Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
dmann

Hd Gear A Waste Of Money!

Recommended Posts

actually 8ms LCD's like my LG handle ball sport very well indeed, I think the 'blur' thing is a bit of an urban myth which refers to older 16ms or 32 ms machines. (one of those catch phrases like "plasma burn in" - used to be a problem but apparently not any more. The only problem I find is "macro blocking" in swimming, where the picture tends to split into lots of squares. However I think this is more of a bitrate thing, as the TV doesn't do it with DVDs such as Planet Earth (which pumps about 13 mpbs to the set as opposed to whatever the free to air channels use, I suppose about 4 or 5 mpbs).

I've never seen an HD CRT, now I'm used to watching a rock steady CRT screen, whenever I see a CRT all I can see is annoying flicker. Does 100mhz remove flicker? Is it actually possible to buy a CRT that displays 720 or 1080 scanned lines as opposed to 576? When I turn on my 51cm Sony trinitron in the spare room it's nice to see the warm glowing colours and wouldn't mind a CRT HD as a second set if it's practicable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly an interesting thread and relevant for me as my trusty Loewe Planus CRT 76cm is showing signs of deterioration and may need to be moved out to the family room

The issue that I have is that I sit just on 3M from my displays - both the Loewe and a 92in projector screen - and really can't move the seating position much, maybe half a metre either way. Based on theory I'm probably too close for the projector when feeding it a 1280x720 signal from my HS50, but I'm still happy with the picture quality. My question is whether to go for a 42 or 50 in screen to replace Loewe and, more importantly, which resolution - I'm sold on HD so it's 1280x720 (min) or 1980 x 1080 - any advice would be appreciated?

PS - Source material includes SD Foxtel (majority of the viewing), HD FTA, SD DVD and HDDVD

Cheers

Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 50” screen is small at 3 meters.

I have been watching a 57” 1080 screen form 2.8 meters for the last 2 years, and no way I would buy anything smaller. In fact my next display will be 1080 and 65-70”, still viewed from 2.8 meters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A 50” screen is small at 3 meters.

I have been watching a 57” 1080 screen form 2.8 meters for the last 2 years, and no way I would buy anything smaller. In fact my next display will be 1080 and 65-70”, still viewed from 2.8 meters.

A 50" screen is not small at 3 meters !

owen have you any comprehension that just because 50" is small for you that it might not be for everyone else ?.

infact it might be "bloody huge" for the mass majority out there I'd say !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


A 50" screen is not small at 3 meters !

owen have you any comprehension that just because 50" is small for you that it might not be for everyone else ?.

infact it might be "bloody huge" for the mass majority out there I'd say !

A viewing distance of 3 meters is about right for me when viewing my 72" Toshi DLP

This article reckons 70-80" is about right for 3 meters as well and this will become common in a few years as technology improves and prices drop.

Can't wait to get that 80" flat panel for $3K :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A 50" screen is not small at 3 meters !

owen have you any comprehension that just because 50" is small for you that it might not be for everyone else ?.

infact it might be "bloody huge" for the mass majority out there I'd say !

hehe well he did just say that he's coming from a larger screen in his 57" CRT.

Furthermore, the guy he was responding to has a 92" projector in the same room, same seating position.

I dont think theres a fixed display in Australia that he wouldn't feel was "small" after watching such a massive screen in the exact same environment. Even one of hte 70" SXRD's or 72" Toshiba's are going to give him that slight 'letdown' feeling when he switches off the Projector and turns that on instead.

To put in in perspective, I watch my 70" 1080 display from just under 3m. Though this is a fraction close for SD stuff, but absolutely brilliant when you put on a HD Video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's what you get used to .. Last year my 37 inch LCD looked huge, then over time it 'just' became the TV. Visitors rave over the massive screen size :D

Recently we went on holiday and stayed in motels with 34cm tvs - on getting home I just sat in front of the TV and revelled in the huge picture!

With a very large lounge room I could easily handle that 80 inch screen, but after a while I'm sure I would be craving for a screen the SIZE OF THE BLOODY WALL!! (if someone could provide me with content that I could watch on it!!) :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's what you get used to .. Last year my 37 inch LCD looked huge, then over time it 'just' became the TV. Visitors rave over the massive screen size :D

Recently we went on holiday and stayed in motels with 34cm tvs - on getting home I just sat in front of the TV and revelled in the huge picture!

