Do bigger screens make any difference ?

[MikeMusic]

Likely a silly question......

If you have 1080 resolution on any size screen the picture is the same

If you have a really big screen, say 50" plus does it look grainy ?

I remember seeing a projector screen some years ago and it was rubbish.

Assume the technology has come on a way or the big screens wouldn't sell - or would they ?

[Audio Al]

I have a 52" LG and the picture quality is awesome on HD , not so good on normal non HD

[YNWaN]

Many HD televisions are rather poor when showing standard res pictures (a friends Samsung was shocking). One of the main reasons I chose the one I have is because it's up sampling software was better than others.

[Thing Fish]

A lot of people I know have TV's that are too big for their viewing distance thus they look grainy. They also have them mounted way too high. Above a fireplace for example...:scratch:

For a 34” screen the viewing distance should be 4.25-7 feet.

For a 42” screen the viewing distance should be 5.25-8.75 feet.

For a 50” screen the viewing distance should be 6.25-10.5 feet.

For a 56” screen the viewing distance should be 7-11.75 feet.

For a 62” screen the viewing distance should be 7.75-13 feet.

For a 70” screen the viewing distance should be 8.75-14.75 feet.

[Macca]

No the picture stays the same - pal of mine has 60'' Pioneer plasma - with Blu-ray you can see the individual pores of the skin. Projectors are a whole different ballgame - really good ones are mega money and still won't equal a good plasma, good screens for them are pricey too.

[UV101]

TV's shouldn't really give you a grainy picture these days. Back in the 80's what you describe in the op used to be a big problem. Customer would replace their little tv with the biggest they could afford and then complain the picture was rubbish and blame the new set. It was always down to poor reception. These day it's all digital so you either have it or you don't. (Or blocky freeze frames)

What you will see that will make for a terrible picture is the fact that a screen with a 1080 native resolution will often look awful with a std def tv picture. Often fuzzy and out of focus. A larger than you need screen will exaggerate this to a level that is really quite depressing. I'm not sure of the exact term but I've called in reverse interpolation on here before. It's when the image does not scale up in a multiple of the screens native resolution. Some guesses are made to full the gaps. Some TV's do it better than others but when you get to larger screens, they are all pretty dire IMHO.(unless you are running an HD source of course)

If you don't actually want HD, you're miles better off with a good old fashioned CRT ;) it has the right number of dots on the screen :D

[Rare Bird]

The amount of living rooms i see with TV far too big for a given room size!..I know that if i bought the next size up the picture would be worse than the size we have.. However im sure people have reasons for big TV's ;)

[Thing Fish]

I'm about 7ft from my TV so 37" is about right. I also have it set up so my eyes are about the middle of the screen.

[Macca]

The amount of living rooms i see with TV far too big for a given room size!..I know that if i bought the next size up the picture would be worse than the size we have.. However im sure people have reasons for big TV's ;)

If you watch a lot of films or sport you really get the benefit of a large screen, if it's just for watching Newsnight or Eastenders then I agree I don't see the point.

[Rare Bird]

If i had my way it would be a 1968 Sony Trinitron 'KV-1310' in our living room :eyebrows:

[MikeMusic]

I have a 52" LG and the picture quality is awesome on HD , not so good on normal non HD

Thanks
I think most of my viewing at least short / mid term will be non HD - old type Tivo wit the odd DVD

[MikeMusic]

Many HD televisions are rather poor when showing standard res pictures (a friends Samsung was shocking). One of the main reasons I chose the one I have is because it's up sampling software was better than others.

Thanks
Does upsampling work on non HD and especially old style Tivo ?
Also seems like I need to see one working

[MikeMusic]

A lot of people I know have TV's that are too big for their viewing distance thus they look grainy. They also have them mounted way too high. Above a fireplace for example...:scratch:

For a 34” screen the viewing distance should be 4.25-7 feet.

For a 42” screen the viewing distance should be 5.25-8.75 feet.

For a 50” screen the viewing distance should be 6.25-10.5 feet.

For a 56” screen the viewing distance should be 7-11.75 feet.

For a 62” screen the viewing distance should be 7.75-13 feet.

