Early 1080p adopters beware: CES 2006 does not look good - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 10:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sfhub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 9,527
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood
If a Cable company or a sattelite offered say 8 totally uncompressed HD local channels--how many more totally uncompressed HD channels could they offer? If they could offer just 20 totally uncompressed HD channels I would buy their service. Could they offer that many? For all the speculators out there: When will we see the next Voom--What year will we see some company such a thing? How many years will we be plagued with HD-Lite?
What do you mean by totally uncompressed? Do you mean 1920x1080 vs 1280x1080 HD-Lite or do you mean higher bit rate or do you mean un(re)touched HD locals. Mpg by it's very nature is compressed so there is no such thing as totally uncompressed. What is mutable is the level of compression we need to tolerate.
sfhub is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 10:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Scott Gammans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Brambleton, VA (Suburban Washington, DC)
Posts: 3,265
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hm, interesting. I wonder what impact (if any) this will have on people considering high-end projectors/displays that aren't 1080p (e.g., three-chip 720p projectors). Although anyone buying a 720p display will obviously have made a conscious decision to forgo 1080p, they'll still have the same connectivity issues to contend with.
Scott Gammans is offline  
post #183 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 10:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary McCoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: San Jose, California, USA
Posts: 6,263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Don't overlook the fact that PC's are capable of true 1080p today. Last night I had my screen divided into quadrants and was watching news in one window, playing cards in another, and surfing this web site with two windows.

I view the 37" Westinghouse from 60" distance. Thanks to the fine pixel pitch of the 1080p display, text is very crisp and readable. When viewing HD full screen, the better quality 1080i OTA signals are jaw-droppingly beautifull at 1920X1080@60Hz. By the way, folks, most of the OTA signals I get are 1080i although some look better than others. 720p signals don't lose much in scaling as well, using the high quality scaler in a HTPC. I think 1080p is the most appropriate display resolution for today's HD signals. I admit, few OTA settop boxes and few cable or DSS signals offer the clean crisp images of the MIT MyHD tuner I use in my HTPC, but they are improving. Also I own up to the fact I live in Silicon Valley where we have a couple of dozen digital broadcasters and I have a big UHF antenna with rotator on the roof.

I have read much knashing of teeth and sage advice from contributors to this thread that 1080p is premature and you need to wait until the technology matures. To the contrary, one needs to avoid the not-quite-up-to-snuff Sharp, Syntax Olevia, etc. displays and acquire only those like the Westinghouse that will accept 1080p from a PC or will properly deinterlace 1080i signals. This Forum is a great place to seperate the wheat from the chaff in that regard.

My point being, 1080p is leading edge, not bleeding edge technology, if one has the proper video source. Due to Forum rules I can't tell you what I paid for mine, only that if you shop carefully, you can acquire 1080p for at least twenty-five percent below the manufacturers suggested retail price.

Some folks apparently want an all-in-one-box HDTV solution. Get real - you are gonna insist upon a 1080p image but use the tiny TV speakers? With all the Dolby 5.1 audio that's being broadcast? That's like using an old B&W tube set for viewing the HD signals!

Gary

Gary McCoy
The United States Constitution ©1791. All Rights Reserved.

Gary McCoy is offline  
post #184 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 11:07 AM
Member
 
dave43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_R
How correct you are. Think about the investment in cameras and control equipement the broadcasters just made. Think about the bandwidth issues. DirectTv can't keep up. Cable won't do it because they want revenue streams from OnDemand, etc. They also want multicasting. Now think about the investment people are making in 1080i/720p sets. They are set out pace tube sets. That's big. People are not going to run out and buy new 1080p sets any time soon. We on this board are a microcosm of the HD world and know wha't around the corner. The average 'Joe' doesn't. I've been watching HD for over six years now and it's just now becoming main stream. 1080p has it's place but not any time soon in the mainstream.
Most of my friends have never seen HD or even care. When I said I had a plasma They only thought of the mtv show "cribs". What percentage of the population even has an HDTV? and out of that percentage how many are feeding an atsc signal. Bottom line is the source will always be the bottleneck until HD is mainstream and there is money to be made. The only bright spot is HD-DVD and Bluray. I just cringe at the thought of purchasing another library of discs.
dave43 is offline  
post #185 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 11:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cajieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Space Coast, Florida
Posts: 4,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave43
Most of my friends have never seen HD or even care. When I said I had a plasma They only thought of the mtv show "cribs". What percentage of the population even has an HDTV? and out of that percentage how many are feeding an atsc signal. Bottom line is the source will always be the bottleneck until HD is mainstream and there is money to be made. The only bright spot is HD-DVD and Bluray. I just cringe at the thought of purchasing another library of discs.
I don't know how you can base your assuptions upon your small circle of "friends". You don't list your geographical area, but in my little abode of Florida there's quite a number of HD broadcasting. Even when you're watching SD in the evening or most all major sporting events, the adverts that this program is being broadcasted "in HDTV" is plastered all over the screen at the begining & during the show. During the recent NFL Playoff Games & the Rose Bowl NCAA National Football Game there were numerous commercials & ad spots for HDTV's. Perhaps 3-4 years ago, I'd agree w/you, but no longer is this "never seen HD or even care" attitude the case for the norm. A vast majority of those folks replacing their TV's are getting HDTV's of one sort or another. Maybe you could do your friends a big favor and introduce to them to current video tech.
cajieboy is offline  
post #186 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 12:46 PM
Advanced Member
 
