or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Poll: When will curved TVs die off?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Poll: When will curved TVs die off? - Page 2

Poll Results: When is the LAST year that curved TVs for the home will be offered? Or will it always be with us?

 
  • 21% (15)
    Always offered. They are here to stay as long as a technology like OLED is around that can support it.
  • 15% (11)
    2013
  • 31% (22)
    2014
  • 17% (12)
    2015
  • 7% (5)
    2016
  • 7% (5)
    (Some later year)
70 Total Votes  
post #31 of 82
Great point, Greenland. As a great admirer of the Chicago School and functionalism, I completely agree. The primary function of the panel is to provide the best visual image, not some imagined acoustical benefit. And unlike the rationale for a mammoth curved movie theater screen, a curved 55 inch screen offer no advantage...quite the opposite according to early viewers.
post #32 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichi4 View Post

Great point, Greenland. As a great admirer of the Chicago School and functionalism, I completely agree. The primary function of the panel is to provide the best visual image, not some imagined acoustical benefit. And unlike the rationale for a mammoth curved movie theater screen, a curved 55 inch screen offer no advantage...quite the opposite according to early viewers.

It is what I call Fernando Lamas Logic, based on having heard him once say on the Johnny Carson show: "Johnny, it is better to look good, than to feel good"!
post #33 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

It is what I call Fernando Lamas Logic, based on having heard him once say on the Johnny Carson show: "Johnny, it is better to look good, than to feel good"!

Unfortunately, this appears to be the credo of our Age.
post #34 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

It is what I call Fernando Lamas Logic, based on having heard him once say on the Johnny Carson show: "Johnny, it is better to look good, than to feel good"!

It's more based on a "Saturday Night Live" sketch spoofing Lamas than any real thing he ever did/said. But anyway...
post #35 of 82
Apparently Lamas did actually say that, as well as his famous "You Look Marvelous." Billy Crystal picked up these quotes as he thought they were intrinsically funny, and used them in his brilliant caricature of Lamas.
post #36 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by taichi4 View Post

Apparently Lamas did actually say that, as well as his famous "You Look Marvelous." Billy Crystal picked up these quotes as he thought they were intrinsically funny, and used them in his brilliant caricature of Lamas.

Billy Crystal certainly remembers it that way. Whether it actually happened is another matter altogether.
post #37 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Billy Crystal certainly remembers it that way. Whether it actually happened is another matter altogether.

Like I said before, I watched the show and heard him say it to Carson.
post #38 of 82
I don't understand the merit at all in a curved television at all other than making alpha users with 1-2yr old sets go out and buy another set......

The viewing angle is only improved for the directly centered viewing position and its worse for all the off axis seating with respect to the nearest side of the set since its curved away from the viewer.... That means majority of the seating positions have a worse viewing angle for half of the screen and marginally better viewing angle for the other half, i dont get it.....

Curved screens for projection setups are to address other issues as previously mentioned not viewing angle.

Not to mention who wants a television hanging on their wall that sticks out 6-12" off the wall..... Thats why I bought a flat panel to begin with was to mount on wall low profile.

My vote: Its dead now. Theyll sell a good amount of units based solely on the cool factor and it wont amount to much more than a flash in the pan. An even smaller flash than 3D......cool.gif
post #39 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by NicksHitachi View Post

I don't understand the merit at all in a curved television at all other than making alpha users with 1-2yr old sets go out and buy another set......

The viewing angle is only improved for the directly centered viewing position and its worse for all the off axis seating with respect to the nearest side of the set since its curved away from the viewer.... That means majority of the seating positions have a worse viewing angle for half of the screen and marginally better viewing angle for the other half, i dont get it.....

Curved screens for projection setups are to address other issues as previously mentioned not viewing angle.

Not to mention who wants a television hanging on their wall that sticks out 6-12" off the wall..... Thats why I bought a flat panel to begin with was to mount on wall low profile.

