|
|
Viewing distance?
Fred wrote:
My wife has had a detached retina and can't see out of that eye. I have CSR and have little vision in one eye and don't see great with the other. I went from 27" crt to 32" HD. Our TV room ia 12 x 15 and we sit 10 to 12 ft from and see it fine. WTF is wrong with you ppl that you need such big screens? I wouldn't want anyting bigger than 32" in my room. I'm guessing 99% of you are simply looking for bragging rights:) Gee whiz Fred, there's nothing wrong with people liking small TV screens, or big TV screens, or in between TV screens. We don't need tham, we just want them. So long as the kids have shoes and food, why not? For the same reason i wouldnt buy a frigging semi when all I need is a pickup truck I'm saying IMHO that many people buy way bigger than need just to keep up with the Jones's and as I said for bragging rights. It sure aint because you can't see a smaller set. -- jer email reply - I am not a 'ten' |
Viewing distance?
On Mar 2, 4:29*pm, Fred wrote:
Fred wrote: My wife has had a detached retina and can't see out of that eye. I have CSR and have little vision in one eye and don't see great with the other. I went from 27" crt to 32" HD. Our TV room ia 12 x 15 and we sit 10 to 12 ft from and see it fine. WTF is wrong with you ppl that you need such big screens? I wouldn't want anyting bigger than 32" in my room. I'm guessing 99% of you are simply looking for bragging rights:) Gee whiz Fred, there's nothing wrong with people liking small TV screens, or big TV screens, or in between TV screens. *We don't need tham, we just want them. *So long as the kids have shoes and food, why not? For the same reason i wouldnt buy a frigging semi when all I need is a pickup truck I'm saying IMHO that many people buy way bigger than need just to keep up with the Jones's and as I said for bragging rights. It sure aint because you can't see a smaller set. -- jer We came from a 35" Mitsubishi SD CRT set to a 50" Samsung DLP 5 years back . It seemed like a big step up but at this point I wish it had been a 60 or 70+ inch screen - for the same reason thare are seats near AND far in the movie theatre. Different folks want different stuff. "*So long as the kids have shoes and food, why not? " G² |
Viewing distance?
On Mar 2, 7:29*pm, Fred wrote:
Fred wrote: For the same reason i wouldnt buy a frigging semi when all I need is a pickup truck I'm saying IMHO that many people buy way bigger than need just to keep up with the Jones's and as I said for bragging rights. It sure aint because you can't see a smaller set. Or maybe they entertain the Joneses. The bigger the screen, the more people that can sit beside each other to watch. |
Viewing distance?
On 03 Mar 2009 00:29:10 GMT, Fred wrote:
Fred wrote: My wife has had a detached retina and can't see out of that eye. I have CSR and have little vision in one eye and don't see great with the other. I went from 27" crt to 32" HD. Our TV room ia 12 x 15 and we sit 10 to 12 ft from and see it fine. WTF is wrong with you ppl that you need such big screens? I wouldn't want anyting bigger than 32" in my room. I'm guessing 99% of you are simply looking for bragging rights:) Gee whiz Fred, there's nothing wrong with people liking small TV screens, or big TV screens, or in between TV screens. We don't need tham, we just want them. So long as the kids have shoes and food, why not? For the same reason i wouldnt buy a frigging semi when all I need is a pickup truck I'm saying IMHO that many people buy way bigger than need just to keep up with the Jones's and as I said for bragging rights. It sure aint because you can't see a smaller set. I think you are wrong. Just because someone buys something bigger than you doesn't mean they do it for bragging rights. You seem like you must justify buying a smaller set. People buy what they like. Isn't that enough for you? Do people buy Cadillacs versus Toyotas for bragging rights? Hardly. Thumper -- jer email reply - I am not a 'ten' |
Viewing distance?
"Fred" wrote in message ... Fred wrote: My wife has had a detached retina and can't see out of that eye. I have CSR and have little vision in one eye and don't see great with the other. I went from 27" crt to 32" HD. Our TV room ia 12 x 15 and we sit 10 to 12 ft from and see it fine. WTF is wrong with you ppl that you need such big screens? I wouldn't want anyting bigger than 32" in my room. I'm guessing 99% of you are simply looking for bragging rights:) Gee whiz Fred, there's nothing wrong with people liking small TV screens, or big TV screens, or in between TV screens. We don't need tham, we just want them. So long as the kids have shoes and food, why not? For the same reason i wouldnt buy a frigging semi when all I need is a pickup truck I'm saying IMHO that many people buy way bigger than need just to keep up with the Jones's and as I said for bragging rights. It sure aint because you can't see a smaller set. Or maybe we have houses that are too big with rooms that are too big. I have a 73" screen, and the seating is anywhere from 12 ft to 25 ft away. It seems to be just about right for my application. If anything, it's a little on the small side....! -- jer email reply - I am not a 'ten' |
Viewing distance?
|
Viewing distance?
