1. Guest,
    If you need help getting to know Xenforo, please see our guide here. If you have feedback or questions, please post those here.
    Dismiss Notice

Vizeo unveils ultra-widescreen 21:0 Cinemawide HDTV LED LCDs

Discussion in 'Displays' started by Ronald Epstein, Jan 5, 2011.

  1. Ronald Epstein

    Ronald Epstein Administrator
    Owner

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    44,716
    Likes Received:
    3,680
    Real Name:
    Ronald Epstein
    Irvine, CA -- Jan 5, 2011 VIZIO, America's #1 LCD HDTV Company*, revealed today plans to launch Cinemawide HDTV, 21:9 Cinema aspect ratio models that can display native 2.35:1 ("CinemaScope") movies without any black bars for a true cinematic experience. The ultra widescreen perspective displays movies as designed for the silver screen for an immersive movie experience at home. Each model also features VIZIO Internet Apps(VIA) in Cinema mode, which allows users to browse apps side-by-side with 16:9 Full HD content without any compromise in resolution or size. The 50- and 58-inch class size models are Edge Lit Razor LED HDTVs with Smart Dimming. VIZIO will also be demonstrating at their private CES showroom a 71-inch class size model with Full Array TruLED backlighting for the ultimate in performance.
    [​IMG]

    All three models feature VIZIO's Theater 3D technology that delivers superior, flicker-free 3D performance that is up to 2x brighter and significantly reduces crosstalk compared to current Active Shutter LCD TVs and works in conjunction with battery-free, lightweight glasses. Theater 3D puts the burden of 3D processing into the TV, eliminating the need for cumbersome, complex, and expensive glasses. Compared to "Active Shutter" technology, VIZIO's Theater 3D offers up to 2x brighter picture quality without flickering. It also significantly reduces the crosstalk inherent in Active Shutter 3D which can cause eyestrain and headaches. Theater 3D eyewear is compatible with most 3D movie theaters.

    "For movie-buffs, the Cinemawide HDTV series is a revelation and lets them watch movies as the filmmakers intended," stated Matthew McRae, VIZIO CTO. "The result is a significantly more immersive experience that fills your field of vision without black bars or loss of resolution. In addition, accessing favorite apps with VIZIO Internet Apps can now be a true side-by-side experience with 16:9 content for a full HD image right next to the VIA sidebar."

    Cinemawide HDTV - Ultra-Widescreen
    Most HDTVs have an aspect ratio of 16:9, or 1.78:1, and a resolution of 1,920 x 1,080 often referred to as 1080p Full HD. This aspect ratio was a compromise between the more square formatting of older televisions (4:3 or 1.33:1) and the wider 1.85:1 aspect of many movies. A 1.85:1 movie on a 16:9 HDTV will still show some black bars at the top and bottom of the screen. Big-budget Hollywood blockbusters, though, are usually filmed in the much wider 2.35:1 or 2.39:1 aspect ratio. VIZIO's new Cinemawide HDTVs slot in between these "CinemaScope" aspect ratios perfectly with a 2.37:1 (21:9) aspect ratio. So whether you're watching 2001, Lord of the Rings, Kill Bill, Toy Story 3, or countless other movies, you can watch them in their original aspect ratio and without black bars. VIZIO Internet Apps (VIA) Meets Cinemawide HDTV


    With Cinemawide HDTV, using VIZIO Internet Apps (VIA) is more seamless than ever. While watching a pixel-perfect 16:9 full HD image on the right side of the screen, users can simultaneously browse and use Apps on the left side of the screen. Search Wiki TV for the actor you just saw, Tweet about the movie you're watching, or even buy tickets to the new sequel through Fandango.

    "Connected TV's are expected to account for 21% of Global TV Shipments in 2010, rising to 122 million units globally by 2014**, representing one of the most exciting areas of growth in the TV industry and ultra-wide aspect ratio TVs, such as 21:9, and will enable consumers to view their TV content and Internet content simultaneously in harmony," stated Paul Gagnon Director of North America TV Market Research, DisplaySearch.