My vote: Its dead now. Theyll sell a good amount of units based solely on the cool factor and it wont amount to much more than a flash in the pan. An even smaller flash than 3D......cool.gif

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but it's not dead now. Trust me. Hold this thought a few more weeks.
post #40 of 82
I thought we were discussing years? confused.gif What answers will we glean in a couple weeks?
post #41 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

Like I said before, I watched the show and heard him say it to Carson.

And in support of your contention, sites devoted to the quotes of Fernando Lamas (yes, they exist) list those quotes as being genuine.
post #42 of 82
All the manufacturers are doing with the curved screen nonsense, is making the product identifiable at a glance. If someone is a first adopter of a new technology, they often want the world to know they are. If you had these OLED screens outwardly look like every other flat screen display, and you had to look hard at the image to determine what you were watching, it wouldn't have the same "snob appeal" (advertising term) as a product you immediately recognize as upscale.

Is a curved screen necessary for OLED? Nah, it's all marketing. But these companies have to devise a sales strategy to recoup their big investment in it. Often, the first adopters paying a premium for the product, offsets a lot of the development cost. That's all they are doing.

Curved screens will be gone when the development costs are paid for, whatever year that happens.
post #43 of 82
Never. Can you achieve 180° HFOV with a flat panel?
That's what I thought. You can't even do 120° (in your regular-size room at a reasonable distance).

Using flexible / curved displays, you'll achieve the same FOV with a fraction of material.
Edited by Randomoneh - 8/25/13 at 12:32am
post #44 of 82
Thread Starter 
Not "a fraction". The math for that does not line up. And further, with an image captured on a flat sensor with optics to match, 180 degree FOV is the very last thing in the world you want.
post #45 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Not "a fraction". The math for that does not line up.
For higher FOV, it absolutely does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

And further, with an image captured on a flat sensor with optics to match, 180 degree FOV is the very last thing in the world you want.
You can't capture 180° degrees with a rectilinear lens. That's why fisheye would be used together with spherical displays.
post #46 of 82
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomoneh View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Not "a fraction". The math for that does not line up.
For higher FOV, it absolutely does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

And further, with an image captured on a flat sensor with optics to match, 180 degree FOV is the very last thing in the world you want.
You can't capture 180° degrees with a rectilinear lens. That's why fisheye would be used together with spherical displays.

 

We're talking about the sensibility of curved TVs.

 

1. About the "fraction".  I have no idea what you're talking about.  Draw a 4" line on a piece of paper.  That will represent a 55" TV width of roughly 4 feet.  Next to it draw the subtly curved 4" arc of the TV screen so that the middle of both lines intersect at their midpoints.  The straight line is now a tangent to the arc.  Drawing lines of the ends of the curves back to a focal point perhaps 6 inches away from that center point perpendicular to the straight line.  That point are the eyes of the person seated at the couch 6 feet.  Yes, you *do* increase the effective size because those lines now intersect the plane that the flat TV is on at a little wider, but you don't increase it anywhere nearly enough to claim "Using flexible / curved displays, you'll achieve the same FOV with a fraction of material."

 

2. About the 180 degrees.  I STILL have no idea what you're thinking, but this statement of yours: "Can you achieve 180° HFOV with a flat panel?  That's what I thought." makes no sense because even if you could achieve 180 degrees, you would never want to without an image captured properly.  You made that statement as if it were in support of curved TVs as a concept.  It does not support curved TVs at all.  Two people at either ends of a flatly captured screen image (like all current FP's display) facing out to the audience would be seem to be facing each other if the screen were wrapped around you a full 180 degree arc.  ONLY IT'S WORSE.  Audience standing back and not in the middle of that ridiculous arc would see the faces still staring out at them, but just squashed narrowly.

 

Take a picture of a person and turn it sideways maybe 45 degrees.  The eyes will still seem to stare straight at you, but the face becomes narrow.  That's what will happen to the person standing back from your 180 degree FOV screen.


Edited by tgm1024 - 8/26/13 at 11:12am
post #47 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

We're talking about the sensibility of curved TVs.

