3D Televisions

So enlighten me. You just come off as an ass and I'm beginning to think you really don't have any information to back up your claims.

So enlighten me. You just come off as an ass and I'm beginning to think you really don't have any information to back up your claims.

 

As I told you from earlier post, I can write a book on it but I'm on the road and i don't need to waste my time to inform someone who's already bias on the subject and cynical on everything thing else. And why grant you the opportunity to continue your rant and doing what you do best as your signature suggests. Conclude on whatever you think; it isn't my problem. I'll just keep laughing. Everyone who had been on L/P long enough knows that I say absolutely no BS on anything relating to audio & video.

 

And if that's your opinion of me, here's the perfect smiley for you then. :icon_butt: Go lay on your mattress & enjoy your 16:9 tv, Dick.

As I told you from earlier post, I can write a book on it but I'm on the road and i don't need to waste my time to inform someone who's already bias on the subject and cynical on everything thing else. And why grant you the opportunity to continue your rant and doing what you do best as your signature suggests. Conclude on whatever you think; it isn't my problem. I'll just keep laughing. Everyone who had been on L/P long enough knows that I say absolutely no BS on anything relating to audio & video.

 

And if that's your opinion of me, here's the perfect smiley for you then. :icon_butt: Go lay on your mattress & enjoy your 16:9 tv, Dick.

 

I didn't ask you to write a book, and clearly you have the time. Just answer a few questions.

 

What would have been the better aspect ratio choice than 16:9 and why?

For the most watched networks, say Fox, CBS, NBC, and ABC, what formats are the sources and what formats are the broadcasts?

 

I'm biased based on the information I've seen. It's pretty retarded to say that I'm biased when you aren't providing any new information to make me think otherwise. Give me some new information which I can follow up on and then see where I stand. It's not like we're talking morals.

I didn't ask you to write a book, and clearly you have the time. Just answer a few questions.

 

What would have been the better aspect ratio choice than 16:9 and why?

For the most watched networks, say Fox, CBS, NBC, and ABC, what formats are the sources and what formats are the broadcasts?

 

I'm biased based on the information I've seen. It's pretty retarded to say that I'm biased when you aren't providing any new information to make me think otherwise. Give me some new information which I can follow up on and then see where I stand. It's not like we're talking morals.

 

I'd rather spend my time helping other members on AV gears from other threads than going way OT on this thread & ping-ponging with you feeding your fix on being cynical. Say whatever you want; it's pointless & a waste of my time to continue on this thread.

Thinking about buying this TV for my dad for christmas, his 2003 sony lcd projection is finally giving out

 

http://www.costco.com/Sharp-AQUOS-60%22-Cl...t.11752362.html

 

 

 

Thoughts? He doesn't need 3-D. He streams netflix, loves watching sports in HD and plays a lot of black/white movies. Anything else I should consider? Trying to keep the price under 2k.

Not 3D but I just bought a 70" Vizio last night for $1599 on tigerdir. I know they have good deals on the 60 and 65" Vizios that have 3D though.

Not 3D but I just bought a 70" Vizio last night for $1599 on tigerdir. I know they have good deals on the 60 and 65" Vizios that have 3D though.

 

Next nov the high refresh rate 120hz and greater tv's are going to cost nothing as 4x hd rolls out.

 

That's going to be amazing stuff. Blu-ray will die and red-ray will take over.

Next nov the high refresh rate 120hz and greater tv's are going to cost nothing as 4x hd rolls out.

 

That's going to be amazing stuff. Blu-ray will die and red-ray will take over.

 

Yeah. My LG is 120HZ and I'm pretty happy with it. I just needed another TV and it seemed like a good deal. I'll maybe add a review once it arrives

Yeah. My LG is 120HZ and I'm pretty happy with it. I just needed another TV and it seemed like a good deal. I'll maybe add a review once it arrives

 

I love the high refresh tv's everything hd looks so real.

I have used 3d maybe twice. Works great but I just don't like 3d that much.

 

Higher res is great but is there content coming up in that format? Are studio cameras digital now?

