Sign In

[hdtv] -> _superwidescreen_phillips_21:9_2:35-1_tv_

Author
Time
 (Edited)

HOLY FRICKING COW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

http://www.cinematicviewingexperience.com/what-is-cinema.html

 

just when i was going to buy a regular tv, and upgrade

to a 1080p 46 inch.... (which i'll do anyways)..

 

but this is something to see !!!!!!! WOW!!!!

beautiful, i can't imagine how much it will cost,

but i want one !! hopefully samsung/mitsubishi will come out with

models too!!!

 

a full 56 inches, and TRUE 2.35-1 aspect ratio for movies,

imagine seeing Star Wars on that!!!!

 

need more details though..

 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time

Already seen one of these and they are a total waste of time. They had a blu-ray movie playing on it and the picture wasn't that great. Who in their right mind would buy one of these? Yeh, for movies with that aspect ratio you lose the black bars (well not all of the bars) but its pretty much useless for every other type of movie and TV viewing. Its even crap watching a movie that has that ratio if you need to have subtitles on. I asked the guy at the stand to turn on the subtitles and they were cut in half, with most not even showing because their placement is usually in the lower part of the picture, in the black bars. now when i got him to play the menus of that disc well that really showed what a piece of crap this idea was. the picture kept resizing itself unless he changed the tv setting to zoom.

you see, how this tv works is the same way a standard hd tv works when using the "full" function on the ratio control. it senses the black bar areas and zooms & crops the image to fit the screen. so movies that have a different ratio to the 21:9 ratio of the TV will look odd and have the incorrect aspect ratio. watching a movie that has a 16:9 ratio becomes squashed or you have to change the settings to zoom and then the image is cropped to shit and just forget even attempting to watch anything that is 4:3. So pretty much useless for watching Tv channels

I was asked to leave the stand at the tech show because the guy who was demonstrating it didn't like the way i managed to get him to show just how crap this idea and the TV was.

 

ANH:REVISITED
ESB:REVISITED

DONATIONS TOWARDS MATERIALS FOR THE REVISITED SAGA

Author
Time
adywan said:

Already seen one of these and they are a total waste of time. They had a blu-ray movie playing on it and the picture wasn't that great. Who in their right mind would buy one of these? Yeh, for movies with that aspect ratio you lose the black bars (well not all of the bars) but its pretty much useless for every other type of movie and TV viewing. Its even crap watching a movie that has that ratio if you need to have subtitles on. I asked the guy at the stand to turn on the subtitles and they were cut in half, with most not even showing because their placement is usually in the lower part of the picture, in the black bars. now when i got him to play the menus of that disc well that really showed what a piece of crap this idea was. the picture kept resizing itself unless he changed the tv setting to zoom.

you see, how this tv works is the same way a standard hd tv works when using the "full" function on the ratio control. it senses the black bar areas and zooms & crops the image to fit the screen. so movies that have a different ratio to the 21:9 ratio of the TV will look odd and have the incorrect aspect ratio. watching a movie that has a 16:9 ratio becomes squashed or you have to change the settings to zoom and then the image is cropped to shit and just forget even attempting to watch anything that is 4:3. So pretty much useless for watching Tv channels

I was asked to leave the stand at the tech show because the guy who was demonstrating it didn't like the way i managed to get him to show just how crap this idea and the TV was.

 

Sounds perfect for Negetive1....you know for someone who thinks Blu-ray is a dead format and DVD never took off.

 

Maybe he can watch his Laserdiscs on it and think he's finally got the setup....

 

I love everybody. Lets all smoke some reefer and chill. Hug and kisses for everybody.

Author
Time

I don't think you guys are quite getting this. It's meant to mimic a constant height setup, which is what decent theaters employ when displaying movies at different aspect ratios.

Nothing should be squished or cropped at all. Scope films should take up the entire screen when properly scaled, and if the Blu-ray author has a brain, the subtitles, if not already burned in, should appear within the image. Placing subtitle info within the black bars is a holdover from the laserdisc era that was wrongfully passed on to DVDs and probably a lot of Blu-ray discs.

