definitely impressive, sad that Philips drop the 3D HD TV development and the advance cinema dep today.

Couldn't care less about a 21:9 display (I only got a 16:9 TV in the last couple years -- and lived with letterboxing just fine before that), but I'd love to see a Making Of for that commercial.

Rob

bloody amazing - but i totally agree with rob - couldn't care less about 21:9.

leslie

It's certainly impressive, love to know how it was done.
I much prefer a wider frame, each to his own I guess.
I was bit shocked to learn that the DCI spec uses a fixed frame that's masked for 'scope. That makes 'scope easier to compress than 16:9.

Bob.

Primarily mannequins and Steadicam.

Mmmmm...

I can't get anything to play? Firefox or IE

I still like 4:3 better. Widescreen seems cramped. I guess i'm just a vertical person.

I'm with Chienworks on the aspect thing. I don't like turning my head to watch TV. I am a lazy couch potato.

Dave T2

Widescreen seems cramped.

On a 4:3 screen, I agree with you.

I can't get anything to play? Firefox or IE

You need to have Flash installed, probably even Flash 10 (which is better anyway).

Great commercial, for sure... wish I could do that, lol.

As for the TV... no doubt it would be great for watching movies filmed in a wider format than 16x9. I'm starting to think someone should release a special 4x3 HDTV that uses 1920x1440 or 1440x1080 , though... it seems that each new generation of TV is become less and less friendly towards the massive back catalog of 4x3 content... there were a lot of great films made prior to 1955, and decades worth of TV shows. I don't see how a 21:9 TV is going to benefit them.

TVs in Europe have had Smart Stretch of 4:3 to 16:9 for 10-15 years now.

It is incomprehensible to me why this is not on 100.00% of all U.S. widescreen TVs.

(Smart Stretch uses variable expansion across the frame to great effect.)

It is incomprehensible to me why this is not on 100.00% of all U.S. widescreen TVs

Probably because the manufacturers recognize that the vast majority of buyers aren't at all discriminating or knowledgeable. So they can get away with not spending the money to implement this feature, because all those people are perfectly happy watching terribly distorted and stretched 4x3 content on their 16x9 TVs.

Personally, though, even smart stretching technology like that kind of irks me. If something was filmed and produced in 4x3, I'd rather watch it with Pillarboxes than under the influence of any kind of stretching technology, no matter how smart.

A 21:9 TV would only make 4:3 way worse... so I'm really skeptical about this aspect ratio.

Also, it isn't really a standard aspect ratio so it will have a lot of problems. e.g. very little material is going to be sold as 21:9.

2- Some people like to stretch 4:3 content... these folks will stay away from this TV.

Also, there's a lot of 4:3 content... watching something with huge pillars would be really annoying for me.

3- The commercial is amazing though!!

"TVs in Europe have had Smart Stretch of 4:3 to 16:9 for 10-15 years now. It is incomprehensible to me why this is not on 100.00% of all U.S. widescreen TVs."

I can't stand this feature. I think it looks horrible. In fact it's much worse than simple stretch, which is quite a bit worse than pillarboxing.

I think all screens should be 1:1. That way there's always some extra vertical room left over for all the 'on screen' information that on can't seem to get away from these days. It could be displayed in that extra area instead of on top of the video i'm trying to watch*. Also think how much nicer this would be when producing a photo slides show and you include some 'portrait' layout images.






*Let the TV stations put their stupid little ads of what's coming up next in that extra vertical area instead of right on top of the show i'm watching now! Not only would i be able to continue watching the current show with far more enjoyment, but i could cover up that part of the screen with a curtain and not be bothered by the ad at al. :)

I don't quite understand why people get so annoyed watching 4:3 stuff on a 16:9 TV. The pillars are black and you're seeing at least as much of the image as you would on a 4:3 TV. What's the problem? Is watching 16:9 letterboxed on a 4:3 TV as annoying?

Yes, it was impressive, but this effect is hardly new by any means. The first time I saw it was in the movie Matrix and have seen it several times since.

How was it done? Probably the same way it was done in every movie and TV commercial it's been in--with a series of pre-postioned still cameras.

The "commentaries" were, in my opinion, practically useless, especially the DP's and the director's.

I can't see everyone that's bought a 16x9 tossing it and running back out to buy this 21x9 (just when most thought 16x9 was going to be the new "standard"). For all the same reasons mentioned above, I wouldn't buy one. It's too extreme for my tastes, especially when watching programs in 4x3.

<I can't get anything to play? Firefox or IE>

<You need to have Flash installed, probably even Flash 10 (which is better anyway)>

Hmmm. I have version 10 r22. Still won't play. weird.

This kind of gimmickry leave me cold.

I've done this sort of thing with my new SpaceTime Imaging Lens from Einstein Industries. Piece of cake. This lens allows you to zoom through spacetime as opposed to a normal zoom lens which, as we all know, is limited to zooming in space only.

"I don't quite understand why people get so annoyed watching 4:3 stuff on a 16:9 TV. "

That's an interesting question because admittedly is DOES annoy me... and not just the 4:3 either, but the 21:9 on a 16:9. I know that the thought pattern is rather illogical but none the less i can't help but feel ripped off in picture size when I see the black bars.

What does concern me however... and quite a legitimate concern is the burn-in that it causes... especially with plasma tv's (which is what I have). It doesn't take a lot to cause those burn-in lines on a plasma

What I do sincerely wish though is that SOMEBODY makes up their dammed mind on what the next standard should be.... and friggin STICK WITH IT for some kind of reasonable time period. I really don't think that's too much to ask for.

I am lost. ( I have not had my coffee yet as an excuse)

A wider screen than 16:9 bet is super expensive but how do you feed it?
Hollywood doesn't send me DCI disks or my satellite dish doesn't have
that output (2K 4K??).