LCD1080's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilburpan
Well, just to be picky* field of vision may be 40 degrees but visual acuity will fall off as you go off center. Many movies will have action happening at the sides of the frame**, so you would be doing some head swivelling at the least...
Even allowing for the fall off in visual acuity along the peripheral field one still does not have to move one's head to fully view the 50" panel at 6' because the eyes themselves may rotate to catch extraneous movement along the sides of the frame.
LCD1080 is offline  
post #187 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 01:17 PM
Member
 
dave43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by cajieboy
I don't know how you can base your assuptions upon your small circle of "friends". You don't list your geographical area, but in my little abode of Florida there's quite a number of HD broadcasting. Even when you're watching SD in the evening or most all major sporting events, the adverts that this program is being broadcasted "in HDTV" is plastered all over the screen at the begining & during the show. During the recent NFL Playoff Games & the Rose Bowl NCAA National Football Game there were numerous commercials & ad spots for HDTV's. Perhaps 3-4 years ago, I'd agree w/you, but no longer is this "never seen HD or even care" attitude the case for the norm. A vast majority of those folks replacing their TV's are getting HDTV's of one sort or another. Maybe you could do your friends a big favor and introduce to them to current video tech.

I live in Minneapolis. I shouldn't say none of my friends have an HDTV. One friend has a plasma but he worked for many years at Phillips and has his own consulting firm (So he is in the industry). I lived in Cape Coral, FL and spent alot of time in Naples and Marco Island. Once again i didn't notice many HDTV's. I'm not talking about content, I'm talking hardware. Most people on this forum have the means to afford these technologies. If you look at the general population of the U.S, the majority make below $30,000/year. Many people making this kind of money will find it hard to make a $1,000 purchase for a TV. I'd be very interested in percentage of HDTV market penetration.
dave43 is offline  
post #188 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 01:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cajieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Space Coast, Florida
Posts: 4,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave43
I live in Minneapolis. I shouldn't say none of my friends have an HDTV. One friend has a plasma but he worked for many years at Phillips and has his own consulting firm (So he is in the industry). I lived in Cape Coral, FL and spent alot of time in Naples and Marco Island. Once again i didn't notice many HDTV's. I'm not talking about content, I'm talking hardware. Most people on this forum have the means to afford these technologies. If you look at the general population of the U.S, the majority make below $30,000/year. Many people making this kind of money will find it hard to make a $1,000 purchase for a TV. I'd be very interested in percentage of HDTV market penetration.
I think I'm now understanding more or less the gist of your post, and in fact have made somewhat similar queries and/or statements about this market penetration. When remarking about how long are we going to get 4:3 SD broadcasts, I've remarked about my many travels and noticing nearly ALL the TV's in the hotels, lounges & resturants are plain ole 4:3 TV's...and I'm speaking of Marriotts, Hiltons, Crowne Plazas, Doubltrees, etc. So no debate on that score.

But if you are in the market for a new TV, all one has to do is visit the Stores, and you'll be hard pressed to find any analog 4:3 TV's for sale. In fact, it's getting hard to find 16:9 HDTV Tubes w/choices being few & all under 34". What you do see in the Stores are many 37" & UP HDTV's ranging from all types of RPTV's to LCD's & Plasma displays. This is what has dominated the market for least the last 2 years, and will continue to do so as the trend is definitely large screen HDTV's.


