Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What makes a 3d tv as best?

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
June 3, 2011 9:00:48 AM

Brands like Sony, Toshiba, Panasonic, Samsung and LG,
all are delivering their 3D TVs with some good tech in market.

Among these prestigious TV companies, which brands 3d tv can be consider as best.

What all options and features make a 3d tv superior than the other?

If someone ever experience 3d tv,
then kindly do let me know and share the best features of a 3d tv.
Thnx!!!

More about : makes

June 3, 2011 9:13:41 AM

shutter glasses can ruin a perfectly good 3d television.
if they dont go from right to left (or left to right) fast and accurate enough, it is worthless.

as far as the television is concerned.. all it has to do is play a video, nothing special at all.
how far out (or how deep in) will make a 3d tv the perfect choice.
i doubt they make an option to choose how much the image pops out.
you'll have to choose that option by choosing the right television model number.
maybe you will have to change brand names to get more or less popping out.

after the signal has been examined, all it does is examine the chroma/luminance and exaggerate the shading.
sure, maybe one video processor does it better than the other.
but it would be disrespectful to the industry.
hopefully the price would easily reflect the video processing quality.

the getting the frames prepared, processed, and displayed is the first thing that has to happen within a specific moment of time to be considered functional (of course faster would be better.. as it would then allow for some custom frames to be added thanks to algebra)

talking about the quality of the software programming.
then you have to consider the quality of the electrical components on the circuit board.
would you sacrifice really huge 3d quality for a television that lasts longer?
or would you want the best 3d quality with a television that is going to go into protect mode in 2 - 3 years?

you cant even go out there and shop.. because the television might be perfect and the glasses they give you are broken or slow (whatever the reason, the glasses might be bad/wrong)

good luck!
m
0
l
June 3, 2011 11:37:48 AM

Well, its natural that i would to choose a 3d tv which ruins perfectly for long time...

well as you mentioned in post sg glasses go from right to left & 'vise versa' fast and accurate enough,
so don't you think that process creates some kind of confusion or that's low down our concentration level.

I'm saying this because once I've tested a Samsung 3d tv in mall and the same process of glasses were going on there like you mentioned in your post.

But know i getting confused, whether that going to be effective or not?
Any ways thanks!!!
m
0
l
Related resources
June 3, 2011 12:49:22 PM

Brand preference is not too much important, main thing is one have to check the technical strenght of the model.
for 3d tv you should check the tech first, and I've heard a lot about the image fliker, overlapping in 3d tvs....
so these are some points which you have to consider before purchase.
m
0
l
June 4, 2011 3:03:50 AM

do i believe the problems can be seen by the person or if they are too small to notice?
yes, i believe both can be true.

there are three points
1. the television
2. the wireless output
3. the glasses

any one of them might get out of sync.
it would probably be a thing of age before it is a problem fresh out of the box.
the company wants you to be happy when you take it all out of the box and try it.
that doesnt mean the glasses are going to be the premium ones.
if the company can get some cheap glasses that work for about 2-3 years without any problems.. then it would save them money AND it would be teamwork, because you would go out and buy another pair of glasses.
if the person really cared about the 3d.. then they would get themselves some premium glasses and not have to worry about another problem for a much longer time.
maybe the new glasses are extra perfect for 5-6 years.. and then a little bit 'off' for the rest of their lifetime.
maybe the glasses are extra perfect for another 6-7 years until they quit.
or
maybe after 6-7 years the problems start to surface and you have the choice to keep using them or do something about it.

i would be willing to blame the wireless receiver too.
cheap kits would do it to you.. maybe not right out of the box, but the problems might start within 2 years and just get worse and worse.

i dont know how the quality is, as i havent been using the hardware myself.

but a wise thought inside of me says this:
the higher quality products are going to last longer than the junk.
when you buy something.. it is all a matter of when it is going to break.
sometimes you will see two televisions side by side.
one television costs half the other one, and the picture quality is half as good too.
but both of them will last for the same number of years.
then you start to say, well this one is too expensive and i need something $150 cheaper.
then you have to check if the picture quality is the same, you have to wonder if the picture quality is going to stay the same.. and you have to wonder if the picture quality does stay the same, will it break a many years earlier than the other television?