On Mar 2, 2:18*pm, Big_Al wrote:
dmaster said this on 3/2/2009 1:36 PM: On Mar 1, 5:22 pm, Fred wrote: My wife has had a detached retina and can't see out of that eye. I have CSR and have little vision in one eye and don't see great with the other. I went from 27" crt to 32" HD. Our TV room ia 12 x 15 and we sit 10 to 12 ft from and see it fine. WTF is wrong with you ppl that you need such big screens? I wouldn't want anyting bigger than 32" in my room. I'm guessing 99% of you are simply looking for bragging rights:) I don't care about bragging rights. *With glasses, my eyes adjust to a little better than 20/20. Still, like every human being, my eyes have a limited resolution. *The eye resolution is described as pixels or line pairs per degrees of arc. *The farther the TV, the smaller it looks (subtends less degrees of arc), and the less actual detail the eye can perceive. *Of, if you fix the distance, the smaller the TV at a given distance the smaller it looks and the less actual detail the eye can perceive. *So, for any given size of TV, there is a distance over which the human eye can no longer distinguish HD from SD. *That won't make the picture look bad, but why pay for HD if you can't see it? *Part of the enjoyment of HDTV is the "wow, look at the detail" aspect. So, if you don't care if you can see the extra detail, that's fine. Enjoy your TV. *But with a little imagination, you should be able to see why some people would pay for a bigger TV. Dan (Woj...) I disagree. *A fuzzy picture 5 feet away looks as bad as a fuzzy picture 20 feet away. * *My vision is 20/30 and a low res SD picture is not friendly to my eyes. *I don't care if its on the 13" or the 42", or what distance I have to be. *Its not clear and my eyes will never get it any better than "not clear".- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Try a little experiment. I did this with my family. I took a good digital photo and ran it through a mosaic filter to create a really blocky, mosaic like picture. Not even close to a photo; no way, no how. I printed the mosaic at 6x8 and propped it on a counter. The family gathered around, took a look at the picture, and agreed that it couldn't possibly be mistaken for a photograph. I then had them look at the picture and slowly back away. To their total astonishment, at some distance like 15 feet, the picture suddenly looked photographic again. They had simply reached the distance where even a truly crude picture passed the limitted angular resolution of our human eyes. That distance will vary depending on eyesight, but it will occur. The same will happen with happen with SD displays, or SD pictures on HD displays. At some point the resolution of the human eye becomes the limiting factor. This "feature" of the eye is exploited all the time. If you can safely do so, walk up to a highway billboard advertisment some time. You will be amazed at the low resolution of the picture. Dan (Woj...) |
Viewing distance?
"Thumper" wrote in message ... On Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:59:03 +0000, Naked Gonad wrote: Charles Tomaras wrote: "Fred" wrote in message ... My wife has had a detached retina and can't see out of that eye. I have CSR and have little vision in one eye and don't see great with the other. I went from 27" crt to 32" HD. Our TV room ia 12 x 15 and we sit 10 to 12 ft from and see it fine. WTF is wrong with you ppl that you need such big screens? I wouldn't want anyting bigger than 32" in my room. I'm guessing 99% of you are simply looking for bragging rights:) All depends on what your definition of "see it fine" is. If someone has hearing impairment and can't hear anything above 2k then FINE music reproduction is very different for that person than it is for someone who hears above 16k. If your television makes you happy with your vision impairment then I guess that's just fine for you, but I see no reason for you to brag about it. I would go further, there are some people I know who do not want anything bigger than a 22" and they would probably think a 32" was showing off. It's a personal choice. Sure but you have to be damned close to a 22" to be able to read anything on the screen. Thumper There are many of us that no longer have sharp (young) vision.... http://cgi.ebay.com/TV-Screen-Magnif...QQcmdZViewItem |
Viewing distance?
On Mar 7, 12:35*pm, "L Alpert" wrote:
There are many of us that no longer have sharp (young) vision....http://cgi.ebay.com/TV-Screen-Magnifier---Fits-15%22- to-25%22-Diagona... My vision is still sharp at 50+ BUT I no longer have the range near vs far that I had. IOW I need different strength glasses for close vs far. 0.75 diopter for TV is sharp as a tack. G² |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:21 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com