    With VIZIO Internet Apps (VIA), top online content and services brands are available at the touch of a button, including: Amazon Video On Demand, Facebook, Flickr, Netflix, Rhapsody, Pandora, Twitter, VUDU, and Yahoo! TV Widgets. Additional Apps recently released include Fandango, iMemories, MediaBox, My-Cast, TuneIn Radio, Web Videos, Wiki TV and Yahoo Fantasy Football . VIZIO Internet Apps delivers unprecedented choice and control of web-based content directly to the television without the need for a PC or set-top box.

    Navigating VIZIO Internet Apps is simple on all three Cinemawide HDTV models, using the included Bluetooth Universal Remote with a built-in QWERTY keypad. State of the art wireless Internet access is available through built-in Dual-Band 802.11n Wi-Fi, allowing viewers to enjoy the convenience of on-demand movies, TV shows, social networking, music, photos and more with just the push of a button.

    The Best 3D Experience Gets Even Better... And Wider
    VIZIO's Theater 3D technology uses circular polarization, similar to what is found in most 3D movie theaters. This technology offers a brighter, flicker-free image, handles fast motion without blurring, and has a wider horizontal viewing angle compared to "Active Shutter" technology.


    By including four pairs of the lightweight and comfortable Theater 3D glasses with these TVs, VIZIO has eliminated two of the most common objections to 3DTV purchases: the need to wear bulky 3D glasses that require batteries or recharging and the need to invest in expensive additional 3D glasses so the entire family can enjoy it together. Two of the four pairs are specially designed to accommodate prescription eyeglass wearers. By incorporating all of the 3D processing into the TV instead of burdening the eyewear, as is the case with Active 3D, VIZIO Theater 3D enables users to wear comfortable, eco-friendly, battery-free lenses instead of Active Shutter glasses that are heavy, awkward, and require recharging and other maintenance.

    Support for the Widest Array of 3D Formats
    The entire Cinemawide HDTV line supports the widest selection of 3D formats to ensure compatibility across Blu-ray, broadcast, cable, satellite, and gaming. This includes Frame Packing, Side by Side, Top and Bottom, plus SENSIO Hi-Fi 3D and the RealD Format.


    VIZIO's Leading LED Picture Quality
    The XVT3D500CM and XVT3D580CM utilize VIZIO's Smart Dimming Edge Lit Razor LED technology. Smart Dimming intelligently controls its array of LEDs, which are organized in 32 zones. Working frame by frame, based on the content being displayed, Smart Dimming adjusts brightness in precise steps down to pure black (where the LED is completely off). This cutting-edge technology minimizes light leakage and enables a Dynamic Contrast Ratio of 10 Million to 1, for blacker blacks and whiter whites.


    The top of the line XVT3D710CM uses VIZIO's TruLED Full Array LED backlighting with Smart Dimming technology that is able to dim specific areas of the image, depending on what's on screen, resulting in the most incredible and life-like images that "pop" off the screen.

    Advanced Audio
    VIZIO Cinemawide HDTVs will feature SRS StudioSound HD - the ultimate all-in-one audio suite designed specifically for Flat Panel TVs. Years of excellence in audio, practical experience and patented technologies allow StudioSound HD to deliver the most immersive and natural surround sound ever using built-in TV speakers. The suite also delivers remarkably crisp and clear dialog, rich bass, an elevated sound stage and consistent, spike-free volume levels. StudioSound HD features optimized audio presets for movies, news, sports and music while also providing a built-in EQ toolset for peak audio performance.


    VIZIO continues its leadership in bringing innovative technologies that transform and enhance the HDTV experience. The Cinemawide HDTV XVT3D500CM and XVT3D580CM will be available later this year.