For a 70” screen the viewing distance should be 8.75-14.75 feet.
Just measured
We watch a 36" CRT from 12 feet.
Could manage bigger :)

[MikeMusic]

No the picture stays the same - pal of mine has 60'' Pioneer plasma - with Blu-ray you can see the individual pores of the skin. Projectors are a whole different ballgame - really good ones are mega money and still won't equal a good plasma, good screens for them are pricey too.

I'm leaning to a Panasonic. Have heard the Pioneer (Kuro ?) is very good

[MikeMusic]

TV's shouldn't really give you a grainy picture these days. Back in the 80's what you describe in the op used to be a big problem. Customer would replace their little tv with the biggest they could afford and then complain the picture was rubbish and blame the new set. It was always down to poor reception. These day it's all digital so you either have it or you don't. (Or blocky freeze frames)

What you will see that will make for a terrible picture is the fact that a screen with a 1080 native resolution will often look awful with a std def tv picture. Often fuzzy and out of focus. A larger than you need screen will exaggerate this to a level that is really quite depressing. I'm not sure of the exact term but I've called in reverse interpolation on here before. It's when the image does not scale up in a multiple of the screens native resolution. Some guesses are made to full the gaps. Some TV's do it better than others but when you get to larger screens, they are all pretty dire IMHO.(unless you are running an HD source of course)

If you don't actually want HD, you're miles better off with a good old fashioned CRT ;) it has the right number of dots on the screen :D
Ah. That's my CRT paired nicely with my Tivo then
:D

[MikeMusic]

The amount of living rooms i see with TV far too big for a given room size!..I know that if i bought the next size up the picture would be worse than the size we have.. However im sure people have reasons for big TV's ;)

I've seen some. Horrid.
I *think* our big room could cope with a 50", but not certain

[MikeMusic]

I'm about 7ft from my TV so 37" is about right. I also have it set up so my eyes are about the middle of the screen.

I put mine on some joined Mark 1 Isobarik stands.
Must be around the same or slightly lower
Seems right

[MikeMusic]

If you watch a lot of films or sport you really get the benefit of a large screen, if it's just for watching Newsnight or Eastenders then I agree I don't see the point.

Fair bit, all via the Tivo though
I'm spending more time listening to Radio progs the Tivo has picked up - with the screen turned off
:)

[YNWaN]

Thanks
Does upsampling work on non HD and especially old style Tivo ?
Also seems like I need to see one working

The difference between an HD and non HD screen is the number of pixels it has - basically, an HD screen has more pixels and so, potentially, higher resolution (irrespective of screen size).

If you watch a non HD picture on an HD screen it is analogous to copying a low res picture from the Internet and enlarging it. Without some form of re-sampling the picture actually loses resolution. Therefore, all HD televisions use software (well, some may not I guess) to extrapolate additional (non existent) picture information from non-HD broadcasts. The Sony I have is very good in that respect, but my friends Samsung, whilst excellent when showing genuine HD content, was unwatchable when showing standard res broadcasts.

Any decent TV you buy now will have a Freeview receiver built in to it. Up-sampling is only required on non HD pictures (and is not mentioned in manufacturer blurb). Just make sure that when you go to look at televisions they aren't being fed by an HD DVD player or an HD broadcast (which most are) - ask to see them on normal, non HD, broadcast. Also, most (possibly all) current televisions have a 'shop display mode' that ramps up the contrast and brightness - this looks very impressive and quite stunning on cartoons - but unless you want fluorescent green grass and every sky to be eye popping blue, it is best avoided.

[Macca]

Whatever size you opt for you will spend the first month thinking 'this is huge', the second month you will be used to it, by the third month you think 'actually, I probably should have gone for the bigger one.' Don't bother with anything less than 50'' is my advice. They don't cost that much more and don't take up anymore floorspace than smaller screens.

[Thing Fish]

Only time my TV is on is to watch a film. Most TV is shite these days. I mostly listen to music when sitting down in the front room.

[MikeMusic]

The difference between an HD and non HD screen is the number of pixels it has - basically, an HD screen has more pixels and so, potentially, higher resolution (irrespective of screen size).

If you watch a non HD picture on an HD screen it is analogous to copying a low res picture from the Internet and enlarging it. Without some form of re-sampling the picture actually loses resolution. Therefore, all HD televisions use software (well, some may not I guess) to extrapolate additional (non existent) picture information from non-HD broadcasts. The Sony I have is very good in that respect, but my friends Samsung, whilst excellent when showing genuine HD content, was unwatchable when showing standard res broadcasts.