1. About the "fraction".  I have no idea what you're talking about.  Draw a 4" line on a piece of paper.  That will represent a 55" TV width of roughly 4 feet.  Next to it draw the subtly curved 4" arc of the TV screen so that the middle of both lines intersect at their midpoints.  The straight line is now a tangent to the arc.  Drawing lines of the ends of the curves back to a focal point perhaps 6 inches away from that center point perpendicular to the straight line.  That point are the eyes of the person seated at the couch 6 feet.  Yes, you *do* increase the effective size because those lines now intersect the plane that the flat TV is on at a little wider, but you don't increase it anywhere nearly enough to claim "Using flexible / curved displays, you'll achieve the same FOV with a fraction of material."

2. About the 180 degrees.  I STILL have no idea what you're thinking, but this statement of yours: "Can you achieve 180° HFOV with a flat panel?  That's what I thought." makes no sense because even if you could achieve 180 degrees, you would never want to without an image captured properly.  You made that statement as if it were in support of curved TVs as a concept.  It does not support curved TVs at all.  Two people at either ends of a flatly captured screen image (like all current FP's display) facing out to the audience would be seem to be facing each other if the screen were wrapped around you a full 180 degree arc.  ONLY IT'S WORSE.  Audience standing back and not in the middle of that ridiculous arc would see the faces still staring out at them, but just squashed narrowly.

Take a picture of a person and turn it sideways maybe 45 degrees.  The eyes will still seem to stare straight at you, but the face becomes narrow.  That's what will happen to the person standing back from your 180 degree FOV screen.
Let's not fight over something that can be easily explained with some basic math. Read my initial comment again. It's obvious that I'm talking about "fraction" in relation to what some would call very high FOV.

Example:

sitting distance: 2 meters
needed display width in order to achieve 140° FOV
- flat display: 11 meters
- cylindrical display: 4.9 meters

needed display width in order to achieve 180° FOV
- flat display: infinite / impossible
- cylindrical display: 6.28 meters

Next, it's also obvious that you wouldn't want to watch a 40° rectilinear video (or any rectilinear video) on a 180° (from center of the curve) cylindrical or spherical display. Two people facing each other would now seem to look forward, in the direction your body is facing (while sitting).

I can't wait for curved displays with small radius.
post #48 of 82
Randomoneh, hope you don't mind my taking the easy way out and asking you to recommend the optimum viewing distance for Samsung's KN55S9 OLED TV? I tried to use your information to determine the best viewing distance, but can't get to a number that feels right.

I'm considering this TV for an unused bed room that we're considering converting into a TV den with a decent surround sound system. This would be a critical 2-channel listening room and I'd like to set it up with exceptional video and decent surround sound. The spare room I have is too small for a larger TV. I'm likely to paint the room dark charcoal gray with good acoustical treatments.

Thanks, Snur
post #49 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by schnura View Post

Randomoneh, hope you don't mind my taking the easy way out and asking you to recommend the optimum viewing distance for Samsung's KN55S9 OLED TV? I tried to use your information to determine the best viewing distance, but can't get to a number that feels right.

I'm considering this TV for an unused bed room that we're considering converting into a TV den with a decent surround sound system. This would be a critical 2-channel listening room and I'd like to set it up with exceptional video and decent surround sound. The spare room I have is too small for a larger TV. I'm likely to paint the room dark charcoal gray with good acoustical treatments.

Thanks, Snur
The main question is - what is your goal?
Do you want the image to be [close to] equidistant (at least horizontally) from your eyes? If that's the case, you should sit at the radius of curvature - 4500 mm. Or perhaps you want to cover x° of your HFOV?

Edit: 5000 mm to 4500 mm
post #50 of 82
Thanks Randometer! I want the very best visual experience possible and as immerse as can be obtained.