 

My LG has a wiDi technology that allows me to wirelessly project my laptop screen on tv. It works great for flash content sites that has pirate movies.

I have no desire for 3D TV either. Seen a couple 3D movies and it just makes me feel sick

I love the high refresh tv's everything hd looks so real.

I actually hate that motion enhancement. Turning it off is the first think I do on any new TV.

I actually hate that motion enhancement. Turning it off is the first think I do on any new TV.

 

Me too. I felt like i am watching a video game with that mode on. Weirdest thing ever.

 

What i love is the firmware update on these smart tvs. Similar to ipads and smartphones, it detects upgrades and loads improvements and additional apps.

 

I just need to get rid of my cable and switch to an internet tv programming some how. Hulu doesn't have the car programming that I like (Velocity / Speed channel, for example)

I have a 3D TV but I've never used the 3D function on it, I would love a huge TV for my new house, anything exciting on the horizon?

I have a 3D TV but I've never used the 3D function on it, I would love a huge TV for my new house, anything exciting on the horizon?

Yes, but there isn't programming support for it yet (4K/Ultra HD).

Yes, but there isn't programming support for it yet (4K/Ultra HD).

 

 

4K/UltraHD is such a tough sell, mainly because there's no short or medium-term way to pipe it into homes via existing cable or satellite networks. Long term (5+ years out minimum) may provide some sort of compression break through or other possibilities, but for now the major cable providers have less than zero interest in looking at supporting it during this decade.

 

However, UltraHD is certainly possible via enhanced Blu-Ray support, thanks to Sony increasing their storage potential on the discs to higher levels recently, but the same old problems of early adoption rear their ugly head under that scenario (only a few movies being offered for the first few years due to few tv sales, $30+ price tag per disc, etc, etc).

 

I spent 30 minutes a foot away from Sony's new 84-inch 4K LCD tv recently and found that even with native 4K content (fed from a small PC nearby) it didn't provide the "wow" factor that say going from 480p to 1080p did for most of us when HD became the standard.

 

It was nice for sure, clearly a superior image, but unlike normal HD it didn't leave me thinking that I couldn't ever go back to the lower resolution. I guess I'm saying that 2K is basically good enough for me, at least for film.

I have a 3D TV but I've never used the 3D function on it, I would love a huge TV for my new house, anything exciting on the horizon?

 

Wait...

 

4K/UltraHD is such a tough sell, mainly because there's no short or medium-term way to pipe it into homes via existing cable or satellite networks. Long term (5+ years out minimum) may provide some sort of compression break through or other possibilities, but for now the major cable providers have less than zero interest in looking at supporting it during this decade.

 

 

In addition, technology is moving so fast that one manufacturer can invest millions into a "new" technology only to be outdone by their rivals in 8 months time so there is no way they will ever recoup their R&D budget. Added by the fact of "firmware updates", many hardware are actually not properly "matured" product for the market; they just want bragging rights to be the first to come out with it. It's all moving towards the "who blinks first" mindset and that really isn't a good sign at all.

 

Wait...

 

 

 

 

In addition, technology is moving so fast that one manufacturer can invest millions into a "new" technology only to be outdone by their rivals in 8 months time so there is no way they will ever recoup their R&D budget. Added by the fact of "firmware updates", many hardware are actually not properly "matured" product for the market; they just want bragging rights to be the first to come out with it. It's all moving towards the "who blinks first" mindset and that really isn't a good sign at all.

 

 

I'm going to wait out ultra hologram HD!

So, after 16 months my 60" Sharp LED has a nice vertical line of stuck green pixels that won't go away.

 

Any thoughts on the Panasonic VIERA TC-P60GT50?

 

Got this yesterday. Passive 3-d. Haven't tried it yet.

 

Say a 4x hd yesterday. I couldn't tell improvement over 1080.