All other material should be displayed at the proper proportions with sidebars just like they do in the theater with curtains; nothing should be cropped.

Constant height setups are the shit in the front projection world and I hope to have one someday. In the meantime, this is a cool solution. I hope we see more displays like this.

originaltrilogy.com Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time

personally,

 

i don't mind subtitles over the pictures (if there are any)...

i don't really have to worry about that issue to often..

 

besides, we all know that 16:9 was a terrible compromise

that doesn't fit many aspect ratios correctly anyways?

 

and why are there so many in this format if there wasn't a point to it? (star wars)

 

i could care less about watching tv shows (i don't even have cable)..

i want a super wide monitor, to use with my computer, and if it shows

movies without compressing them, then why not?

 

i guess all you guys like the black bars on your 16:9 films or having them

converted to fill the screen at the wrong aspect ratio? how is that a better

solution?

 

i currently have dual monitor setups for both my computers, and I love have super

wide screens, i was going to go DUAL - HDTV's pretty soon, but with this, i would

only need 1 tv....

 

let's see if it can catch on or not.

 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Jay said:

I don't think you guys are quite getting this. It's meant to mimic a constant height setup, which is what decent theaters employ when displaying movies at different aspect ratios.

Nothing should be squished or cropped at all. Scope films should take up the entire screen when properly scaled, and if the Blu-ray author has a brain, the subtitles, if not already burned in, should appear within the image. Placing subtitle info within the black bars is a holdover from the laserdisc era that was wrongfully passed on to DVDs and probably a lot of Blu-ray discs.

All other material should be displayed at the proper proportions with sidebars just like they do in the theater with curtains; nothing should be cropped.

Constant height setups are the shit in the front projection world and I hope to have one someday. In the meantime, this is a cool solution. I hope we see more displays like this.

Quoted for truth.  Nearly everybody on these boards should have at least some experience with this, since Star Wars movies have been placing the subtitles in the matte for years!  I remember one of the often brought-up problems with the GOUT was that, when you zoomed in to watch it on a 16:9 TV, the subtitles were cut off!  If they had been in the pictures (as opposed to in the matte) and (preferably) burned-in, there would not be a problem (of course, it should go without saying that it wouldn't solve all of the GOUT's problems).  You can't blame the television for shitty ideas in the home video market. 

I only have a few gripes about this 21:9 concept.  The above was one of them.  Another is a silly personal problem about lack of space.  And the final reason also ties into Jay's argument.  If you think 4:3 images stretched out to 16:9 look disgusting, wait until you see Joe Six-Pack Consumer stretch out an episode of Happy Days into 21:9 because he doesn't want to see those black bars!  Again, though, that's the fault of the consumers, and you can't blame the television for that.  I think it's a great idea, although I'm still on the fence as to whether or not I'd actually consider getting one in the future.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

well, the board was having issues when i originally tried to respond to this, but basically, I said it was a cool idea (like Jay says, fixed vertical height is a good thing imo).  But ultimately, i don't think this is that good of an idea.  Personally, i think the 16x9 ratio is a GOOD compromise between all the different common ratios.  I find it the most economical solution when it comes to the size of the tv vs. the amount of screen realestate wasted on black bars when watching anything that doesn't fill the screen.  I mean, just think about how much of the screen will be wasted when watching an older academy ratio (4x3 roughly) film on this new set!  With a 16x9 tv, less than half of the screen space is ever "wasted" for any of the common ratios.

 

EDIT: Forgot to mention that this concept (fixed height setup) is great for movie theaters.  Or for people for whom money and space are not constraints so that they can get a big enough set that the wasted screen space doesn't matter when watching other aspect ratios.  But for the average consumer I just don't see this being as pratical of a solution as a 16x9 ratio.  As an example, when I switched from a standard to an HD tv, I went from a 27" to a 42" so that i wouldn't lose any vertical picture size.  & that meant my new tv was roughly twice as wide as my old one.  I have nowhere in my house to reasonably put a 2.35x1 tv that would have the same vertical height as my current tv, & i (like MOST of the world) can't afford a home theater room that could house one big enough.

