Philips' 56-inch Cinema 21:9 HDTV gets showcased on video
By Darren Murph 
posted Jan 29th 2009 4:35PM
posted Jan 29th 2009 4:35PM
posted Jan 29th 2009 4:35PM
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
"You elimate those annoying bars finally." What a joke. Great journalism. Hmmm interesting that they never brought up the fact that all of our HD Broadcast in 16:9 and any film shot in anything other than 2:35:1 will have giant bars down the sides of the screen. Dig deeper Philips.
As I'm sure it's been pointed out before, this is pretty cool, but while solving one problem, it just creates another. Obviously, it would get rid of the black bars that appear on HDTVs when watching most widescreen movies (though, not all of them), but it would create the black bars on the side for some movies and all regular HD broadcasting (even watching a movie on HBO would have bars on the side since they adjust their content to air in the 16:9 format).
It's funny because most of us thought we were ending the black bars when we switched from a 4:3 TV to a 16:9 one. The sad truth is that the black bars will never, ever go away.
This TV would be great in a home theater used just for movies, but if you have the money for that extra setup, wouldn't you maybe want something bigger? I just can't see this replacing anyone's main TV in the living room if the problem is the black bars, since this would obviously make everything else worse.
Yeah, the design of this television is that all content is produced in its native aspect ratio.
It's not.
And this is so much of a spwill never be cheaper to buy than an equivelent quality screen of the same width, but more vertical space.
This really highlights the "black bars" fallacy: it's not that there are black bars on the screen, it's that the content doesn't fit the screen you're watching it on.
If you really can't stand black bars, there are two options: stretch and zoom.
"stretch and zoom"
ew,ew,ew.
While your at it, why don't you listen to all your music in mono, or better yet through a string and cup to your ear.
Native aspect ratio is the only way to go. Why do you want to distort your expensive blurays?
PS, 2.35 aspect ratio was around long before they decided to arbitrarily create an entirely new aspect ratio, ie 16:9. I understand they could not have forseen how ignorant a move that was and what problems it would cause, they were trying to compromise. But the world would be a much better place if they had chosen 2.35 for the hdtv standard.
And by the way, there are only two options: native aspect on a lcd/plasma with black bars that you shouldn't even be noticing if you're really watching the movie... or get a projector and use masking to maintain CIH
point????
Sure some movies will not have bars with this.........but even MORE movies WILL still have bars not to mention TV Shows........
I dont see many of these selling for anyone other than PC Gamers maybe.......hell I'd get one for a Good price and I'd use it and have Photoshop, Flash, & Dreamweaver opened at the same time side by side by side.....
Yeah, the whole concept behind the design of this television is that all content is produced in its native aspect ratio.
It's not.
And this is so much of a specialty item that it will never be cheaper to buy than an equivalent quality screen of the same width, but more vertical space.
This really highlights the "black bars" fallacy: it's not that there are black bars on the screen, it's that the content doesn't fit the screen you're watching it on.
If you really can't stand black bars, there are two options: stretch and zoom.
This TV is initially kinda cool and fun, but ultimately silly and pointless.
Case closed.
here we go again... will manufactures catch on or will content providers catch on or will customers whine too much and not let it catch on. seems to me that if studios would release movies in this format and tv caught on it would be a win win. but just like bluray/hddvd i'm sure the common sense approach will be rejected like hddvd was.
The common sense approach is yet another aspect ratio for fixed pixel displays?
I have my doubts.
Yeah this is great... Finally we can eliminate letterboxing from movies only to get pillarboxing for all other content such as tv.
And even then, how long before hollywood decides it needs to one-up television again?
The thing is... this would be fantastic for a dedicated theater room where for whatever reason a projector won't work, or for the majority of people who feel a projector is too much hassle. You would just use the tv in the living room for regular content.
But the main problem here is, for a dedicated movie display, this is just no where near big enough, especially considering it will already have a price premium. Width needs to be more like 70 inches or so, and the resolution should be around 1920x800, so it doesn't distort the picture, it only basically chops off the bars.
I wouldn't mind having a 120" 21:9 TV hanging in my theater room. Of course it would have to be at the $3,000 mark or less :)
And it should also have an integrated nuclear reactor for power and automatically connect to any device, regardless of interface, wirelessly, and also get every PPV and HD service from all local service providers free for forevers.
They're so stupid with this crap, "the black bars are gone", yeah
right! they'll be back on the sides when watching 16x9 stuff, which
is the norm now, extra wide is only when you watch a dvd.
