John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rob_Quads
quote:
Originally posted by Balling
quote:
Originally posted by Jakey
Plus I think a decent LED TV is better quality than some 3D I've seen.
Which makes no sense...
It's not an LED TV, it's an LCD TV with LED back- or edgelighting.
3D it self is not a technology, but a feature. There's no difference between a 3D TV and a none 3D TV.
There is a lot of differences between the 3D TVs and non-3D TV. The 3D ones have a lot more electronics which all add cost and extra potential for distortion if your not using it.
You could get a higher spec non 3D TV than a basic 3D tv so if you don't need the feature don't go for it.
3D is going to be constantly changing for a few years yet. Some of the manufacturers have agreed some standards but not enough. 3D is being used as the real selling point while they try and get the OLED TVs into production that have taken longer than expected and so they need some 'buz' feature to keep the sales going
It has extra electronics yes but that's the extent of it.
Why would it add distortion? The TV continues to display a picture just as it always would, it just syncs up with a pair of glasses.
|
Rob_Quads
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: southampton
User status: Offline
|
The more electronics a signal passes through the more its prone to error and signal deviation.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Thats not what's happening here. The picture the tv displays is exactly the same as a non 3d one. 3d in no way causes what you are suggesting.
[Edited on 24-01-2012 by John]
|
Rob_Quads
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: southampton
User status: Offline
|
The 3D picture is different. You look at a 3D picture on a TV thats not 3D i..e Sky 3D. Both the left and right picture are produced in the same frame.
IF there is no difference in the way the 3D picture is shown then how does the 3D view suddenly show the picture full screen?
It takes half the image, shows that then takes the other half and shows that....which is all done in electronics - processing which is not needed if your watching non 3D
[Edited on 24-01-2012 by Rob_Quads]
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
It shows one left frame then one right frame, over the full screen, so it just has to flash the frames up quicker. It might not even be any extra electronics, it could be done in software, all it's doing is syncing the glasses with when it shows a left frame or a right frame.
WTF does that have to do with the picture going through any extra electronics when it's not playing 3D.
The 3D functionality of a TV does not in any way, shape or form, do anything at all to the picture quality of a normal signal.
|
Balling
Premium Member
Registered: 7th Apr 04
Location: Denmark
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rob_Quads
There is a lot of differences between the 3D TVs and non-3D TV. The 3D ones have a lot more electronics which all add cost and extra potential for distortion if your not using it.
I'm certain that's not true.
No electronics are required except, as John says, the ability to sync with the glasses, which is a process that runs parallel with the image signal and not something the signal runs through.
The only difference between a 3D TV and a none-3D TV is the ability to sync the glasses.
Obviously this is only true for active 3D and not passive 3D.
I am yet to see any conclusive evidence, that the added feature of 3D affects the 2D performance of a TV.
|
Terry12
Member
Registered: 24th Sep 07
Location: Manchester
User status: Offline
|
I went and bought a TV today.
Finally decided on this Samsung
I got it for £450 though.
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Terry12
I went and bought a TV today.
Finally decided on this Samsung
I got it for £450 though.
It's worth reading of the Samygo Wiki (http://wiki.samygo.tv/index.php5/Main_Page), especially activating the PVR on the D5's.
|
Terry12
Member
Registered: 24th Sep 07
Location: Manchester
User status: Offline
|
Will take a look at that. Cheers.
|
Balling
Premium Member
Registered: 7th Apr 04
Location: Denmark
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Terry12
I went and bought a TV today.
Finally decided on this Samsung
I got it for £450 though.
Looks like a decent purchase, especially at that price!
|
Terry12
Member
Registered: 24th Sep 07
Location: Manchester
User status: Offline
|
I'm certainly impressed. I know the contrast ratio is a lot lower than the Panasonic but it is a great picture.
Happy with it so far. I'm just waiting for the bracket and wall shelves so I can put it on the wall.
|