    VIZIO Cinemawide HDTV Series at a Glance

    [​IMG]
    *Sources: Q3 2010 iSuppli and DisplaySearch Reports
    **Report source: DisplaySearch Quarterly TV Design and Feature Report


    About VIZIO
    VIZIO, Inc., "Entertainment Freedom For All," headquartered in Irvine, California, is America's HDTV and Consumer Electronics Company. In 2007, VIZIO skyrocketed to the top by becoming the #1 selling brand of flat panel HDTVs in North America and became the first American brand in over a decade to lead in U.S. TV sales. Since 2007 VIZIO HDTV shipments remain in the TOP ranks in the U.S. and was #1 for the total year in 2009. VIZIO is committed to bringing feature-rich consumer electronics to market at a value through practical innovation. VIZIO offers a broad range of award winning consumer electronics. VIZIO's products are found at Costco Wholesale, Sam's Club, Walmart, Target, BJ's Wholesale, and other retailers nationwide along with authorized online partners. VIZIO has won numerous awards including a #1 ranking in the Inc. 500 for Top Companies in Computers and Electronics, Fast Company's 6th Most Innovative CE Company of 2009, and made the lists of Ad Age's Hottest Brands, Good Housekeeping's Best Big-Screens, CNET's Editor's Choice, PC World's Best Buy and OC Metro's 10 Most Trustworthy Brands among many other prestigious honors. For more information, please call 888-VIZIOCE or visit on the web at www.VIZIO.com.

    The V, VIZIO, TruLED, Extreme VIZIO Technology XVT, VIZIO Internet Apps, 480Hz SPS, 240Hz SPS, Thin Line, Smooth Motion, Razor LED, Smart Dimming, Theater 3D, Cinemawide HDTV, Entertainment Freedom For All, names, phrase and symbols are trademarks or registered trademarks of VIZIO, Inc. All other trademarks may be the property of their respective holders.


    ###

    Source: VIZIO, Inc.
     
  2. Jason Charlton

    Jason Charlton Ambassador

    Joined:
    May 16, 2002
    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    317
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Real Name:
    Jason Charlton
    Great! Just what we need.... more aspect ratio confusion!


    Now if only they would start making TVs with a 1.33:1 aspect ratio so that I can enjoy all my old "classic" movies without any black bars, that would be GREAT!


    Oh, wait a minute...
     
  3. Stephen_J_H

    Stephen_J_H All Things Film Junkie
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,555
    Likes Received:
    396
    Location:
    North of the 49th
    Real Name:
    Stephen J. Hill
    If this uses passive glasses, does that mean the resolution for 3D will actually be 540 x 2560? Just wondering......
     
  4. Jason Charlton

    Jason Charlton Ambassador

    Joined:
    May 16, 2002
    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    317
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Real Name:
    Jason Charlton
    Oh, and someone needs to tell the folks at Vizio that Toy Story 3 has a 1.85:1 aspect ratio.


    The passive 3D is interesting, not quite sure how they go about it. I suppose there is some sort of "polarization" layer that can be switched from horizontal to vertical with each displayed field. They tie one polarization angle to the left eye field and the other to the right eye field and the result is still full HD at 60Hz to the user.


    The thing that really bothers me the most about this is that any source that you watch "without black bars" will have to be scaled or "zoomed" to an odd (and more importantly, non-native) resolution. Movies with a 2.35:1 aspect ratio will be scaled from a width of 1920 pixels to a width of 2560 pixels.


    Heck, any 16:9 HD broadcasts will fill the screen top-to-bottom, but leave 320 pixel black bars on each side. YEAH! That's progress!


    Doesn't anyone know the definition of "compromise" and why one had to be reached when the HD spec was created and aspect ratios came into the discussion?
     
  5. Mark-P

    Mark-P Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2005
    Messages:
    2,890
    Likes Received:
    787
    Location:
    Camas, WA
    Real Name:
    Mark Probst
    Passive 3D for home screens has the polarization of the odd scan lines set 90 degrees from the even scan lines. The drawback is that each eye only sees half of the vertical resolution - 540 for each eye, whereas active shutter technology has 1080 lines for each eye.