With a very large lounge room I could easily handle that 80 inch screen, but after a while I'm sure I would be craving for a screen the SIZE OF THE BLOODY WALL!! (if someone could provide me with content that I could watch on it!!) :blink:

not everyone want s 80" panel in their lounge room either.

certainly given the poxy quality of digital broadcast at present I certainly wouldnt want to be watching a digitla display of any kind of that size at 3m ! keep in mind the majority of our diet is SD at present and it would look very poxy at that sort of distance. unless you have a CRT based display I suppose that woudl smooth over the picture artifacts rather than make them very obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


One of the things I really dislike on the sub-SD sets (<576 lines) I've seen are the prominent "jaggies" on lines on the screen. This is when they are fed PAL DVD or HD signals.

I haven't had a chance to really research it yet, but IMHO all of the talk of how much detail you can resolve, and that is why SD is OK at normal viewing distances may be missing a point.

Your eyes are VERY sensitive to sharp edges and brightness, and not so sensitive to colour. This is how PAL TV works, the high resolution black & white signal makes up the picture (and takes up most bandwidth), and the colour is crayoned in over the top with large kindergarten Crayolas. Your eyes are also very sensitive to movement.

I think that the appearance/disappearance of conversion arttifacts like jaggies is visible even at distances greater than the resolving of your eyes for a static image. I'll bet you could spot a single white pixel jammed on, on a screen of black. Even at 2x the "resolution" distance. So, we've just proved that you can (in certain cases) resolve more detail than expected.

If that white pixel is blinking on and off you'll have an even better chance of seeing it (which is why we have blinkers on cars and strobes on planes).

If you have lots of little edges appearing and disappearing as an SD set tries to valiantly display an HD signal, my belief is that you'd see these, the same way you see a "jammed on" pixel. In fact more, because your visual system also has sophisticated motion detectors.

I think that the argument for HD sets being a waste of time because of a single metric- eye resolution for a static image at a particular distance- is simplistic and misses lots of other characteristics of our visual perception.

Anyway, as people have said before, if SD is good enough for you it is good enough for you! Just like some people spend money on more expensive wine, some people spend more money on HD sets. And just like with wine, people's visual senses are as different as their olfactory senses. Just because someone can't taste the difference between the 2001 and 2002 vintages doesn't mean it isn't there (it also doesn't prove it is there!).

Merry Xmas (in clear defiance of PC posturing)!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A 50" screen is not small at 3 meters !

owen have you any comprehension that just because 50" is small for you that it might not be for everyone else ?.

infact it might be "bloody huge" for the mass majority out there I'd say !

Yes we all know you don’t like big screens (hard to believe if you had ever lived with one), but for someone used to a 92” screen, a 50” is bloody tiny.

A 50” at 3 meters is like me viewing my little 86cm from 2 meters, which we normally do. The SD picture is very good, and even Foxtel looks good most of the time, however 1080 HD is just wasted on such a screen size – viewing distance combination.

I constantly find myself leaning forward to around 1.5 meters when watching the little 86cm, its just too small, and I never find myself immersed in the viewing experience, it’s just watching TV.

Viewing the 57” at 2.8 meters is just WAY more entertaining, no comparison.

I wonder how many 42” Plasma owners would not like a 50” if it was the same price, and how many 50” owners would not go bigger if cost was not an issue, and they could get it pasted the other half? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the things I really dislike on the sub-SD sets (<576 lines) I've seen are the prominent "jaggies" on lines on the screen. This is when they are fed PAL DVD or HD signals.

I haven't had a chance to really research it yet, but IMHO all of the talk of how much detail you can resolve, and that is why SD is OK at normal viewing distances may be missing a point.

If you are siting far enough away that you can’t see much difference between SD and HD resolution, scan lines, (jaggies) in SD source are not a problem.

In fact, with film based SD source, you can view much closer then that before jaggies become an issue, if the HD display is doing a good job of upscaling.