True, the black bars will never go away, but that is not sad, it is simple math.
While the TV is not the biggest, it certainly has a place in smaller living room home theaters.
Also, it will be essential in convincing media producers to provide movies encoded in the 64:27 aspect ratio, maybe even with the native 2560X1080 resolution of this TV, on the next Blu-Ray spec. And to convince equipment manufacturers to support these formats in their devices and the next HDMI version.
So far all disc formats (DVD, Blu-Ray) and digital interfaces such as HDMI support only two native aspect ratios, 4:3 [(4/3)^1] and 16:9 [(4/3)^2]. It is high time to also support 64:27 [(4/3)^3], even as anamorphic format on a 1920x1080 frame, to increase the number of used pixels in a frame.
This would be a transition like the one from letterboxed non-anamorphic DVDs to the anamorphic ones. That made a huge difference for scope movies.
This is the problem. Movies are being shot in aspect ratios that cater to Movies theaters with huge screens. But studios seem to forget that a movie has a very short life at the movie theater. After it's run, it's off to dvd and bluray. People tv's are in the 4:3 and 16:9 ratios. 16:9 is now the standard on new TV's.
One would think that movies studios will start producing films that would fit correctly on 16:9 TV's since this is now the standard ratio for HD.
Say what you want but the fact remains. A high quality Bluray movie that uses the entire screen, looks better than a high quality film with black bars around it.
I highly disagree. I've watched Ben Hur (2.76:1) on a 1.25:1 17" computer screen and loved it. It looked amazing. Yes, it was small, but the effect of the aspect ratio still remains. I wouldn't buy any DVD or Blu Ray disc that doesn't have the OAR.
If the production company chooses to go for 16:9 because of the home market it's entirely for commercial reasons, which I detest. Movies have to be made in the aspect ratio the director and his director of photography chooses.
This week I watched several episodes of "Twin Peaks" (4:3), the movie "Brick" (1.85:1) and "The Dark Knight" (1.85:1 & 2.35:1).
Point being, unless the screen can physically change size (like they do in movie theaters by adjusting the blinds), you're always going to have black bars regardless of the screen ratio. And that's just the way it should be. Aspect ratio shouldn't be standardized. Filmmakers should have the ability to choose whatever ratio best fits their asthetic. Stanley Kubrik shot "The Shining" in a full screen format because he wanted the hotel to loom over the audience by filling the entire frame, and because he wanted to keep all the interior shots and closups tight.
Let's not forget that televisions are made to showcase cinema, not the other way around.
Yea great but not all widescreen movies have the black bars at the top and bottom, some movies actually fill the entire 16:9 screen. So will 16:9 movies have black bars on the side when viewed on the 21:9, which means its like watching a 4:3 on a 16:9 screen. And what about older TV show which are 4:3, on a 21:9 screen you would have twice the thickness of black bars on the side. I am more of a movie buff then TV, but I am still not sold on this 21:9 screen, not until the movie, television shows, and TV manufactures conform to a standard format. There are too many variations in all three industries to consider buying this TV. We have DVD and Blu-rays, we have plasmas and LCD's and soon Laser TV and OLED TV and SED TV and FED TV, we have wide screen and anamorphic wide screen, we still have TV shows being filmed in pathetic 4:3 when 4:3 TV's are no longer being sold we have 16:9 and 21:9. I mean 2.76:1, 1.25:1, 21:9, 16:9, Its getting to be too much, even for a tech-head like me, I feel like throwing my hands in the air and saying screw it! I like my 16:9 plasma, I like my blu-ray and that’s it. In the end as long as the movie is widescreen and nothing is being chopped off I dont care if it is true widescreen or anamorphic or 2.76:1, 1.25:1, 21:9, 16:9, as long as it is widescreen, HD Blu-ray I dont care about black lines at the top and bottom. You will have to do a lot of convincing before I even consider buying a new TV like Laser or OLED with a newly introduced ratio 21:9 (outside the movie theater.)
p.s. SED and FED have no chances against Laser TV or OLED TV especially if it will drive down the price of Plasmas and LCD. Even that is too much that would be four types of TV’s and if SED and FED do indeed come out, then we will have 6 different types of TV’s to choose from? NO WAY not going to happen. Most novice consumers are already flustered when having to choose between LCD and Plasma and what the difference is between their old Tube TV and plasma let alone 4 other types of TV’s. Its all getting to be way too much and it sucks that the industry has let it build up this much, its just going to be one big mess with a lot of people loosing money.