat

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off