Widescreen Cinematic Displays

[Judder Master]

First, thanks to all that have made this website and forums so informative. My reason for joining is the pursuit of a better cinematic experience watching Blu-ray movies. Currently, I enjoy watching movies on a Panasonic Viera plasma TV from a Panasonic Blu-ray player via HDMI and this setup works very well with less judder, great contrast and accurate colors. Due to the differing aspect ratios of 1080p TV (16:9) and common computer monitors (16:10) versus the current widescreen cinema standard (23.9:1), HD TV's don't seem to utilize the full potential of Blu-ray movies. Would one of the new 29" Ultra Widescreen cinematic monitors provide a noticeable improvement albeit on an overall smaller format?
Thanks!

[Chief Blur Buster]

Would one of the new 29" Ultra Widescreen cinematic monitors provide a noticeable improvement albeit on an overall smaller format?
Thanks!

It depends on your goals, but they would be pretty good for watching movies on, and situations where you want something slightly closer to surround gaming (but without bezels). It'd be good for home theater.

Most people around here (as we're called "Blur Busters" ) mainly focusses on "better than 60Hz" technology.
The current crop of ultra-widescreen monitors are limited to 60Hz without any motion-enhancing technologies (e.g. G-SYNC). So they aren't as good for gaming motion-fluidity-improving -- such as high refresh rates, strobe backlights such as LightBoost/ULMB, and things like G-SYNC.

[Neo]

A 21:9 / 2.35:1 display would look nice while it's showing native content but not so much showing standard 16:9 content. Most movies aren't shot widescreen but rather in 1.85:1. But it would make a good pc monitor that can show a custom source resolution from a computer when not being used to view movies. Especially if it's curved it might replace a surround set-up.

I think a better solution is simply 4K resolution and standard 16:9 aspect ratio. A 21:9 widescreen letterbox presentation would use 3840x1620 out of the 3840x2160 resolution. A larger screen / shorter viewing distance accounting for and optimized for a constant screen height, as the scope image is 25% smaller, creates a virtual widescreen display while maintaining efficient use for standard 16:9 content. The extra resolution that many 4K h8ters complain is overkill really does show it's usefulness in such a use case. Viewing even a 50" screen up close from a comfy chair will provide a much more cinematic experience than a 29" monitor that should be on a desk.

VIZIO [LINK] SEEMS TO BE promising plasma-level blacks and cinema-friendly specs with large screens at mainstream prices. They might work better than the 21:9 displays that seem more like concept products right now.

[spacediver]

I would avoid buying any 2160p displays or tvs for now. They'll likely be obsolete very soon (i.e. because of them being 8 bit). Wait until UHD standards are finalized is my advice.

[Judder Master]

Thank you all for excellent information...after having read most all of the sites articles and post I knew I would find solid relevant information from the members. I had not considered how a movie would be displayed on a 4K screen using "3840x1620 out of the 3840x2160 resolution" which should be a noticeable improvement. However at this time, 4K Blu-ray media is enhanced, up converted 2K.
One review I read on Newegg about the Asus MX299Q series monitor claims it can be over clocked to 120hz so maybe that would be something to also consider as it an AH-IPS monitor.

[Chief Blur Buster]

One review I read on Newegg about the Asus MX299Q series monitor claims it can be over clocked to 120hz so maybe that would be something to also consider as it an AH-IPS monitor.

Don't forget about the frameskipping factor -- www.testufo.com/frameskipping
Sometimes it's actually only displaying 60 out of 120 refreshes per second.

[Neo]

I would avoid buying any 2160p displays or tvs for now. They'll likely be obsolete very soon (i.e. because of them being 8 bit). Wait until UHD standards are finalized is my advice.

Lots of reasons to not jump in with current selection of low-spec, high-priced displays. But VIZIO's Dolby Vision reference series is a 10-bit panel and Dolby reps claimed in interviews that the Dolby Vision Master format supports Rec.2020. Technically it's dual modulation system supports full 16-bit. I also haven't seen a rush by content providers to promote the use of full spec Rec.2020 material. Even Google's 4K VP9 codec is limited to 8-bit 60FPS. I'd prefer my InuYasha episodes in 10-bit or higher but waiting on support for a bit-depth spec that most people seem to care less about than even native high frame rate input might be a long wait indeed.

[spacediver]

yep Scott Wilkinson agrees with you:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1510329/avs-c ... t_24206438

The Toshiba L9400 series are also 10 bit.

[Neo]

I bet all Dolby Vision displays are 10-bit. (The LCD actually only needs no more than 150:1 contrast and 8-bit is more than enough for local contrast in a dual modulation system.) I've read the VIZIO R-series is a Sharp panel. Sharp, TCL and VIZIO are the announced Dolby partners so I bet they are using Sharp's RGBY UV²A panels for the brighter, wider color benefits. Sharp has been making noise for some time now about improving pixel quality via IGZO and larger pixel apertures, so that would be a natural application for bright, high dynamic range systems.

[Judder Master]

Thanks again! Lots of great information I did not know...will keep me busy for awhile following up and learning all that was provided.