anyone got the new 21:9 56" from philips?

[seigneur_rayden]

Originally Posted by Reid Malenfant

I'll get some pics up as soon as possible to satisfy a few people that would like to see how the thing looks

Thanks.

[Reid Malenfant]

Originally Posted by seigneur_rayden

Thanks.

Not a problem, well in a while that is

I just went to take some pics & the camera battery died on me, it's charging as i type

What i'll try to do is load as big a set of pics as possible to photobucket & then link to the images which i'll place in an album that i'll set up in my userCP. I have already tryed linking on here via IMG tags & it works so i'm guessing it will in an album.

It remains to be seen how big the pics can be though, 1000 pixels isn't a problem but i'd like to get as close to full resolution as possible

Here's a taster at about 1200 pixels wide.




Once i have done it i'll link to the album on another post. I'll get a few pics from a few different films, just remains to be seen if i can keep the camera steady

[Reid Malenfant]

Damn, the album pics are too small

Lets see if this works Yes it does

Ok, Monsters Vs Aliens first, please remember that this was taken with a camera sitting on top of a speaker on top of a chair You might notice some kind of rainbow effect, i'm not the worlds best photographer

First pic is of the standard 1920 x 1080 image.



Here we have the Philips menu



Now we scale it up



A few more...







Another movie, The International.. Not sure about the colours as my camera may be biased









Another film, Avatar









Finally a non blu ray












Apologies as i know the pics are a pain in the ass to view, but there you have 2560 pixels with 1080 lines. Unfotunately the camera appears to love blues due to the lack of flash No complains as none are stored on this site so no server space taken up.

I'd have dumped them in an album but the size contraints frankly took the mickey Each pic is at least 2560 pixels wide though they may well have been compressed via Picasa so they are less than 1meg so i could upload them to photobucket

Please remember that a paused pic is in no way as good as a moving image...

Have fun, i'm going to

[ZoetMB]

the aspect ratio looks wonderful, but the images look horrible, although that could be the camera. I hope the actual PQ doesn't really look like illustrations, instead of cinematography.

[seigneur_rayden]

Looks good Reid Malenfant. However, I was more interested in the pic of the set itself than its image. Keep them coming (the pics).

[DavePS3]

I think it's a ridiculous concept. 16X9 (1.78:1) exists because of HD broadcasts. No other reason. Our films are on 17 different aspect ratios. Getting a display that gives you a wider format is only good for that one format. Everything else, including HD broadcasts will have black bars at the sides or the top and botton in some cases or you'll have to zoom in an image to fill the screen on lesser formats. You're doing that NOW! Why pay so much more for something that makes you work just as hard or harder? It makes no sense to me.

[IronMaitallica]

So, I've been wondering, how do 21:9 TVs handle something like The Dark Knight which switches between aspects ratios and is it true that 4:3 images are always stretched to 16:9?

[Reid Malenfant]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

the aspect ratio looks wonderful, but the images look horrible, although that could be the camera. I hope the actual PQ doesn't really look like illustrations, instead of cinematography.

Probably a conbination of things. I had to sit the camera on top of a speaker on a chair & it was pretty close to the TV, half the distance i'd normally view at Then i probably wobbled the camera a bit when pressing the button & i'd had a few bevvies

Originally Posted by seigneur_rayden

Looks good Reid Malenfant. However, I was more interested in the pic of the set itself than its image. Keep them coming (the pics).

Oh right lol. I'll remedy that sooner or later

Originally Posted by DavePS3

I think it's a ridiculous concept. 16X9 (1.78:1) exists because of HD broadcasts. No other reason. Our films are on 17 different aspect ratios. Getting a display that gives you a wider format is only good for that one format. Everything else, including HD broadcasts will have black bars at the sides or the top and botton in some cases or you'll have to zoom in an image to fill the screen on lesser formats. You're doing that NOW! Why pay so much more for something that makes you work just as hard or harder? It makes no sense to me.

No-one is asking you to buy one Just like lots of cars are different people will choose one to suit themselves for various reasons

Originally Posted by IronMaitallica

So, I've been wondering, how do 21:9 TVs handle something like The Dark Knight which switches between aspects ratios and is it true that 4:3 images are always stretched to 16:9?

If you stuck it on auto i'd imagine it would switch between 16/9 & 21/9. I actually have that film but i don't remember any aspect ratio changes Then again i always set it to either 16/9 or 21/9 & never use auto.

[Reid Malenfant]

It appears i made a mistake 4/3 or 1.33:1 content can be watched on this TV I have played a few 1.33:1 blu rays on it recently & they are 100% fine & in the proper aspect ratio when it's set to 16/9. I'm guessing that the blu ray manufacturers have deliberately added black bars either side of the image so it doesn't get pulled out into a 16/9 image on screen.

Also Capricorn 1 which is supposed to be a 4/3 or 1.33:1 image is no such thing It reminds me of the old letterboxed DVDs you'd get in a 4/3 image but with a 2.35:1 picture Yes it's not 1080P but probably nearer half of that

I reckon that DVDs could be viewed properly as well now i think about it, there is an odd setting that appears to pull the image too big vertically & i'd hazard a guess that this will be fine for 1.33:1 DVD content. I'll let you know when i have tried it myself