Really wide (1.85:1) monitors?

[ToniLou]

Hi

I'm building a HTCP system and I'm searching for a really wide computer
monitor. All I can find are 16x9 monitors, but I'd like to get
something wider (with an ideal aspect relartion of about 1.85:1).

Does such a monitor exists? Anyone knows if there is any plan to
produce really wide monitors?


Toni

[Robert Gammon]

ToniLou wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm building a HTCP system and I'm searching for a really wide computer
> monitor. All I can find are 16x9 monitors, but I'd like to get
> something wider (with an ideal aspect relartion of about 1.85:1).
>
> Does such a monitor exists? Anyone knows if there is any plan to
> produce really wide monitors?
>
>
> Toni
>
>
Fraid not.

The only thing I am aware of is a anamorphic lens option offered by some
high end projector companies. The projector then Stretches the source
image from a stored 16x9 with black bars top and bottom (i.e.DVDs) to a
native 1.85:1

Mainstream TVs are moving to 16x9 (2:35:1) in support of HDTV

HTPC is regarded as "Way Out There", at least according to Wikipedia
articles. Noise is a BIG concern, and costs can easily exceed doing the
same thing with dedicated audio/video equipment.

The ONLY reason to do it is that you are tied to the computer all day
and night long, so you might as well push back and take a break with a
TV show or movie.

Others would argue that it is better to push back and walk away from
the computer to go watch TV or a movie in a separate room.

[cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net]

Robert Gammon <rgammon51@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ToniLou wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I'm building a HTCP system and I'm searching for a really wide computer
> > monitor. All I can find are 16x9 monitors, but I'd like to get
> > something wider (with an ideal aspect relartion of about 1.85:1).
> >
> > Does such a monitor exists? Anyone knows if there is any plan to
> > produce really wide monitors?
> >
> >
> > Toni
> >
> >
> Fraid not.
>
> The only thing I am aware of is a anamorphic lens option offered by some
> high end projector companies. The projector then Stretches the source
> image from a stored 16x9 with black bars top and bottom (i.e.DVDs) to a
> native 1.85:1
>
> Mainstream TVs are moving to 16x9 (2:35:1) in support of HDTV
>
> HTPC is regarded as "Way Out There", at least according to Wikipedia
> articles. Noise is a BIG concern, and costs can easily exceed doing the
> same thing with dedicated audio/video equipment.
>
> The ONLY reason to do it is that you are tied to the computer all day
> and night long, so you might as well push back and take a break with a
> TV show or movie.
>
> Others would argue that it is better to push back and walk away from
> the computer to go watch TV or a movie in a separate room.

16 x 9 is not 2.35:1, it is 1.78:1

Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

[Rich Clark]

"ToniLou" <tonilounavarro@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1158757388.956736.11010@d34g2000cwd.googlegro ups.com...
> Hi
>
> I'm building a HTCP system and I'm searching for a really wide computer
> monitor. All I can find are 16x9 monitors, but I'd like to get
> something wider (with an ideal aspect relartion of about 1.85:1).
>
> Does such a monitor exists? Anyone knows if there is any plan to
> produce really wide monitors?

16:9 is 1.78:1. In practice, this is close enough to 1.85:1 as to make
virtually no practical difference.

RichC

[ToniLou]

Okay, but wouldn`t it be nice having in the room a real 2.35:1 wide
monitor to watch DVDs? Is there any technical reason not to produce
one?


Toni



Rich Clark wrote:
> "ToniLou" <tonilounavarro@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1158757388.956736.11010@d34g2000cwd.googlegro ups.com...
> > Hi
> >
> > I'm building a HTCP system and I'm searching for a really wide computer
> > monitor. All I can find are 16x9 monitors, but I'd like to get
> > something wider (with an ideal aspect relartion of about 1.85:1).
> >
> > Does such a monitor exists? Anyone knows if there is any plan to
> > produce really wide monitors?
>
> 16:9 is 1.78:1. In practice, this is close enough to 1.85:1 as to make
> virtually no practical difference.
>
> RichC

[Rich Clark]

"ToniLou" <tonilounavarro@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1158778895.290185.290390@k70g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> Okay, but wouldn`t it be nice having in the room a real 2.35:1 wide
> monitor to watch DVDs? Is there any technical reason not to produce
> one?

