Opinions on big screens and 3-D

Daniel, weren't you in another thread saying how we shouldn't buy so much stuff...and now you're thinking of buying a new big screen TV?!?

I trust that, at a minimum you will compare energy usage and get whatever model consumes less. From what I've read, some big screen TVs use a LOT of power.

 

I bought Samsung LN52... not 3-D... I love the screen.

Zero complaints on performance.


I HAVE looked at a couple of 3-D screens to put into the Living Room... I'm not ready to jump yet, because it ain't as good as I would want it to be for the coins.

 

I want the 65 incher, that one takes a 220 volt 50 amp power feed.... yeah that's the ticket...

 

It means the standby consumption is low and the power consumption is 40% less than "standard" units, though I'm not sure if "standard" means older HDTVs or ancient CRT TVs.

CNET is actually a good resource for looking up power consumption. If you find a given model TV there, you can mouse over their "energy guide" and view the standby and operating wattage.

Also, enjoy your new TV, but don't give up fighting the good fight! The world needs more socially conscious activists like yourself! You may not have kids of your own, but mine will thank you for it.

 

There will be something better in five years but you will still have the same quality picture on the screen you buy now. I bought a plasma (Pioneer 503CMX) almost seven years ago. I still enjoy the quality of the picture even though there are better panels now.

I would skip the 3D and go for a bigger display, but don't rule out a panel just because it is 3D capable. I like the look of plasma over LCD.

AVS forums will keep you busy for some time.

AVS Forum

 

What are you guys talking about different 1080P standards? 1080p is 1080p The only difference is the frame rate. US uses NTSC at 23.976 fps or 29.97fps. Europe uses PAL at 25fps. Both are at 1920X1080. The source from the network (cable, OTA, satellite) are at those frame rate. The device may convert those frame rate to 50fps for PAL or 60 fps for NTSC. All the newer TV sets are capable of handling all 5 frame rates and then some. If you're using a 1080P HDTV as a computer monitor like I am you're PC is putting out 1920x1080@60fps.

The plasma vs CCFL LCD vs LED LCD has never been declared a true winner. I do know that manufacturers are leaning toward LCDs whether it's ccfl or led. The LEDs are found in the higher end models due to its ability to dim or shut off individual LEDs to enhance contrast. That's why some LED LCDs have ridiculously high contrast like 5mil:1 or higher. Many HTPC users prefer LCDs over plasma due to lack of screen burn ins.

Most 3D TV sets require shutter glasses due to consumer's demand for full hidef resolution. The way shutter glasses work is that you have odd frames for your left eyes and even frames for right eye. All frames are displayed at full 1080P so you'll see the picture at full 1080P. The only difference is that each eye will only see 60 fps instead of 120fps. This brings up the difference between a 120hz none 3D capable vs 120hz 3D capable TV. The 3D capable can accept 120fps input where as the none 3D can only accept 60fps input but then converts the 60fps into the fluid like 120hz. Of course the glasses's shutters must match precisely to the display frame in corresponding to each eye. If the shutter is off even by the fraction of a frame, your right eye will see left eye's image and vice versa and therefore you'll see ghosting.

Polarized 3D TV is not popular because it uses field sequence. What this means is that the odd lines (1,3,5,7,9,....1075,1077,1079) are filtered out by the polarized lens of the 3D glasses so that only your right eyes will see those lines. the even lines (2,4,6,8,10,....1076,1078,1080) are filtered out by the polarized lens of the 3D glasses so that only your left eyes will see those lines. This is bad because each eye will only see half of the resolution. The up side is that you can enjoy fluid like motion of 120hz TV and use cheap $10 polarized glasses.