     
  6. Jason Charlton

    Jason Charlton Ambassador

    Joined:
    May 16, 2002
    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    317
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Real Name:
    Jason Charlton
    ^^ Thanks for the clarification on the passive 3D system. I wonder what the perception would be for average consumers if they knew that the price of losing the expensive glasses was to give up an HD image.


    I suppose that perhaps the fact that this set will likely appeal to consumers who are STILL obsessed with doing away with "black bars" may be an indicator that image fidelity is the least of their concerns.
     
  7. Scott Calvert

    Scott Calvert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 1998
    Messages:
    885
    Likes Received:
    2
    It amazes me that you guys don't get it. A display device with a screen ratio like this involves the LEAST compromise of anything we've yet been given. All material will be displayed at a constant hieght, so 2.35 films can be viewed without the shrinking necassary to fit within a 1.85 frame. I think it's a godsend and only wish I could get a 65 inch model without the added 3d crap which only adds cost.
     
  8. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    19,970
    Likes Received:
    1,588
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    Huh?


    How many 2.35 movies are out there?


    -versus-

    How many movies are MORE or LESS than 2.35 formatted?

    How many BILLIONS of Hours of 1.33 television is out there?

    How many MILLIONS of hours of HD broadcast 1.85 TV is out there?


    I think your math is just a bit off.
     
  9. Scott Calvert

    Scott Calvert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 1998
    Messages:
    885
    Likes Received:
    2


    All material can be displayed at a constant height without losing any of the image. Who cares about the percentage of content delivered in each aspect ratio? This really isn't that hard a concept folks. This set is one size fits all for 99% of content. Yes I know there are ultra-widescreen films out there but they are very few and far between. And yes, you have image area on the sides that will not be used for a lot of programming, but that's not the point. You would buy one of these sets so you would have that extra image area for the content that needs it without having to shrink the image on the very films that are suppsed to be bigger, not smaller.


    I can't believe you guys are poo-poohing a set like this, on Home Theater Forum no less. I know I can't be the only one who feels this way.
     
  10. Jason Charlton

    Jason Charlton Ambassador

    Joined:
    May 16, 2002
    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    317
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Real Name:
    Jason Charlton
    Grrr, HTF... why do you keep failing to post my responses!!!!



    If you read the first part of the press release quoted above, you see that the emphasis the manufacturer has placed on this TV is it's ability to show movies in their original aspect ratio without black bars. This is a misnomer. There will be black bars no matter the shape of your display. It's also incorrect to state that "Big budget Hollywood blockbusters are usually filmed in the much wider 2.35:1 aspect ratio". Many more films are released in the 1.85:1 aspect ratio.


    My biggest beef with this setup, however, is the screen resolution. In a perfect world, I would like my 1920x1080 image displayed at its native resolution of 1920x1080. Don't scale it up or down. Don't stretch the image using some scientifically engineered mathematical forumla, just give me the pure picture as it was encoded on the disc (in a 16:9 format, by the way).


    This display doesn't do that. It scales the image up so that the actual "picture" area of a 2.35:1 film is 1080 pixels high. As it scales the image, the black bars of the originally 16:9 frame are pushed off the top and bottom of the screen, and the result is a 1920X1080 image that has been scaled to a horizontal resolution of 2560 (see the second part of the quoted press release) to match the display's width (meaning the height of the scaled image is now 1440). Scaling an image introduces artifacts and destroys the integrity of the image.


    The "Constant Image Height" camp for front projection setups approach this problem very differently. They are not digitally scaling the actual image or changing the resolution, they employ expensive and very sophisticated glass lenses to magnify the (still 1920x1080) image so that the black bars are pushed off the projection screen. This approach preserves the pixel integrity of the image and does not degrade the quality.


    To me, there's no comparison between these two approaches - one preserves a one-to-one pixel mapping and the other does not. If the anamorphic lenses and related apparati (sp?) weren't so darned expensive, I would consider changing my front projection setup to CIH, however it's not in the cards. Regardless, I don't think there's any way I'll believe that this display is in any way better than my current 720p 16:9 front projection setup.
     