On a random trivia fact, reading about all this technology, I find it hilarious that in the old Soviet Union, where the government built the TVs, they had a problem with exploding television sets. And they weren't just prone to exploding when turned on either, just plugging them in could cause them to explode. Brings new meaning to saying the TV will blow you away

 

I didn't know 3D television was possible without wearing the special glasses. All this advancement over the last few decades makes one wonder what will television in another thirty years be like? And computers!? I have read that we are probably on the verge of robots becoming ubiquitous in society in the way computers have become. I have also read that they should be able to increase the fuel efficiency of internal combustion engines by another 30% to 50%, that the limitation right now isn't mechanical, but rather that the raw computing power needed to be able to design the new engines isn't available yet.

 

I am so jealous of what young people will have available when I am old

Got this yesterday. Passive 3-d. Haven't tried it yet.

 

Say a 4x hd yesterday. I couldn't tell improvement over 1080.

 

The 70" sets have really come down the last few weeks, selling for nearly half of their street prices just six months ago. Great deals out there for sure.

 

I also found 4k to be unimpressive, spent 20 minutes with Sony's 84" 4k tv streaming native 4k content off of one of their media server PCs and while it was a noticeable improvement it was nowhere near the leap that going from 480p to 1080p was the last time.

The 70" sets have really come down the last few weeks, selling for nearly half of their street prices just six months ago. Great deals out there for sure.

 

I also found 4k to be unimpressive, spent 20 minutes with Sony's 84" 4k tv streaming native 4k content off of one of their media server PCs and while it was a noticeable improvement it was nowhere near the leap that going from 480p to 1080p was the last time.

 

Just curious, but how does one do that (test the televisions)? Is that part of your profession or do the stores allow it or something?

The 70" sets have really come down the last few weeks, selling for nearly half of their street prices just six months ago. Great deals out there for sure.

 

I also found 4k to be unimpressive, spent 20 minutes with Sony's 84" 4k tv streaming native 4k content off of one of their media server PCs and while it was a noticeable improvement it was nowhere near the leap that going from 480p to 1080p was the last time.

 

I didn't feel 1080 was better than 720 until the 120hz tv's were released. Maybe the 4x needs much better refresh rates.

Honestly, I don't understand why many of us have been so mislead by all the marketing hype. Sure, tv/video technology had advanced so much that it likely did more in the last 5 years than the past 25 years. However, as much as the tv is "capable" of, there is hardly any software to justify buying a so-called state-of-the-art set.

 

I hate to say it but NTSC is an inferior system to begin with. And North American tv stations haven't really stepped up to support the HD technology either. Check out the HD in Japan (also in NTSC incidentally) and the HD in Europe (in PAL, except France where it uses the SECAM) and it becomes obviously clear (pun intended) that we are way behind in quality HD transmission.

 

Whether it's 3D, 4K, UHD etc..., we lack the signal transmission from our tv stations. There is virtually no 4k materials available on Blu-Ray; most 4k video are in demo state. Likewise, very little 3D materials are available on BD at the moment. That leaves native 4k & 3D materials available only via self-made video. And that involves a state-of-the-art HD/3D/4k camcorder which is $$$. How many people are doing that?

 

Aside from bragging rights, there is no need to get anything bigger than 55" which is the sweet spot for set top tv. Projects are slightly different but, at the moment, there is only ONE true native 4k projector available (others claim 4k capability by playing with pixel-shifting technology which really isn't 4k) and it's not cheap. And these whole 4k/3D things are still in their infancy. For the current video signals that we are getting in North America, tv, internet, set top boxes & DVD/BD etc..., there really really is no need to go crazy to pursue the latest technology.

 

Wheels, bring a Blu-Ray disc known to have quality video that you are familiar with to a tv store and ask them to play the disc on a few sets, the A/B comparison would be obvious. You can also buy DVD/BD video calibration discs to test the tv. And if a tv store refuses to play the disc for you, then they aren't worth patronizing anyway. Old tech tv involving picture tube and/or tubes to drive the circuit require extremely high voltage and amperage; many also have large capacitors which can store plenty of current. Consequently, the circuits have to be well designed and stringently manufactured in order to tolerate such high power; any sloppy job would yield "explosive" results...literally.