Re: SIT CLOSER TO YOUR HDTV

Quote:
all the money you paid for a HD disc player setup may as well have not been spent

I think it becomes more of an issue of whether we need to conform to the comfort of the machines or to the comfort of the people using them. Given this chart and such, the argument could easily be made that you can get away with a 720p TV as opposed to a 1080p one and put the money saved towards media or other components (mine is 1080). It is quite an individual decision there and all depends on whether you're more comfortable at that close range or can deal with a slight decrease in pixel clarity at a more comfortable (for the individual) distance. In either case, I don't think you could call the HD signal a waste.

Quote:
Really, just about anything that isn't a smooth object or flat surface in a movie will give it away.

Funny you should say that, because that is where I can easily pick out differences between upconverted SDVD and HDM. If you watch carefully, this is where you can usually see the upconverting processor having trouble guessing where to place whatever color pixel to show color transition or even the slightest bit of shading.

HDM rules! But the average buyer doesn't see enough difference yet.

Griz

Quote:
HDM rules! But the average buyer doesn't see enough difference yet.

Yup, truth is, progress in pixel density has been too quick for the masses.

Say people used to watch a 480P DVD on a 30" TV. And they sit 9 feet away. Now, with a 6x increase in spatial resolution at 1080P, people may be watching it on a 50" HDTV. And they might still sit 9 feet away from the screen. The pixel density has outpaced the habits of the mass market consumer, and ergonomics of the living room.

I do agree with the "distance" I was testing my 37" TV at 9 feet and at 3-4 feet in an attempt to see if there was any difference between the TV's native 720p resolution and the upscaled 1080i resolution used by it. I found that at 9 feet is hard to tell but at around 4 feet I could clearly tell the anti-alliacing (sp.) used by the TV when the image is upscaled at 1080i.

Quote:
The pixel density has outpaced the ... ergonomics of the living room.

I agree wholeheartedly. As for the mass market consumer, aren't there still people out there with VCRs in use? I bet they're even still flashing 12:00

The THX website http://www.thx.com/home/setup/display.html also has some good tips...

What do you mean sit closer? How closer do you wanna be? I love movies and TV shows, but that doesn't mean I'm gona be 'hugging' the TV...I wanna sit back and enjoy...I don't wanna make out with it (disturbing but interesting )

And again, if you need to sit closer in order to take advantage of the HDTV, that is lame, sad and stupid. IMO. That comes with the 'upconversion' thread...if you need to sit closer to the TV in order to get a better picture, it doesn't make sense, really, at all...

Quote:
if you need to sit closer to the TV in order to get a better picture, it doesn't make sense, really, at all

Umm... it doesn't make the picture better. It's just that if you're sitting so far that you're eye/brain cannot perceive any more detail than that provided with 480p probably means a person should stick with standard DVD, since additional resolved detail will be lost and wasted. The HDTV was a waste too.

The reason why people have been conditioned to adopt an angle of view so much smaller than the theater is because sitting FURTHER away makes the picture look "better" with regular NTSC sources. Now that we have HDTVs and HD sources, a person doesn't have to sit so far back. It's probably a conditioning thing and now that we've traded in our old Trinitrons and floor RCA CRT sets, we don't have to do this anymore. We did get HD for a reason... ummm... right?

Again Skyhawk misses the point. Unless you're someone who sits on the front row of the movie theater most people like to have a little distance from the TV. It's not a pixel grain issue, it's a comfort issue. If you really want to watch TV like your nose is pressed to the window, go right ahead. This is more a comfort and ergonmics issue than wringing the last bit of pixel definition out of your eyeballs at the expense of the comfort of the rest of the body.

Exactly GKing...I have a better vision than I used to (thanks to Lasik ) and I don't like sitting in front of the TV, and again, I argue, if you need to sit closer, it's NOT WORTH IT...

[Post edited by mvckalel on Mar 7, 2008]

GKing74, front row? Where ever did I imply that? Obviously the only thing wrong about my point is that it went way over your head.

The recommended THX viewing angle that the MAJORITY of center seats in a theater must offer is a 36 degree viewing angle. The front seats generally exceed this by a huge factor. The last row of seats, those furthest away from the screen in the entire theater cannot offer any less than a 26 degree viewing angle. You can't get any further away from a theater screen than that unless you break down the rear wall.

Now translated to viewing a 50" screen, this furthest away you can get (26 degrees) is achieved at a distance no more than 7 feet, 9 inches. Even at this distance, the human eye cannot resolve 1080p. At the THX recommended viewing angle (considered the center sweet spot in a theater for both picture and sound) you would sit about 5 feet, 6 inches from a 50" screen.

Although some people don't like the theater even in the furthest seat from the screen, my point is why buy an HDTV if the old Trinitron would have done fine? HD offers no benefits from a distance at which your eye cannot perceive more detail than that in a 480 line image (or less).

You obviously wasted (or are wasting) your money.

[Post edited by Skyhawk on Mar 7, 2008]