  11. Jason Charlton

    Jason Charlton Ambassador

    Joined:
    May 16, 2002
    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    317
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Real Name:
    Jason Charlton
    Dammit, HTF... what keeps happening to my replies!!! This is getting ridiculous... need to post to feedback.


    All material can be displayed at a constant width without losing any of the image, too.

    Actually, all TVs (be they 4:3, 16:9, 21:9) can display all aspect ratios - the only difference being the size and location of the black bars.


    The fact is, until someone invents a TV that can physically alter its shape, black bars are a fact of life.
     
  12. Scott Calvert

    Scott Calvert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 1998
    Messages:
    885
    Likes Received:
    2


    None of anything you state is a problem with the set itself. The marketing has errors, yes.


    If bluray were encoded with a 2:35 image squeezed into a 16.9 image area, then this could work exactly like anamorphic DVD. Since blurays aren't encoded that way, thats a problem with bluray, not the display. As it is the display can zoom on on the 16.9 native image. Better than nothing!


    Also, constant image height projector lenses do not work that way. People who have these lenses adjust the height of 2.35 films via projecter geometry settings setting so that there is no black image area and everything appears tall and skinny. Then use the lenses to "unsqueeze the image horizontally.
     
  13. Scott Calvert

    Scott Calvert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 1998
    Messages:
    885
    Likes Received:
    2

    All material can be displayed at a constant width without losing any of the image, too.

    Actually, all TVs (be they 4:3, 16:9, 21:9) can display all aspect ratios - the only difference being the size and location of the black bars.


    The fact is, until someone invents a TV that can physically alter its shape, black bars are a fact of life.



    Oh boy. This is not about black bars. It is about IMAGE AREA. 2.35 films will be BIGGER on this set, because they are supposed to be BIGGER. As it is all 16.9 sets have to SHRINK the image area of 2.35 films to fit the 16.9 screen! Do you not understand that? Ie everyone who owns a 16.9 set has to watch 2.35 films that will appear smaller than 16.9 films. In my theater, Lawrence of Arabia has a smaller image than Billy Madison, beacuse of the display.
     
  14. Zack Gibbs

    Zack Gibbs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,687
    Likes Received:
    2

    "2.35:1" is not a size, it's an aspect ratio. The 'size' of a movie in comparison to another is meaningless. You've probably been conditioned to think one is "bigger" over the years because of how your theaters operated, but there are many Cinemas today who mask their screens top and bottom for 2.35 content.
     
  15. Scott Calvert

    Scott Calvert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 1998
    Messages:
    885
    Likes Received:
    2

    Correct, it is an aspect ratio. An aspect ratio that was developed to create a wider image area for a larger, more immersive theatrical experience to further differentiate itself from TV.


    I have never seen a commercial cinema that masks the top and bottom of a screen for 2.35 films. Can anyone confirm that is what theaters are doing?
     
  16. Jason Charlton

    Jason Charlton Ambassador

    Joined:
    May 16, 2002
    Messages:
    3,402
    Likes Received:
    317
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Real Name:
    Jason Charlton
    Actually, it IS all about black bars - it's a matter of choice for users. Do they want to minimize the presence of black bars by choosing a display aspect ratio that will result in most of their viewing material virtually filling their screen, or are they willing to live with pillarboxing for most content in order to maximize the presentation of their 2.35:1 material.


    Most of what I watch is 16:9, followed by 1.85:1, then it's a tossup between 4:3 and 2.35:1. For me, it's a no-brainer. A 16:9 display gives me the best impact for most of my viewing. Sure 2.35:1 movies are "smaller" when viewed on my display, but it's infrequent enough that it doesn't bother me.


    I'd much rather utilize my full display as frequently as possible, rather than "save" screen area on the sides only for when I need it. This is simply a matter of personal preference, and having many friends and family who, to this day, still don't understand why some movies have black bars and others don't, this is likely to be the preference of most of the general public.