Well, you didn't say 2.35, you said 1.85.

2.35:1 isn't the native resolution of anything. Yes, there are a lot of
movies made in this aspect ratio, but the video versions of them are 16:9
anamorphic; the black bars that make up the difference between 2.35 (or
2.25, or 2.00, or whatever arbitrary AR the filmmaker chose) and 1.85 are
imprinted in the video. On a 2.25 monitor, a 2.25 movie would appear
pillarboxed (black bars at the sides) because it's really a 16:9 video. You
would gain nothing.

So the technical reason not to produce one would be "it would be useless.
There is no 2.35 (or 2.25) native video format."

RichC

[Robert Gammon]

ToniLou wrote:
> Okay, but wouldn`t it be nice having in the room a real 2.35:1 wide
> monitor to watch DVDs? Is there any technical reason not to produce
> one?
>
>
> Toni
>
>
1:78:1 to 1:85:1 while maintaining roughly a 50 inch image height
switching to 1:85:1 results in about a 10 inch wider image on a 107 wide
screen.

Now as for direct view, what toni is discussing is a CRT, LCD, Plasma,
or DLP monitor that a PC can drive (with suitable H/W and S/W) in a 27
to 45 inch diagonal.

Technically, no reason why a 1:85:1 aspect ratio monitor could not be
built. The question is demand. As much as Microsoft may want to
integrate the TV and the PC into one appliance,the world is not yet
ready to produce such except in very very limited quantities.

Basically,you need to get the largest 1:78:1 TV monitor you can afford
27, 36, 42, 50, 56, 61, 73, or 81inch diagonal and live with the black
bars at top and bottom.

There IS a solution that works, the one i mention above. It costs
roughly $40,000 for the projector and anamorphic lens, and the screen to
wipe out the black bars is roughly another $8,000. Both Runco and
Digital Projections have the projectors and anamorphic lenses. You can
scrimp on this by reducing the screen size and going with a 720p
projector, but even so, its a total of over $25,000 and by scrimping,
you may have to keep the room at night time light levels (most lights
off) in order to ENJOY the movie.

[ToniLou]

Thanks for your answers, guys.


Toni


Robert Gammon wrote:
> ToniLou wrote:
> > Okay, but wouldn`t it be nice having in the room a real 2.35:1 wide
> > monitor to watch DVDs? Is there any technical reason not to produce
> > one?
> >
> >
> > Toni
> >
> >
> 1:78:1 to 1:85:1 while maintaining roughly a 50 inch image height
> switching to 1:85:1 results in about a 10 inch wider image on a 107 wide
> screen.
>
> Now as for direct view, what toni is discussing is a CRT, LCD, Plasma,
> or DLP monitor that a PC can drive (with suitable H/W and S/W) in a 27
> to 45 inch diagonal.
>
> Technically, no reason why a 1:85:1 aspect ratio monitor could not be
> built. The question is demand. As much as Microsoft may want to
> integrate the TV and the PC into one appliance,the world is not yet
> ready to produce such except in very very limited quantities.
>
> Basically,you need to get the largest 1:78:1 TV monitor you can afford
> 27, 36, 42, 50, 56, 61, 73, or 81inch diagonal and live with the black
> bars at top and bottom.
>
> There IS a solution that works, the one i mention above. It costs
> roughly $40,000 for the projector and anamorphic lens, and the screen to
> wipe out the black bars is roughly another $8,000. Both Runco and
> Digital Projections have the projectors and anamorphic lenses. You can
> scrimp on this by reducing the screen size and going with a 720p
> projector, but even so, its a total of over $25,000 and by scrimping,
> you may have to keep the room at night time light levels (most lights
> off) in order to ENJOY the movie.