The 3D processors takes all these different 3D source and convert them into their prospective manufacturer's 3D technology whether it'd be frame sequential (shutter glasses) or field sequential (polarized glasses)

The 3D technologies used in the theaters are another story. Some use a single projector and require active shutter glasses. Some use dual projectors and use polarized glasses. The single projector system is similar to the 3D TV set. But the dual projectors are what set them apart. This is the best 3D setup possible. Each projector has its own polarized filter. The screen is a special screen that can preserve the polarized light reflecting off the polarized filter. The glasses is polarized to filter out the images not meant for each eye to see. By using the dual projector system, each eye can see full resolution, full frame rate, and you can enjoy it with cheap $10 glasses.

If you think the display standards are too many, you should check out the source technology. Just off the top of my head there are anagraphic, full SBS, half SBS, full top/bottom, half top/bottom, and field sequential

All these talk about 3D display and source technology lets not forget how the 3D video was shot and created. All true 3D footage are shot using 2 cameras. The space between the cameras and the angel of the cameras will determine how close an object is displayed relative to your eyes. The farther apart and the camera lens are angled toward each other the closer an object will look in a 3D display. Animation 3D is easier to create than live footage because you can always manipulate the angles on a computer. A bad 3D animation can look horrible. It looks like 2D but layered in different depth to look like 3D.

I have a Toshiba 3D laptop and I'm pretty satisfy with it. I bought it due to its versatility. I'm always looking for different 3D videos to test out.

The technology is still at its infancy so there will be different standards that each manufacturer uses. This drives the competition up and advance the innovation.

 

While there is a standard set for OTA HD 1080I, there is NO BROADCAST standard set for 1080P! If there was, you can bet it would be boadcast. Until there is, you not see 1080P broadcast OTA! While there are SMPTE Standards for eveything else, just not 1080P, yet...someday.
3D, not even close to a SMPTE standard yet!

 

For the sake of argument we're talking about ATSC used in the US OTA broadcasting. ATSC already set the standard for high definition broadcasting. 1080i can have 29.97fps (59.94 fields/s) or 30fps (60 fields/s) while 1080p can have 23.976, 24, 29.97, 30 fps.
You don't see 1080p OTA because there's no equipment to handle the 1080p capturing, editing, storage, compression and broadcast. An uncompressed 1080i is 1.5Gb/s and 3Gb/s for 1080p. broadcasters use high compressions to compress 1.5Gb/s down to as little as just 5Mb/s for 1080i by using either mpeg or h.264 codec. It would require at least 10Mb/s for broadcasting 1080p. Even if there's a TV station broadcasting 1080p, there's still a question of does the TV tuner capable of tuning in a 1080p station.

As far as broadcasting 3D content OTA This is already possible using today's technology. Half SBS and half top/bottom has the same resolution as 1080i the 3D processor could de-interlace the signal then process the side-by-side frame to frame sequential needed for the shutter glasses. As a matter of fact, I have a 3D half SBS 1080i clip that my laptop can process and display properly in 3D.

When HDTV first arrived, they were all 1080i without ATSC tuners because there were no broadcasters out there, only NTSC tuners. Some higher end HDTVs would have both ATSC and NTSC tuners. A few years later full HD came out and 1080p were all the rage. Skip forward a couple of years and 120hz came out promising fluid like motions. Then a couple of years ago, 3D TV came out, 120hz got increased to 240hz. And now 480hz is here. While all these new technologies hit the consumers, broadcasters are stuck using multi-million dollar first generation broadcasting equipments. Since broadcasters are using 1080i there's no point to make ATSC tuners to receive 1080p broadcasts.

I forgot to mention another 3D technology the glassesless 3D. It works pretty much like a hologram you see on the cover of some 3D movies. You tilt the screen at a different angle to see different pictures. The glassesless 3D TV uses multiple lens on the screen to bend the light of image of left and right to a few degrees from each other. This type of 3D TV have a very limited viewing position and the distance between the TV and the viewer is also crucial. Too close or too far and you will only see 2D. This also narrows down how many people can view the 3D TV at a time due to limited optimum viewing position. The 3D effectiveness is also lowered for some reason for these type of displays. The ones I've seen at 2010 CES were all showing animated clips. All the objects stayed inside the screen. It's like looking at candies and stuffed animals in a vending machine. The object doesn't have that "in your face" look to it. Even my little 15.6" Toshiba 3D laptop can display 3D objects like it's 2 inches from your face. My niece was reaching for the screen trying to grab the rock pebbles from the cars peeling out. It was adorable.

