I want your opinion on 3D TV...RIGHT NOW!

I used to work with a one-eyed coworker. He said he didn't understand all the fuss about 3D.

Tom

 

As previously mentioned, animated movies lend themselves well to 3D because there is no need for a "focus". The 3D version of Puss-N-Boots was fantastic. One of the best I have seen.

Hugo in 3D will be no different than the Shrek people's movie in 3D. Animated 3D rocks. Filmed in 3D, 3D is pretty decent with crazy mind focus tricks that give some people headaches. 3D made from interpolating 2D is horrible.

Unfortunately like GM making an "EV" burst into flame it has tarnished the name of all EVs. When stupid studios make an interpolated 3D movie and someone tries out the 3D movie for the first time, it sucks so why spend the extra money?

Going to the theatre is not cheap. I usually do 1 or 2 a week and it is about $22 per person for the tickets, $7 per drink and $7 for a popcorn. By the time everything is done, it is close to $70 with tax. If I paid $70 to see an interpolated 3D movie, I would be pissed. Save the $5 a ticket and go 2D, and you are still paying $60, but not expecting anything special.

Although we just went to a live theatre production in town of Young Frankenstein which was fantastic, and only cost $70 for 2 tickets. 2 and a half hours of brilliant acting, a one of a kind show with audience interaction and truly comical directing for the same price. Seems like a no-brainer to me!

 

I tend to be of the mindset, that 3D is a good periodic experience but not something I'd want in my home. The last 3D movie I saw, gave me a headache but it also used the red/blue glasses. It probably didn't help that I worked at the movie theater and was runnign the movie through to make sure there were no problems, and there were about 3 bad splices in the previews .

That said, the price to get into a 3D movie here is a little cheaper. I can still get in free if I want to, but it's an older theater and the seats aren't too comfortable to me. I think the concessions are a tad cheaper here than for you, as well. Then again, you could be in NYC where it's almost double!

 

My girlfriend used to work a theatre so sometimes we get in for free still when one of her old friends is working there, but that's about it. I don't even remember seeing a movie-theatre last time I was in Manhattan. Production theatres everywhere obviously and we went to quite a few showings but wowzer... Those are like $100 to $200 a ticket for "just-ok" seats.

 

I remember when the price of a movie jumped from fifteen cents to twenty-five. We each only had a quarter that day, and so had to skip the ten-cent popcorn. There were some kids in line who didn't have popcorn money and could not get in.

According to THIS site, twenty five cents when I was ten would be worth $1.93 today.

At the local multiplex, P in B 3-D is $13 and a regular 2-D movie is $10. So about half of what Toaster pays. But still five times the inflation-adjusted cost when I was little. And we got a double feature plus a cartoon!

When I lived in Mexico, Crazy Ana and I brought our own popcorn to movies. She always carried an enormous book bag wherever she went, and nobody ever asked to see whether we were bringing contraband food into the theater.

 

I'm assuming everyone is quoting evening prices for movies vs matinee pricing. The one I worked at, still has the Early Bird ticket which is the first matinee of the day for the movie. I can't remember if it's only MON-FRI, but pretty sure it is. When I worked there, 2 people could see the EB for $7.50 total.

I still know the GM and 3 Assistants that work there, so I just call and go in. I don't pay much attention to prices, but then I also rarely go see a movie, too lol.

 

M-F early bird which is usually between 10am and 11am is $6.25 per person here. But if you factor in the loss of work time, it becomes much more expensive than an evening show.

 

I just clicked on a time at random. I think it was middle afternoon. I don't like to drive after dark, and I'm usually too sleepy to go out in the evening. The fifteen cent double features when I was little would have been daytime.

 

Well we just went through the MOTHER OF ALL WINDSTORMS here in LA Wednesday night, the power problems blew up my beloved Pro HDTV. CRAP, DAMN ETC!!!
So I can fix the old, or use the excuse to buy a new set. #d is RIGHT OUT! Waste of money. I am leaning toward the 55" Sharp Quattron, or the Visio 55" We have the 70" Quattrons in our new Network Distribution Facilities, and damn they look nice!
On the other hand the Vizio 55" is half the price, but the screen is not quite the same, due to the lack of the Yellow drive the Quattron adds.
I went to Best Buy, Same crappy DVD video fed to all the HDTV'S, and sadly the sets were barely set up correctly, I had a better test and viewing session at Costo!
Anybody have any thoughts on NON 3D sets they have looked at?

 

Get the Samsung 55" 240hz 3D 7050 at Costco. 1699 after rebate. GREAT picture non 3D and you have the 3D option. Thin, no border, crystal non reflect screen, 2 pair of glasses included. We haven Direct TV with several 3D channels with good quality. Some are waiting for the 3D to reach out and touch them, not going to happen, but it is different and enjoyable on this set.

 

+1

Samsung makes the best screens hands down. With 240hz, its like a life action play in a box.

 

I have a Panasonic plasma that's served me well for a few years now. My dad got a Samsung TV a little while after I got my Panasonic. My TV is still going strong: his is too, but it's got some serious *sparkle*/ snow issues. Last time I visited and these issues were so pronounced, I thought I'd google the issue. Looks like it's pretty common for older Samsungs: after a bit, that particular adjustment goes and then you have to open the TV up and adjust a pot. I thought the snow was distracting enough to go ahead and try this adjustment...but my dad didn't want to go through that hassle. Samsung is a decent TV company, but I wouldn't say they're making extraordinary TVs.