While noting all this, the question of market penetration arises. I don't know the fiqures, but I think what we under estimate is the actual breadth & scope of this huge market. Whereby, perhaps many of your friends do not yet (they will) own a HDTV, but yet this market is flourishing w/millions of HDTV owners & subscribers of HD.
cajieboy is offline  
post #189 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 02:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rysa4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCD1080
Even allowing for the fall off in visual acuity along the peripheral field one still does not have to move one's head to fully view the 50" panel at 6' because the eyes themselves may rotate to catch extraneous movement along the sides of the frame.
Well Ya. If you think about it and concentrate on not moving your head- with a resultant headache due to unnatural extaocular motion.
Rysa4 is offline  
post #190 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 02:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
orogogus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Posts: 1,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by optivity
Buying a 1080p PDP with a one-way CableCARD slot will be a mistake; but I support your advocacy regarding, and recommend you pursue an early adoption of 1080p PDP technology. We need people like you to be the "guinea pigs" while manufacturers improve new technologies to meet the requirements of these evolving standards and products that have yet to enter the market, so when our turn to buy comes... we can pay less & get more.
Ole!

I endorse this post. :)
orogogus is offline  
post #191 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 02:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Joe_R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Delaware
Posts: 1,194
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
My neighbor just made the leap to HD. First one of the immediate 10 houses. He bought a 60" Sony SXRD (xbr). He gives me the 'latest and greatest' speil, 1080p etc. Then I inform him while it's capable of 1080p, it won't accept a 1080p input. At first he was confused. Then he got over it because it was basically half price through a Sony employee purchase. Then he said, oh well, it's still HD and it looks great. And it did.
But my point here; is it's very confusing to us, let along 'joe' public, on what is being purchased. Everything has a spin. LCD vs. plasma, 1080i, 720p, 1080p, hdmi 1.0, hdmi 1.3 etc. etc. People are buying tv's and even if there is 1080p content, the will not go buy another just because. They will let their stb or tv downconvert and be happy. I don't think 720p will become the 'vhs' picture we once had compared to 1080p. Bottom line, people are buying now, blindly, and will deal with what they have for years to come.
Joe_R is offline  
post #192 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 02:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
LCD1080's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rysa4
Well Ya. If you think about it and concentrate on not moving your head- with a resultant headache due to unnatural extaocular motion.
There's nothing unnatural about moving one's eyes while viewing television. People do it all the time. I just got back from BestBuy where I made a point of viewing a 50 inch panel from 6 feet. Not once did my head move in over 5 minutes of viewing. Try it yourself and see if you don't agree.
LCD1080 is offline  
post #193 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 02:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
orogogus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Posts: 1,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldcband
Maybe I don't get this 1080P stuff either. My question is it seems to me that SED displays where the hit of the 2006 ces show. These displays where displaying 720P and the comments where nothing but awestruck, so if these are amazing at 720P why all this 1080P talk? Maybe someone can explain this. Whats missing?
Because resolution is only part of the PQ equation, brightness and contrast are far and away more important to the way our eyes and brain works unless you are really close to the display. SED looks good because of this- a very bright, but at the same time highly contrasted image. The resolution isn't hyper critical at smaller sizes and normal viewing distances.
orogogus is offline  
post #194 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 02:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
orogogus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Posts: 1,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by assJack1
Thanks Rich. I didnt realize the HD-DVD was only 1080i. That makes me hope that BR "wins" even more.
HD-DVD spec is 1080p/24 (and 30p and 60i/p IIRC) just like Blu-Ray. The first gen Toshiba players for some reason have decided not to include a 1080p output however... *shrug* but it's not a limitation of the format.
orogogus is offline  
post #195 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 03:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
orogogus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Posts: 1,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrubin
when will we see the next VOOM?

never

when will we see end of HD Lite?

4-5 years at the earliest :(

IMO
I think there is a market for full-rez VOD HD content. I know I'd pay for it, even if I had to wait a bit for it to download. Here's to hoping for more (and another feather in the cap of reasons to get a 1080p display).
orogogus is offline  
post #196 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 04:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rysa4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by orogogus
Because resolution is only part of the PQ equation, brightness and contrast are far and away more important to the way our eyes and brain works unless you are really close to the display. SED looks good because of this- a very bright, but at the same time highly contrasted image. The resolution isn't hyper critical at smaller sizes and normal viewing distances.
SED is a different technology altogether. This is more of a LCD/DLP/PLASMA/LYCIS wow than a resolution specific issue.
Rysa4 is offline  
post #197 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 04:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rysa4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 1,909
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCD1080
There's nothing unnatural about moving one's eyes while viewing television. People do it all the time. I just got back from BestBuy where I made a point of viewing a 50 inch panel from 6 feet. Not once did my head move in over 5 minutes of viewing. Try it yourself and see if you don't agree.
There is also a natural head motion as well. In the example given, one would have to consciously restrict head motion to use only their eyes for the viewing angle/side to side you origianlly referred to.
Rysa4 is offline  
post #198 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 04:18 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,601
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1400 Post(s)
Liked: 1520
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCD1080
The SMPTE viewing distance calculator states that a viewing distance of just under 6' is required to obtain a 36 degree viewing angle on a 50 inch panel. A person's field of view is 40 degrees which means that one can see over a 40 degree angle without swiveling one's head. Since one may view all points on a 50 inch panel from a distance of 6 feet without moving one's head your conclusion would not appear to be valid.