 

3D on a TV is much better than in the cinema, but it's still gimmicky bullcrap. i hope it fucks off and dies soon.

I have a 60" kuro plasma, so a little biased, but LCD's always look grey to me, are often soft, sometimes have motion blur, and occasionally have terrible brightness pumping (my mother in law has one where this is really bad. If you watch something like star trek which switches between a brightly lit enterprise bridge and a dim and murky klingon bridge the brightness pumping is very obvious and extremely annoying). They are brighter than plasma though, so look "better" in walmart, or a brightly lit living room. In a home cinema room, plasma kills lcd completely.

 

When I was trying to decide LCD vs Plasma I went with the Plasma because it has the hard glass over the screen. This makes it a bit more durable and easier to clean. But with the flat glass screen you will get more glare if there is a window behind you. So if you have a lot of glare than get a LCD if you don't then get a plasma. I have a Panasonic and very happy with the choice. My mom has a Vizio LCD and she likes it but I could not live with it; very slow processor, slow to come on, and not so good picture. But I think this is because it is a cheap TV and not a factor of being a LCD. I have seen some very good LCD TVs. Whatever you do make sure you get a 1080.

Bigger is better as long as it fits the room and does not over power it.

I can see no reason to get a 3D TV.

TED

 

Well, that would be because there IS NO SMPTE STANDARDS that are set and in place for 1080P.

Once again, and I am going to repeat mself...
There is no SMPTE Standard set for 1080P and 3D...PERIOD!!!
Until there is, you will NOT those two formats being broadcast. I know what the numbers are, I work for the ABC Network, and we are not doing for 3D and 1080P because of this tiny fact!!

Actualy, NO, the tuner was an EXPENSIVE OPTION you could buy, of course, because when they started to release the sets, NOBODY was Boadcasting HD yet! You could plug the set into cable and see a 480I boadcast on an HDTV...
It took years to actually get a definative launch date set for OTA HD!

ONLY, because, once again I repeat myself...
There is no SMPTE Standard set for OTA BROADCAST in 1080P or 3D!
All the 120/240/480 is, is a multiple of the 60 Hz field rate, and while yes, it improves on motion blur, it's roots go back to the Farjudia 480I line doublers, and quadrupliers.

Well thats real nice, but, you still will NOT see OTA 3D, until they resolve the 4+ different 3D systems for 3D, and come up with a SPMTE Standard, it will NOT be boadcast OTA! It's that simple! I have been a Boadcast Engineer for 40+ years. I am currently am part of the group of engineers that is building the HD infrastructure for ABC West Coast Operations. While we are installing and setting up the next incarnation of technology, what we are NOT doing is paying ANY attention to 1080P and 3D, simply because of the lack of SMPTE Standards defining the OTA specifictions for those two formats!

Maybe someday we will, but not TODAY!!!

 

I think you'll find that everyone thinks their tv is the best. It's really subjective. I liked the look of sonys LCD tvs so went with that brand and type over plasma which had too much glare for me. I've had it for over two years with no problems. Plus the Internet ready features are pretty cool too!

 

For big plasma you may want to research commercial Panasonics or Samsung sold at Visual Apex in Seattle.They are an advertiser on Priuschat
Commercial Pannies have no tuner or speakers.They have excellent build quality and picture.

 

Don't go less than 1080p.

That's what our next TV will be. I keep hoping ours will die soon...

 

Agreed. The difference is very noticeable.

 

Flaninacupboard - with you on the Kuro although Pioneer has stopped producing them...some of the Kuro tech still lives on in some of the Panasonic plasmas though.

3D is just a distraction as far as I'm concerned but if anyone is thinking of buying one then they should be aware that new 3D tech is coming which will do away with the need for glasses (technology that is similar to new Nintendo 3D DS).