 

I guess the key words are "a few years ago". Going from 3" thick to 1" thick or less involves some advances in technology and quality. Anyway, I bought the extended 5 year parts and labor in house warranty from Costco. Hopefully it shoots craps in a couple of years and we'll get a new "latest, greatest" TV on Square Trade.

 

The ultimate glasses-free 3D experience even for the one eye people.

 

I remember the first color TV I ever saw. My uncle was a Big Spender. So he bought the very first color TV. The picture was in color all right, but all the colors were wrong. There was an adjustment, but good luck getting it right! It was so bizarre that it was uncomfortable to watch. But it was color.

 

I just changed out from a Sony 40XBR4 to a Sony 46HX929. There was nothing wrong with the old TV, but the new one gives me something like a 20 to 25% increase in screen area in a slightly smaller, and much thinner package. It also has much higher contrast, which is the other main reason I got it – anything to help my now aging eyes. It also gives me 3D, which I don’t care about, but is hard to avoid at the high end. Despite most reviewers preference for plasma, I personally prefer the brighter picture of an LCD to Plasma, especially for daytime viewing in a normal living room (as opposed to a dimly lit media room). I also have what is probably an irrational distrust of the plasma technology. Let the plasma vs. LCD flame wars begin!

My capsule review is that the aesthetic design, contrast and picture quality are as good as they say. The software side of things is useable, but poor compared to other brands. For those considering going high end Sony, you should note that although CNET gives this an editors choice for LCD TVs, even their reviewers say the step down 720 model is nearly as good, for half the price. There are also Samsung and LG models worth considering.

Most reviews note that the back firing speakers do not make for great sound quality, but that is true of most of the newer, thin flat panels, and is easily avoided with a sound bar or other home theater setup. I have mine hooked up to a Sony HT-150 soundbar. For some reason, presumably because of the sound processing on the TV, the audio quality has greatly improved compared to my old Sony. It is much cleaner and clearer now, allowing us to keep the volume at a lower level then with the older Sony. Since this TV sits lower, I need to figure out how to raise the TV up 2.5 inches, since the soundbar is blocking some of the front panel sensors, such as the 3D sensor.

One quirk I haven’t solved yet is that if I try to use the TV’s Netflix streaming, it won’t switch the sound from the TV channel to the Netflix. Not sure what the problem is, but I have Netflix access through both an Apple TV and a Sony DVD player, so it doesn’t really matter.

For those considering an LED LCD TV, please note that the bright white lighting of either edge lit or back lit LED screens can make the lighting in the picture look slightly unnatural. You have to fiddle a bit with the settings, so that sunlit scenes don’t look too white, and people and objects don’t take on an unnatural, over lit cast. Just dialing down the LED backlighting solves 90% of the problem. Most reviewers also like to play with the whiteness settings and use the Warm 2 setting (makes up for the tendency of white light to look too cool or blue). The out of the box cinema settings for this TV are pretty close to the CNET settings. I prefer the out of the box standard settings, but with the backlight turned down from 7 to 3, and the Warm 1 setting. I don’t get why videophiles with their calibration software want the picture to look like dim, sepia toned, washed out film, or think those settings are somehow more natural looking (same comment applies in the plasma vs. LCD wars). Perhaps someone here can enlighten me.

I have not noticed any "blooming" issues (a potential flashlight effect from backlit LED TVs). You can sometimes see a slight color shift if you move back and forth from in front of the TV to a side angle (a problem of all LCDs compared to Plasma). The picture is plenty clear even at fairly extreme side angles, and the color shift is not something non-videophiles are going to notice. It just doesn't matter. I have also not noticed any pixelation or motion related problems (another area where plasma is considered better).

 

Just as anecdotal side evidence to counter yours, I have 3 Samsung flatscreens on this level, of varying ages (1 to 3 years) and 2 more down below (2 and 4 years old) none of which have any change in picture. The 4 year old one is not 1080 resolution, so it's resolution is less than the Panasonic nearby, but it still "looks" better and more fluid.

At my mothers house she has a 2 year old Samsung, her friend a 1.5yr or so Samsung and neither of them show any problems either. Both bought on my recommendation

I am sure with googling you can convince people that Prii suffer from runaway acceleration too.

 

Or you could be more productive and google reliability ratings of TV brands...it's a much larger pool then my dad's plasma, my mom's Samsung LCD that died, or your 3 Samsung TVs. Samsung garners favorable reviews, but is not "best hands down".

 

Just remember that all these are user polls. You can find a user poll or national poll to say anything you want. There is an entire industry devoted to it.

My reliability subset shows it to be at 0% failure. Yours at 100% failure. Obviously these can't be right overall.

And reliability is different than picture quality. My company has products inside the Samsung controllers and we know what component selections and designs they use for these high end models. With that extra info it solidifies them at the top for me. I have yet to see another brand screen show anything near as nicely as any of mine. If someone comes out with one, then I will consider buying it. But I have yet to have anyone come over and say my picture quality looks bad or even any worse then theirs. In fact every single person that has come over and seen my uber-Samsung set has told me how their whatever-brand pales in comparison.

Now, everyone has different eyes. So what looks good to me may look bad to others. But for me, they are the best in quality. I don't intend on keeping it as the main tv for 5 years, let alone another year. So reliability (while I have never had a problem) is no issue. It will just get downgraded to a side-tv while something newer and awesomer replaces it next year probably.