http://www.myhometheater.homestead.c...alculator.html

I was not referring to a 50" screen.....I don't consider that a 'large screen'. I'm referring more to screen sizes in the 65" and above category that would really benefit from the higher 1080p resolution. I will also contend that most people do not sit 6' or closer to even a 50" screen.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #199 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 04:26 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,601
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1400 Post(s)
Liked: 1520
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCD1080
Even allowing for the fall off in visual acuity along the peripheral field one still does not have to move one's head to fully view the 50" panel at 6' because the eyes themselves may rotate to catch extraneous movement along the sides of the frame.
What a wonderful viewing experience as one swivels their eyes all night to 'catch the action'. Sorry, sitting that close is just not that common as people don't like to view TV that way. The next time you go to the movies, take a look at the front rows and you'll probably see them empty since people don't like to swivel their head (or eyes) as they watch a movie.

I'll defer to the neurooncologist! ;)
Ken Ross is offline  
post #200 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 04:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sfhub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 9,527
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross
What a wonderful viewing experience as one swivels their eyes all night to 'catch the action'.
So it is *truly* just like being at the ballpark, but with the comforts of home :) :) Swivel your head/eyes to catch that Bond's home run.
sfhub is offline  
post #201 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 04:30 PM - Thread Starter
Super Moderator
 
markrubin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 23,084
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 478
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross

I'll defer to the neurooncologist! ;)
I had to look that one up:

Definition of Neurooncologist

Neurooncologist: A physician trained to diagnose and treat patients with brain tumors and other types of tumors of the nervous system. From neuro- + oncology and sometimes written with a hyphen as neuro-oncologist.

please take the high road in every post
if you see a problematic post, please do not quote it or respond to it: report it to the mods to handle
markrubin is offline  
post #202 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 04:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,601
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1400 Post(s)
Liked: 1520
AVS...it's not just "TV" anymore. :)
Ken Ross is offline  
post #203 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 06:05 PM
Advanced Member
 
LCD1080's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross
What a wonderful viewing experience as one swivels their eyes all night to 'catch the action'. Sorry, sitting that close is just not that common as people don't like to view TV that way. The next time you go to the movies, take a look at the front rows and you'll probably see them empty since people don't like to swivel their head (or eyes) as they watch a movie.

I'll defer to the neurooncologist! ;)
The primary reason people don't sit in the front rows of a movie theater is that one's head must be tilted to a high angle to view the film which is quite uncomfortable. Were that not the case I'd be sitting up front on a regular basis. The amount of eye movement required to view a 50" screen at 6' is negligible. The amount of head movement at that distance is nil. Sorry I just don't buy what you're saying.
LCD1080 is offline  
post #204 of 261 Old 01-11-2006, 06:12 PM
Advanced Member
 
LCD1080's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross
What a wonderful viewing experience as one swivels their eyes all night to 'catch the action'. Sorry, sitting that close is just not that common as people don't like to view TV that way. The next time you go to the movies, take a look at the front rows and you'll probably see them empty since people don't like to swivel their head (or eyes) as they watch a movie.

I'll defer to the neurooncologist! ;)
The primary reason people don't sit in the front rows of a movie theater is that one's head must be tilted to a high angle to view the film which is quite uncomfortable. Further the analogy is strained at best because the screen image viewed from the front seat of a movie theater occupies a field of view that is far in excess of 40 degrees. The amount of eye movement required to view a 50" screen at 6' is negligible. The amount of head movement at that distance is nil. Sorry I just don't buy what you're saying.
LCD1080 is offline  
post #205 of 261 Old 01-12-2006, 09:34 AM
Member
 
wilburpan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCD1080
There's nothing unnatural about moving one's eyes while viewing television. People do it all the time. I just got back from BestBuy where I made a point of viewing a 50 inch panel from 6 feet. Not once did my head move in over 5 minutes of viewing. Try it yourself and see if you don't agree.
5 minutes is one thing. If you can do that while watching one of the LOTR movies, then that is another thing altogether.