    Sure, there's likely to be a niche market for folks who want their 2.35:1 movie experience to be "bigger" than Billy Madison and I can understand that, however people that see these sets, and read the literature that says "No black bars" are still going to be disappointed.


    Going back to my first post, the added confustion that these sets will create among the general population is likely to be a problem.


    Oh, and my apologies on my description of CIH front projection. I don't know what I was thinking... thanks for the correction.
     
  17. Scott Calvert

    Scott Calvert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 1998
    Messages:
    885
    Likes Received:
    2
    Being that this is the Home Theater Forum, that is the perspective I am posting from. From that standpoint, this set is a fantastic idea. For those who have a dedicated home theater primarily for the purposes of viewing movies (which is the focal point of this site), and who don't want to go the costly route of front projection with anamorphic lenses, this set will do perfectly. Any scaling/resolution issues are the fault of the bluray spec, not the display. I just don't see the point of crapping on it.
     
  18. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    19,970
    Likes Received:
    1,588
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    Pick your poison. If you are watching exclusively super-widescreen movies then this set may be your best choice. The VAST MAJORITY of people however are going to benefit with sets that are in the current HD broadcast ratio of 1.85 and adjusting to pillar box black bars on the side for 1.66/1.33 content and letterbox black bars on top and bottom for anything at all over 1.85, in varying degrees of thickness depending on HOW WIDE the super-widescreen film is. 1.85 is a nice compromise.


    You can have CIH _projectors_ that adjust for their content's width. You CANNOT have a CIH _flat panel_ that does anything but put black (or another color) bars when it encounters content not in the panel's aspect ratio.

    So I personally see VERY LITTLE value in ultrawidescreen monitors with the possible exception of video gaming if you can make your content work on them.
     
  19. Scott Calvert

    Scott Calvert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 1998
    Messages:
    885
    Likes Received:
    2

    I truly can't see why no one is agreeing with me, outside of the possibility that hardly anyone reads this board.


    For the dedicated home theater, for cinema viewing, a 2.35 monitor is absolutely ideal, provided you can obtain the screen size to get decent field of view. That's as close as you are going to get to replicating the cinema experience at home without front projection. Which means constant height for all material. You can create masks to cover the small amount of light emitted from the pillarboxed areas for 1.85 and narrower films, just like you can create curtains for front projection systems. For those not inclined toward front projection with optical manipulation which gets really expensive, this is the next best thing especially considering its coming from Vizio and should be affordable.


    I can't believe I'm having to argue this, but the main draw of 2.35 is that it is WIDER, not SHORTER, than the ratio represented by television programs and other movies of the time. That's the whole point it was brought out back in the 50's, to further differentiate movies from TV. That aesthetic has been flip-flopped for letterboxed home viewing because of the need to get the 2.35 frame into a 1.33 and now 1.66 image area. That was an OK compromise because even though you are shrinking the image in relation to all other material presented on that display, you get the full image without lopping off the sides. A 2.35 display makes that a moot point.
     
  20. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    19,970
    Likes Received:
    1,588
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    I think nobody is agreeing with you not because we don't understand your points but because we believe you to be, well, wrong.


    I think you would find that all of us would agree with you if you were talking about CIH technology like a projector. While most of us think that is an interesting and 'cool' solution, buying into it doesn't make financial sense given the realities of the marketplace right now.


    But buying an expensive flat panel where the vast majority of content will be ill formatted doesn't make sense, financially or visually, in the favor of the few times when true widescreen material would look marginally more awesome. It would be a VAST waste of money and produce an unsatisfying experience for all viewers.


    Think about it this way, a 71" 21:9 monitor has about the same height as a 55" 16:9 unit at a much greater cost. Most users would gladly sacrifice the width and buy a 65" 16:9 flat panel (for less money) and have it fit a LOT more of their content correctly.
     

Share This Page