Thanks. Very useful
I need some good upsampling from non HD then
Is there a key phrase or word used for 'good upsampling for non HD' ?

[MikeMusic]

Whatever size you opt for you will spend the first month thinking 'this is huge', the second month you will be used to it, by the third month you think 'actually, I probably should have gone for the bigger one.' Don't bother with anything less than 50'' is my advice. They don't cost that much more and don't take up anymore floorspace than smaller screens.

Yes, having a 36" I thought going a bit bigger, 40" or so was probably pointless

I imagine it sitting on a Mana stand !

[Macca]

I've found the HD channels have a better picture quality than the standard def versions even if not watching them in HD. Odd, but I'm not the only one to notice it.

[MikeMusic]

Only time my TV is on is to watch a film. Most TV is shite these days. I mostly listen to music when sitting down in the front room.

That's where the Tivo is a killer
We don't watch any live TV now.
BTW if you haven't seen Person of Interest it is about to start again from the beginning. Probably the best thing TV right now

[MikeMusic]

I've found the HD channels have a better picture quality than the standard def versions even if not watching them in HD. Odd, but I'm not the only one to notice it.

From memory ....
I'd have to go to Freesat for that wouldn't I ?
I'm not paying anymore than the licence fee so the paid for stuff is out

[YNWaN]

Manufacturers tend not to discuss it and concentrate just on refresh rate etc -issues relating to HD performance (which is pretty good from all of them now).

There are, potentially, shed loads of picture adjustments that are possible. Most televisions group these together under global terms like 'brightness', 'contrast' etc. but they don't tell you how they are actually balancing the various internal aspects to achieve the end result -this is another of these aspects which is rarely mentioned.

[Macca]

From memory ....
I'd have to go to Freesat for that wouldn't I ?
I'm not paying anymore than the licence fee so the paid for stuff is out

Not sure - I have Virgin HD except I have it wired with a SCART so only get standard def - just not sorted it out yet, HDMI cable still in the packet :doh:
I like the telly, was brought up by it so I don't mind paying to have all the channels, I can understand why people think it is a waste of money though. Don't they have HD on freeview now?

[MikeMusic]

Manufacturers tend not to discuss it and concentrate just on refresh rate etc -issues relating to HD performance (which is pretty good from all of them now).

There are, potentially, shed loads of picture adjustments that are possible. Most televisions group these together under global terms like 'brightness', 'contrast' etc. but they don't tell you how they are actually balancing the various internal aspects to achieve the end result -this is another of these aspects which is rarely mentioned.

'Swat sells boxes I guess
I wonder if it would be worth the bother to end up with something that was bigger and not so good......
I'm watching less no and intend it to become less again
Assume the CRTs days are eventually numbered though

[MikeMusic]

Not sure - I have Virgin HD except I have it wired with a SCART so only get standard def - just not sorted it out yet, HDMI cable still in the packet :doh:
I like the telly, was brought up by it so I don't mind paying to have all the channels, I can understand why people think it is a waste of money though. Don't they have HD on freeview now?

Tivo only has SCART.
DVD has HDMI, but rarely watch it
There is almost nothing on the padi for lots I need - apart from British Eurosport which I would love to have but that costs a fortune on top and that's all I want.
If Chobham gets broadband we can actually stream I would pay the £3 or 4 a month

[YNWaN]

Yes, CRT is on the way to the technology graveyard - however, only because it is too bulky, you still get a better picture from an HD CRT (although the res difference issues still exist).

All new televisions will have a Freeview box built in to them. Though, personally, I have cable - which is a mixed blessing (certainly not all good).

[MikeMusic]

Yes, CRT is on the way to the technology graveyard - however, only because it is too bulky, you still get a better picture from an HD CRT (although the res difference issues still exist).

All new televisions will have a Freeview box built in to them. Though, personally, I have cable - which is a mixed blessing (certainly not all good).

Assumed there was no CRT HD. Could I have it already ?

Cable - hah !
Down this little country cul de sac, off a little country road, off a slightly bigger country road, probably not