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

You guys must have really big houses and loads of money (not to mention understanding neighbours).

 nope, i've been living in single bedroom apartments for decades

now.. never thought about a house..

 

i just like getting electronic gadgets..

 

as for money?... nope don't really have

a lot of that either!

 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Bingowings said:

So where does this wall of vision fit in a single bedroom flat?

How do you pay for it if you don't have money?

Nosey bugger ain't I?

 1) well,  i don't really own any furniture , except a futon and some shelfs,

     so i  have plenty of room for gadgets. i even have a full sized arcade

     machine! (no wife, kids or pets to worry about either!)

 

2) savings ... worked for a couple of years, and saved up. it's been over

    2 years since i've had a job. but, if i see something i like. i try to get it.

 

3) not really, curiousity can be a good thing.

 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time

doubleofive said:

How do you decide when to carriage return to the next line? Just eyeball it?

What is this, the "Ask The Negative Guy a Question" thread all of the sudden?

 

I'll bet he spent years developing a browser plug-in that does it randomly for him, btw.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV's Frink said:

doubleofive said:

How do you decide when to carriage return to the next line? Just eyeball it?

What is this, the "Ask The Negative Guy a Question" thread all of the sudden?

 

I'll bet he spent years developing a browser plug-in that does it randomly for him, btw.

Why do I feel like negative 1 is an inside joke I don't understand?

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time
Remove "inside" and you might be on to something.
Author
Time

Since everyone else is asking -1 questions, I guess I will too.

Negative1, if someone were to register as Positive1 and you two were to make posts directly adjacent to one another, would the two posts cancel each other out and cease to exist?

Every 27th customer will get a ball-peen hammer, free!

Author
Time

I also have a question. Does the -1 indicate you are bleeding internets with every post?

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Akwat Kbrana said:

Since everyone else is asking -1 questions, I guess I will too.

Negative1, if someone were to register as Positive1 and you two were to make posts directly adjacent to one another, would the two posts cancel each other out and cease to exist?

 i was tired of seeing people go first post, etc..

also people bragging about being "number 1"..

 

i've a very cranky, cynical, depressing

person. i used to be zer0, because i

felt like nothing.

 

i switched to negative 1, because people

used to tell me that i was the most

depressing person that they knew. ha ha..

 

so yeah, somebody positive and trying

to be funny (aka tv's frink) cancels me out! ha ha

 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

I also have a question. Does the -1 indicate you are bleeding internets with every post?

 i exist in the imaginary zone..

 

although as a math guy...

 

-1, is just a negative integer..

 

if you take the square root of it..

you get an imaginary number ->   sqrrt(-1)= i

 

that's what you learn with a college degree in math.

 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time
 (Edited)

doubleofive said:

How do you decide when to carriage return to the next line? Just eyeball it?

 

i actually don't have a lot

to say, believe it or not.

 

so what's the point of dragging out one line, just to say something in a long run on-sentence, when the browser margin border just wraps the text around anyways? besides this kind of a line break looks a lot worse to me because then i'm not in control of where the sentence breaks? see, i can post in long sentences too, which i have no idea when the line ends.oh joy!?

(run on sentence)

 

later

-1

[no GOUT in CED?-> GOUT CED]

Author
Time

It's easy to tell that you majored in math rather than in English. ;)

Every 27th customer will get a ball-peen hammer, free!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

My friend was a math major. I remembered him saying something about Calculus IV. He might as well as told me he saw bigfoot. Prompted by these memories, I just watched part of a video of a Calc IV class. At first I thought: maybe I could understand it with sufficient effort. After a couple minutes of brain ache I concluded they were just trying to make something (still have no idea what) unnecessarily complicated. That was the problem I had with advanced math - it had no apparent relevance. Like running on a treadmill, it just gets boring and painful. I can accept that Calc IV - like bigfoot - exists and that somebody has seen it in real life (perhaps that video was a spoof and I have a sneaking suspicion it was...) but it still seems kinda crazy.

The blue elephant in the room.