Here's what I don't get; if my math is correct 4500 mm = slightly less than 15'. But that can't be right as I would expect the best viewing distance to be something less than 10' as even flat 55" TVs are best viewed at about 7' from the screen.
post #51 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by schnura View Post

Thanks Randometer!
It's Randomolotov actually.
Quote:
Originally Posted by schnura View Post

I want the very best visual experience possible and as immerse as can be obtained.
If I had a KN55S9 (54.6'' 16:9 4500R set), I'd set it to occupy ~30° of my HFOV. Curvature and depth taken into account, distance needed for that is 2304 mm or ~7.5 ft. At this distance, benefit from the curve in terms of HFOV gained (compared to flat set) is ~1.5%. Not that much.

It would be great if we could properly enjoy the immersion by sitting closer (40°, 60° HFOV). Unfortunately, you'll come across many close-up scenes that aren't meant to be spread across your field of view like that. In return, you would feel uncomfortable, moving your eyes across the screen.

in the future, we might see sets with sharper curvature and therefore lower curvature radius - 2000 or 3000 mm. Those will be sets where viewers would be able to sit at radius distance (equidistant) and still feel immersed. With KN55S9 and 55EA9800 you can't really count on that so you'll have to sit closer than the distance of the radius.
post #52 of 82
Thread Starter 

And you still don't seem to understand that we're talking about curved TVs.  Content has to be shareable across all physical configurations.  Curved TVs cannot be curved at ever increasing or arbitrary amounts and still have the content work perfectly between them and flat.  The content must be matched to the display.  Period, end of story.  You also don't seem to accept the fact that TVs are often designed to have more than one person watching them.  The curves are therefore only able to be slight in nature, and any increase in FOV in the examples you talk about is completely irrelevant.

post #53 of 82
I think they will die off as soon as display manufacturers sort out the yield, uniformity and longevity issues with large area OLEDs. Considering how long OLED has been in development that could still be a few years.

While these issues are still present, they need a way to constrain supply and selling curved screens is probably the perfect way to do so.
Even though they probably won't sell many of these displays, it certainly has generated a lot of PR for both companies.
post #54 of 82
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NLPsajeeth View Post

I think they will die off as soon as display manufacturers sort out the yield, uniformity and longevity issues with large area OLEDs. Considering how long OLED has been in development that could still be a few years.

While these issues are still present, they need a way to constrain supply and selling curved screens is probably the perfect way to do so.

 

By this you mean they need a way to sell less?  Please clarify, because if that's what you're saying, then it's the cart before the horse.  Artificially throttling down supply does have an influence on the end price, but that only works when you're in demand at a price point and completely without competitors.  Neither of these companies would shy away from having the demand so great that they couldn't meet it.  That's just not a problem that they're afraid to have.

post #55 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by schnura View Post

Thanks Randometer! I want the very best visual experience possible and as immerse as can be obtained.

Here's what I don't get; if my math is correct 4500 mm = slightly less than 15'. But that can't be right as I would expect the best viewing distance to be something less than 10' as even flat 55" TVs are best viewed at about 7' from the screen.

The 15' figure is what you would need based on my viewing of the Samsung OLED. Anything much less than that and you will perceive a slight bow or sag on the top or bottom border of the screen - they would not appear exactly parallel. Whether that would bother you, I can't say. I found that I could tune it out after 2 hours of testing the TV but would still prefer a flat one. You can see my full updated review in the OLED advancement thread.
post #56 of 82
post #57 of 82
LG has exhibited a 55 inch flat OLED TV at shows all around the world since the beginning of 2012. Other than that, it has been waiting for Godot.
post #58 of 82
True enough but since the last sentence of the LG press release says:

"GALLERY OLED TV will be launched this month in Germany with other markets to follow."

perhaps Godot may finally arrive.
post #59 of 82
post #60 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speakerphile View Post

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but it's not dead now. Trust me. Hold this thought a few more weeks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NicksHitachi View Post

I thought we were discussing years? confused.gif What answers will we glean in a couple weeks?

Quote:

As I said. It's not dead yet. See above.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Poll: When will curved TVs die off?