see.. the $150 price is for the old days with CRT before they started to cost as much as $1,500
i dont know what all the prices where back in the early to mid 1990's

and it is really sad nowadays.
you hear about people who spend $3,000 on a new television that lasted only 4 - 5 years.
and some people like me will tell you.. maybe you shouldnt have bought the new television technology when it first came out.
you could have spent that money on a high definition CRT .. as the crt televisions have been around for a long long time.
they know how to build those without them breaking.
sony and philips and rca used to make televisions that would last 10 years EASY.
there are still some sony and rca CRT televisions from the 1990s at work.
and there are still some zenith and rca and magnavox console televisions that are being sold and still work.. these are from the early 1990's
there are even some projection televisions that are being sold that still work, and they come from the mid 1990's (though almost all of their screens are blurry as snot)

i do hate to think 'you get what you pay for' when it comes to how long a product will last before it breaks.
if i cant afford (or dont care to buy the best) color accuracy.. i should be able to live with it for the same number of years as the best televisions.

am i ignorant and stupid sometimes to say 'i want a television with superior picture quality.. and i dont care if it breaks in 6 years' ?
yes i am.
sometimes people will pay less for functionality and ENJOY buying a new television.
as it changes the atmosphere in the living room.
sometimes we need to say 'i got my moneys worth out of it'
and i think we should always be saying that, because i remember my mother and father saying 'i got my moneys worth out of it and then some'
so to see that and also see a change from that.. it is disrespectful and degrading.

i would hope the rest of us are usually only making the mistake of buying inferior color accuracy, and a higher resolution screen will be available in the future.
i have seen some higher resolution LCD televisions.
we need these to be more common for PC use.
it will help the video card market continue to seperate the rich from the poor.
maybe the rich will play these video games at the highest resolution when the game first comes out.
but
that doesnt mean you cant wait 2 or 3 years before you get your chance to play the game at the highest resolution.

buying everything from last generation saves money at the cost of getting there late.
maybe not as many players, and that hurts.
but if the people you are playing with arent very good at the game.. it is safe to say they are the 'middle / low financial class' too.
and that should really help you feel relaxed and comfortable in the virtual environment.
and it should also be a real good reason for game developers to stop giving up support for a video game too early.
m
0
l
June 7, 2011 8:46:20 AM

This looks as u writing an article.....information is good but not up to the mark....!!
m
0
l
June 7, 2011 4:54:34 PM

tegasunil said:
This looks as u writing an article.....information is good but not up to the mark....!!


that is tickling because the same can be said when viewing a 3d television with some sync problems.
as if to say, the 'article' is the flashing of the glasses when the television and glasses arent letting all of the light through as a team.
you get these feelings of grey or a lighter shade of black.

maybe you get these feelings of black when you put the glasses on and the shutters are working.
but that would be adding color to the display, and it isnt something i would expect when grabbing some glasses that are simply supposed to open and shut some blinders.
i guess if the refresh rate was high enough, whatever color the shutters are would kinda blend in with the picture.
maybe not by being close to the eyeball and interfering with the vision to the television.. but maybe because of the light bouncing around on the shutters, producing more of an ambient artifact from those reflections off of the shutters.
or are the lenses themselves slightly tinted?

anyways.. i would assume the situation goes like this, if there are sync problems.. then the 3d wont pop out as much (or if at all) because your brain isnt getting the information for each eye continously.
with a sync problem two things happen:
1. the left side goes to the left eye and slowly shifts to the right eye, then back to the left (ruining the brains chance to do all of the processing)
2. as the shutters get out of sync, you dont get as long to view each frame of video.. so you might be seeing only one frame for a fraction of the time you should be seeing it.
or
you might be seeing the television switch from one picture to the next (more blurry)
watching the television switch frames from a single eyeball means you are missing the frame entirely, on each eyeball.
the viewing experience couldnt get any more blurry unless you reduced the sharpness of the television, or smeared a liquid on the lenses of the shutter glasses.
and this is how the video information could be good.. as if a 'change' but not popping out of the screen (or giving extra depth for that matter).
m
0
l
June 8, 2011 4:45:10 AM

anwaypasible said:
do i believe the problems can be seen by the person or if they are too small to notice?
yes, i believe both can be true.

there are three points
1. the television
2. the wireless output
3. the glasses

any one of them might get out of sync.
it would probably be a thing of age before it is a problem fresh out of the box.
the company wants you to be happy when you take it all out of the box and try it.
that doesnt mean the glasses are going to be the premium ones.
if the company can get some cheap glasses that work for about 2-3 years without any problems.. then it would save them money AND it would be teamwork, because you would go out and buy another pair of glasses.
if the person really cared about the 3d.. then they would get themselves some premium glasses and not have to worry about another problem for a much longer time.
maybe the new glasses are extra perfect for 5-6 years.. and then a little bit 'off' for the rest of their lifetime.
maybe the glasses are extra perfect for another 6-7 years until they quit.
or
maybe after 6-7 years the problems start to surface and you have the choice to keep using them or do something about it.