SD displays viewed up close just don’t look good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I wonder how many 42” Plasma owners would not like a 50” if it was the same price, and how many 50” owners would not go bigger if cost was not an issue, and they could get it pasted the other half? :blink:

Well you have got me there owen,I have the 42pv500a at 2.8 metres and now wish that I had bought the 50inch.One thing to remember though is most people when moving into the digital tv realm are coming from 66-68 cm screen sizes and 42 inch screen sizes look massive initially.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes we all know you don’t like big screens (hard to believe if you had ever lived with one), but for someone used to a 92” screen, a 50” is bloody tiny.

A 50” at 3 meters is like me viewing my little 86cm from 2 meters, which we normally do. The SD picture is very good, and even Foxtel looks good most of the time, however 1080 HD is just wasted on such a screen size – viewing distance combination.

I constantly find myself leaning forward to around 1.5 meters when watching the little 86cm, its just too small, and I never find myself immersed in the viewing experience, it’s just watching TV.

Viewing the 57” at 2.8 meters is just WAY more entertaining, no comparison.

I wonder how many 42” Plasma owners would not like a 50” if it was the same price, and how many 50” owners would not go bigger if cost was not an issue, and they could get it pasted the other half? :blink:

did I say I dont like big screens ? its you who keep going on about any reasonable size screen as "small" and "bloody tiny". and that anythign less than your gianormous screens a waste of space.

1080 on a 50" screen is not wasted at 3m and neither is 1080 on a 86cm screen at 2m. and yeah i'm sure FTA it looks reasonable to your eyes only thing can put that down to is that your using analog crts that smooth over details and digital artifacts.

you obviously have a real problem understandign perspective. and that not all people have the same needs or requirements as you do.

and its not all about screen size either. physical size of these tvs is a factor too. man can you understand that not every one want a big huge behemoth TV in their lounge room !

Even a 65" plasma is one big thing let alone a bloody huge RPTV. on the other hand a pj is a different matter. you'll find lot more people quite happy with a very lounge room friendly pj setup where you have a thin screen that drops down for serious viewing with good quality source, and we even have high def disc sources now to feed them to produce top quality pics. A much better solution if chasing screen size in my opinion. A proper pj setup now yeah that would make yoru RPTV look pidly by comparison for screen size owen.

Really cant understand why you havent gone for a pj setup if screen size is all your after owen. wasting your time with these scaller screen sizes anyother way :P:D

~One thing to remember though is most people when moving into the digital tv realm are coming from 66-68 cm screen sizes and 42 inch screen sizes look massive initially.

exactly and how many are coming from TVs even smaller ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really think each person has their own preference, its like in a cinema some people love having the screen smack bang around them so sit in the front row, others like having the screen take up most of their vision so will sit somewhere in the middle. Others like having a border around the screen so will sit further back. Is anybody wrong here??

When I got my 76cm widescreen it was huge, now its normal. The 70 inch I'm getting will be massive for a while then it will just be normal.

Even a 65" plasma is one big thing let alone a bloody huge RPTV.

To me a RPTV isn't massive because I have floor standing speakers paying more for a thin panel seem crazy because the speaker and cabinets around the tv already project out and the telly having a depth of 61cms with a 70inch screen isn't bloody huge. well IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really think each person has their own preference, its like in a cinema some people love having the screen smack bang around them so sit in the front row, others like having the screen take up most of their vision so will sit somewhere in the middle. Others like having a border around the screen so will sit further back. Is anybody wrong here??

When I got my 76cm widescreen it was huge, now its normal. The 70 inch I'm getting will be massive for a while then it will just be normal.

To me a RPTV isn't massive because I have floor standing speakers paying more for a thin panel seem crazy because the speaker and cabinets around the tv already project out and the telly having a depth of 61cms with a 70inch screen isn't bloody huge. well IMO

exactly everyone would have their own preference. and to many a 70inch tV with a 60cm or 2 foot depth is bloody huge taking up a lot of room in a loungeroom that not everyone will be comfortable with. on the other hand as you say for your self its just what your after :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Since Martin is happy with 720p on a 92” screen, I think he would be happy with something a lot bigger then a 50” if cost where not an issue.

