AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 45 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Philips is going to release a 56 inch 21:9 LCD TV in spring 09.


Can´t post the Link.........




So: www. cinematicviewingexperience .com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,958 Posts
Why would they? Scalling pending on course, but when we use an anamorphic lens to optically expand our images for CIH, we scale the images first to fill the 1920 x 1080 panel (actual program starts out as 1920 x 810) and the images are sharp. So veritical scaling works. It will be interesting to see how it goes on the horizontal...


Mark
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
850 Posts
I would buy this in a blink.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
336 Posts
Uggg.... glossy bezel. Will someone explain to me why glossy is so hip right now?

Oh, wait, there's a 21:9 lcd there! WOW!!! I didn't notice it at first because of the gloss and back lighting.


Seriously, I'm totally psyched about it!
 

·
Registered
HT Room: Atmos 7.1.4 with 117" 21:9 AT DYI screen & prism; Bedroom: Atmos 5.1.4 with 55" OLED
Joined
·
885 Posts
Can someone explain to me why this ominous "21:9" is popping up left and right, when it is in fact 64:27 (as evident by the 2560x1080 resolution)?


That would be the logical extension of the existing video aspect ratios anyhow, we have 4:3, 4*4 : 3*3 (or, 16:9) and now 4*4*4 : 3*3*3.


21:9 would be either 2560x1097 or 2520x1080...


Other that that: Great innovation! Please make this into a plasma or OLED as well, I don't like LCD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,644 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabaeus /forum/post/15552378


Can someone explain to me why this ominous "21:9" is popping up left and right, when it is in fact 64:27 (as evident by the 2560x1080 resolution)?

My guess is that 21:9 is easier to compare to the usual 16:9. That is, 21 is wider than 16, given the same height of 9. Also, instead of writing 21.33, it is rounded to 21. In other words, 21:9 is a nominal value, not an exact value.
 

·
Registered
HT Room: Atmos 7.1.4 with 117" 21:9 AT DYI screen & prism; Bedroom: Atmos 5.1.4 with 55" OLED
Joined
·
885 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Garci /forum/post/15552635


My guess is that 21:9 is easier to compare to the usual 16:9. That is, 21 is wider than 16, given the same height of 9.

That almost makes sense. By the same logic, they should start referring to 4:3 TVs as "12:9". Oh well, marketing speak.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
970 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabaeus /forum/post/15552378


Can someone explain to me why this ominous "21:9" is popping up left and right, when it is in fact 64:27 (as evident by the 2560x1080 resolution)?


That would be the logical extension of the existing video aspect ratios anyhow, we have 4:3, 4*4 : 3*3 (or, 16:9) and now 4*4*4 : 3*3*3.


21:9 would be either 2560x1097 or 2520x1080...


Other that that: Great innovation! Please make this into a plasma or OLED as well, I don't like LCD.

2560x1080 is close to 2.37:1 which is close enough to 2.35:1 which is close enough to 21:9..



Very nice:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,787 Posts
Hey! How about we just finish the math and call it a 7:3!!! Apparently phillips is worried their customers don't understand ratios? Maybe 7:3 sounds too much like 4:3?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
No way this works for mass market consumer. Too many people complain now about 4:3 aspect ratio on 16:9 sets due to the bars on the the sides.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by sage11x /forum/post/15559296


Hey! How about we just finish the math and call it a 7:3!!! Apparently phillips is worried their customers don't understand ratios? Maybe 7:3 sounds too much like 4:3?

my thoughts exactly
 
1 - 20 of 45 Posts
Top