HomeCinemaBanter

HomeCinemaBanter (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/index.php)
-   High definition TV (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Cheap(er), small(er) HD sets: When? (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/showthread.php?t=7042)

T. Pascal July 12th 04 04:14 PM

Bert Hyman wrote in message . ..
(T. Pascal) wrote in
om:

Another idea is to simply use a regular 4:3 TV fed by component or
S-Video cables. You can display HD TV on an SD TV with no problem (it
looks a little squished, but once you get used to it...) The benefit
is that SD channels look as they should.


When an HD tuner/receiver downconverts an HD signal to SD, can't it
"letterbox" it? Is this a feature on some tuners?




It is available, but mine doesn't (appear to have it). Most idiots
don't like letterboxing, and would post questions like "How do you get
rid of the black bars at the top and bottom?"

I was recently at the local store and saw some very inexpensive ($400)
27" widescreen, non-HD CRT sets. That would fit the ticket, except
that SD stuff is stretched. When more and more HD material comes out,
these sets could be the exact ticket for rooms around the house.

Joe Moore July 12th 04 07:17 PM

ixjunk (nixjunk) wrote:

I was addressing the practicality of HDTV on a small CRT, not the
desirability. I was just saying that if it's possible to produce a 19
inch CRT computer monitor which displays 1600 by 1200, then there is
no technical reason why a 23 inch CRT HDTV would be impractical. Which
is what the original poster was asking about.

Whether the market for such a set would be big enough to make
producing it worthwhile is another issue.


Of course there would be, just as there is for current small TVsl. Plenty of
people have small TVs in their kitchens, garages, extra rooms, etc.


Sure. But manufacturers would rather sell more expensive, higher
margin, flat-panel, non-CRT tv's for those uses. And as long as
consumers are willing to spend more money for less resolution in order
to get the latest style, manufacturers will be happy to oblige them.


joemooreaterolsdotcom

dizzy July 12th 04 09:10 PM

On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 13:02:23 +0000, Joe Moore wrote:

I was addressing the practicality of HDTV on a small CRT, not the
desirability. I was just saying that if it's possible to produce a 19
inch CRT computer monitor which displays 1600 by 1200, then there is no
technical reason why a 23 inch CRT HDTV would be impractical. Which is
what the original poster was asking about.

Whether the market for such a set would be big enough to make producing
it worthwhile is another issue.


Right, not much market for an small but expensive, high-resolution
wide-screen CRT. LCD's are taking-over the "small but good" sector of the
market.


dizzy July 12th 04 09:15 PM

On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 09:21:12 +0000, nixjunk wrote:

This reminds me of people that say that below an 8x10 print size medium
format or even large format film doesn't show any advantages. The truth
is even with a 4 inch print the advantages of a larger film is evident.
Assuming the actually TV can display a good quality picture on its own
then the advantages of HD should be evident even in very small displays


If you're close-enough to it to resolve the details, certainly. A 100"
screen that is 10' away looks exactly as large, and "requires" exactly the
same resolution, as a 10" screen that is 1' away.



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:44 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com