Why is that such a problem for you? You don’t have to watch it now do you mate?

Put that into perspective.

I don’t have a projector because I just don’t like the picture quality they produce.

It’s not a patch on a good RPTV or Plasma.

A big Plasma can be wall mounted and hidden behind a curtain, so you don’t have to look at it when not in use.

A big Panel or RPTV could also be built into the wall or a wall unit if required, and can be very aesthetically pleasing if you put some time thought and effort into the installation. F111 is thinking of doing just that with his 60” SXRD.

Some people are prepared to go to the extra effort and expence for the results they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the lively feedback

Just to expand on my setup the projector is mainly for DVD or big ticket TV events (Bathurst, Grand Final etc) - it's a lay back and get immersed thing, a la Gold Class, but does require near total darkness for the HS50. The vast majority of my viewing is on the 76cm Loewe so while coming down from a 92" makes any fixed panel display look small it's really more of a coming up from the 32 in Loewe that I'm interested in - especially for day time watching when I don't want to turn the lounge room into a cave

Based on discussions to date 42" may be too small at 3M so it really looks like a 50" 1280x720(min) plasma (Pioneer or Panasonic) or 46-47in 1920x1280 LCD (Sony or Toshiba) is the way to go. Given my mix of viewing would the higher res LCDs be a benefit (especially with the HDDVD discs) or are the Plasmas a better all rounder for Foxtel, SD DVDs, Xbox and HDDVDs?

Cheers

Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the lively feedback

Just to expand on my setup the projector is mainly for DVD or big ticket TV events (Bathurst, Grand Final etc) - it's a lay back and get immersed thing, a la Gold Class, but does require near total darkness for the HS50. The vast majority of my viewing is on the 76cm Loewe so while coming down from a 92" makes any fixed panel display look small it's really more of a coming up from the 32 in Loewe that I'm interested in - especially for day time watching when I don't want to turn the lounge room into a cave

Based on discussions to date 42" may be too small at 3M so it really looks like a 50" 1280x720(min) plasma (Pioneer or Panasonic) or 46-47in 1920x1280 LCD (Sony or Toshiba) is the way to go. Given my mix of viewing would the higher res LCDs be a benefit (especially with the HDDVD discs) or are the Plasmas a better all rounder for Foxtel, SD DVDs, Xbox and HDDVDs?

Cheers

Martin

and that will be like a lot of people who for day time everyday viewing even though they might have a pj might not fire it up and use a smaller screen instead.

at 3m regardless of what owen might say I do think a 50" be it a plasma or priceir lcd would do a great job on HD be it FTA or hi-def format disc as source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since Martin is happy with 720p on a 92” screen, I think he would be happy with something a lot bigger then a 50” if cost where not an issue.

Why is that such a problem for you? You don’t have to watch it now do you mate?

Put that into perspective.

I don’t have a projector because I just don’t like the picture quality they produce.

It’s not a patch on a good RPTV or Plasma.

A big Plasma can be wall mounted and hidden behind a curtain, so you don’t have to look at it when not in use.

A big Panel or RPTV could also be built into the wall or a wall unit if required, and can be very aesthetically pleasing if you put some time thought and effort into the installation. F111 is thinking of doing just that with his 60” SXRD.

Some people are prepared to go to the extra effort and expence for the results they want.

I think your very confused yourself jsut reading yoru very contradictory comments

Exactly, a standard CRT TV looks bad at 1 meter.Know one would want to view one that close.

The whole idea of 1080 HD is to make very large images look good up close for a cinema experience.

Know one is arguing that HD is not of value on a 42” screen at 2.5 meters, it most certainly is, and I would always recommend a HD model for distances less the 3.5 meters, but 4 meters it is a different story all together.

Are you seriously suggesting that you can see more the SD resolution on a 42” at 4 meters plus? I know damn well that I can’t.

I remember looking at a row of 42” Plasmas displaying the 9 HD loop, some SD and some HD models. At 4 meters plus, the resolvable detail looked the same on all.

Some models did look better then others, but this was for reasons other then resolution.