There may be nothing unnatural about moving one's eyes while viewing television, but it is more natural to also move your head while trying to track objects visually. That is how our brains and muscles are wired.

To get this thread back on track, I believe the subject was the state of flux in HDTV technology, specifically the current implementation of 1080p. For me, I've been in the market for a HDTV to replace my now 11 year old 27" CRT for about a year now. I was looking for something in the 40"-46" range, because of size constraints. At this point, with the way that the technology is in flux, I'm actually more inclined to get a 37" (or maybe even a 32") HDTV for now, because I am expecting an HDTV purchased today to be outdated within a few years, and a smaller TV would be easier to fit into the bedroom, should I buy a replacement.
wilburpan is offline  
post #206 of 261 Old 01-12-2006, 10:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
cajieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Space Coast, Florida
Posts: 4,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 57
If you're still viewing an older analog 27" CRT then by all means upgrade IMMEDIATELY. The jump in PQ will astound you as it does anyone that switches from analog SD to HD (lite or otherwise). When I switched over 3 years ago from an older analog Sony 27XBR to a Sony 40XBR HDTV the results were amazing, and I also suggest you upgrade your DVD Player at the same time as they are relatively cheap and offer many PQ rewards. BTW, your purchase today will NOT be outdated in a few years. How far away do you sit from your display?
cajieboy is offline  
post #207 of 261 Old 01-12-2006, 10:33 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,601
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1400 Post(s)
Liked: 1520
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCD1080
The primary reason people don't sit in the front rows of a movie theater is that one's head must be tilted to a high angle to view the film which is quite uncomfortable. Further the analogy is strained at best because the screen image viewed from the front seat of a movie theater occupies a field of view that is far in excess of 40 degrees. The amount of eye movement required to view a 50" screen at 6' is negligible. The amount of head movement at that distance is nil. Sorry I just don't buy what you're saying.
Don't buy it. But I don't know of any of my friends that watches a screen 50" or greater from 6' or less. Oh, and the other reason people don't sit that close in the theaters is that many get headaches at that distance.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #208 of 261 Old 01-12-2006, 11:04 AM
Advanced Member
 
LCD1080's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross
Don't buy it. But I don't know of any of my friends that watches a screen 50" or greater from 6' or less. Oh, and the other reason people don't sit that close in the theaters is that many get headaches at that distance.
That's because there are no 1080P 50 inch panels on the market at this time. Once people start to buy these 50 inchers I expect many of your friends will be doing just that in order to derive the PQ benefit of all those 1080 lines.

The reason people get headaches at theaters when they sit in the front rows is that the screen occupies a field of view that is far greater than their own 40 degree field of view. That is not the case when viewing a 50 inch panel at 6 feet where the screen occupies 4 degrees less than the average viewer's field of view.
LCD1080 is offline  
post #209 of 261 Old 01-12-2006, 11:13 AM
Advanced Member
 
LCD1080's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 642
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross
Don't buy it. But I don't know of any of my friends that watches a screen 50" or greater from 6' or less. Oh, and the other reason people don't sit that close in the theaters is that many get headaches at that distance.
That's because there are no 1080P 50 inch plasma panels on the market at this time. Even if there are a few 50 inch DLPs on the market there are no 1080P Blu-Ray DVDs to view. Once people start to buy these 50 inchers and 1080P source material starts to proliferate I expect many of your friends will be doing just that in order to derive the PQ benefit of all those 1080 lines.

The reason people get headaches at theaters when they sit in the front rows is that the screen occupies a field of view that is far greater than their own 40 degree field of view. That is not the case when viewing a 50 inch panel at 6 feet where the screen occupies 4 degrees less than the average viewer's field of view.
LCD1080 is offline  
post #210 of 261 Old 01-12-2006, 11:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sfhub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 9,527
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by cajieboy
If you're still viewing an older analog 27" CRT then by all means upgrade IMMEDIATELY. The jump in PQ will astound you as it does anyone that switches from analog SD to HD (lite or otherwise).
If he still views significant analog or digital SD the jump in PQ could on the other hand be unimpressive (depending on display), especially coming from a small 27" where almost everything looks pretty decent analog and digital. Ironically due to reduced pixel resolution in many digital SD broadcasts, analog SD could end up looking better than digital SD albeit with more noise. The HD pictures will look impressive of course. I was on Best Buy return line yesterday and there were 2 people returning flat panels they got for Christmas saying the picture looked like crap compared to their old TV (which I took to mean old CRT)
sfhub is offline  
Closed Thread OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off