For a 2.7 meters viewing distance don’t even consider an SD Plasma, you will see the pixel structure, and it will not be pretty.

at one point you say no one would argue the value of a 42" screen at 2.5 meters and recommend a HD model for distances under 3.5m

~

A 50” at 3 meters is like me viewing my little 86cm from 2 meters, which we normally do. The SD picture is very good, and even Foxtel looks good most of the time, however 1080 HD is just wasted on such a screen size – viewing distance combination.

I constantly find myself leaning forward to around 1.5 meters when watching the little 86cm, its just too small, and I never find myself immersed in the viewing experience, it’s just watching TV.

~

and then you say HD is wasted on a 50" screen at 3m ?

and I dont knwo about PJs not being good enough in the PQ department. The few I've seen dLP & CRT are about the pinacle of PQ that I've come across certainly better than any RPTV or any other screen display I've come across.

some of the very best systems out there use PJs owen if PQ & picure size is what your chasing I hardly think that theyre second to what can achived with a rptv sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never said a 50” Plasma would not do a great job, it most certainly will, just that something bigger would be nice if price was not an issue.

A good 50” Plasma is definitely preferable to a 46” LCD IMHO, especially at 3 meters.

You would only want to consider an LCD if you have a lot of reflection problems, or the room is very bright most of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Never said a 50” Plasma would not do a great job, it most certainly will, just that something bigger would be nice if price was not an issue.

A good 50” Plasma is definitely preferable to a 46” LCD IMHO, especially at 3 meters.

You would only want to consider an LCD if you have a lot of reflection problems, or the room is very bright most of the time.

Thanks Owen, so the extra res of HD LCDs doesn't beat the other benefits of, say, a 1366x768 plasma in my case?

Cheers

Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Owen, so the extra res of HD LCDs doesn't beat the other benefits of, say, a 1366x768 plasma in my case?

Cheers

Martin

martin your best advised to go check out for your self. somethign like the latest sony X series lcd are priceir but would be well worth checkign out I reckon. woudl give the the lower res 50" plasmas a good run for their money in my opinion.

with a hi-def source the higher res displays would be stunnign I reckon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A big Panel or RPTV could also be built into the wall or a wall unit if required, and can be very aesthetically pleasing if you put some time thought and effort into the installation. F111 is thinking of doing just that with his 60” SXRD.

Some people are prepared to go to the extra effort and expence for the results they want.

Yeah thats what im doing as well with the 70". Building a false wall to sit the TV, amp, HTPC etc.

When done it will look exactly like a 70" plasma without the stupid price tag or cables running down the wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on discussions to date 42" may be too small at 3M so it really looks like a 50" 1280x720(min) plasma (Pioneer or Panasonic) or 46-47in 1920x1280 LCD (Sony or Toshiba) is the way to go. Given my mix of viewing would the higher res LCDs be a benefit (especially with the HDDVD discs) or are the Plasmas a better all rounder for Foxtel, SD DVDs, Xbox and HDDVDs?

I'll sidestep the Alebonau v Owen sidehow, and offer my opinion on this: if you are going to watch a 50" at 3m, then in my humble opinion, a 1 Megapixel screen (whether it be 1280 x 720 or 1366 x 768 or whatever) will be sufficient. Whether people accept the science or not, your eyes simply won't be able to resolve all of the detail offered by a 46" 1920 x 1080 (2 megapixel) LCD at a distance of 3m. Check this:

http://www.carltonbale.com/wp-content/uplo...ution_chart.png

A 50" 1 Megapixel plasma will still offer you a quality HD viewing experience and, IMO, is a better (and cheaper) option than a 46" 2 Megapixel LCD, at least for your circumstances. Furthermore, in my experience, SD looks pretty lousy on the Bravia X LCDs.

That all said, I think the amount of HD content is going to grow very quickly from here. If you can wait another year, you might not be too worried about buying a screen that does a good job on SD. And your 3m viewing distance is, IMO, perfect for getting rid of the dual proj/plasma setup and going for a single 1920 x 1080 70" screen or thereabouts. At least once HD content becomes more common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Classifieds Statistics


    Currently Active Ads

    Total Sales (Since 2018)

    Total Sales Value (Last 14 Days)

    Total Ads Value (Since March 2020)
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...