i would be willing to blame the wireless receiver too.
cheap kits would do it to you.. maybe not right out of the box, but the problems might start within 2 years and just get worse and worse.

i dont know how the quality is, as i havent been using the hardware myself.

but a wise thought inside of me says this:
the higher quality products are going to last longer than the junk.
when you buy something.. it is all a matter of when it is going to break.
sometimes you will see two televisions side by side.
one television costs half the other one, and the picture quality is half as good too.
but both of them will last for the same number of years.
then you start to say, well this one is too expensive and i need something $150 cheaper.
then you have to check if the picture quality is the same, you have to wonder if the picture quality is going to stay the same.. and you have to wonder if the picture quality does stay the same, will it break a many years earlier than the other television?

see.. the $150 price is for the old days with CRT before they started to cost as much as $1,500
i dont know what all the prices where back in the early to mid 1990's

and it is really sad nowadays.
you hear about people who spend $3,000 on a new television that lasted only 4 - 5 years.
and some people like me will tell you.. maybe you shouldnt have bought the new television technology when it first came out.
you could have spent that money on a high definition CRT .. as the crt televisions have been around for a long long time.
they know how to build those without them breaking.
sony and philips and rca used to make televisions that would last 10 years EASY.
there are still some sony and rca CRT televisions from the 1990s at work.
and there are still some zenith and rca and magnavox console televisions that are being sold and still work.. these are from the early 1990's
there are even some projection televisions that are being sold that still work, and they come from the mid 1990's (though almost all of their screens are blurry as snot)

i do hate to think 'you get what you pay for' when it comes to how long a product will last before it breaks.
if i cant afford (or dont care to buy the best) color accuracy.. i should be able to live with it for the same number of years as the best televisions.

am i ignorant and stupid sometimes to say 'i want a television with superior picture quality.. and i dont care if it breaks in 6 years' ?
yes i am.
sometimes people will pay less for functionality and ENJOY buying a new television.
as it changes the atmosphere in the living room.
sometimes we need to say 'i got my moneys worth out of it'
and i think we should always be saying that, because i remember my mother and father saying 'i got my moneys worth out of it and then some'
so to see that and also see a change from that.. it is disrespectful and degrading.

i would hope the rest of us are usually only making the mistake of buying inferior color accuracy, and a higher resolution screen will be available in the future.
i have seen some higher resolution LCD televisions.
we need these to be more common for PC use.
it will help the video card market continue to seperate the rich from the poor.
maybe the rich will play these video games at the highest resolution when the game first comes out.
but
that doesnt mean you cant wait 2 or 3 years before you get your chance to play the game at the highest resolution.

buying everything from last generation saves money at the cost of getting there late.
maybe not as many players, and that hurts.
but if the people you are playing with arent very good at the game.. it is safe to say they are the 'middle / low financial class' too.
and that should really help you feel relaxed and comfortable in the virtual environment.
and it should also be a real good reason for game developers to stop giving up support for a video game too early.


OMG! It's good to know such a vast detail about tv....
m
0
l
June 8, 2011 5:09:28 AM

anwaypasible said:
that is tickling because the same can be said when viewing a 3d television with some sync problems.
as if to say, the 'article' is the flashing of the glasses when the television and glasses arent letting all of the light through as a team.
you get these feelings of grey or a lighter shade of black.

maybe you get these feelings of black when you put the glasses on and the shutters are working.
but that would be adding color to the display, and it isnt something i would expect when grabbing some glasses that are simply supposed to open and shut some blinders.
i guess if the refresh rate was high enough, whatever color the shutters are would kinda blend in with the picture.
maybe not by being close to the eyeball and interfering with the vision to the television.. but maybe because of the light bouncing around on the shutters, producing more of an ambient artifact from those reflections off of the shutters.
or are the lenses themselves slightly tinted?

anyways.. i would assume the situation goes like this, if there are sync problems.. then the 3d wont pop out as much (or if at all) because your brain isnt getting the information for each eye continously.
with a sync problem two things happen:
1. the left side goes to the left eye and slowly shifts to the right eye, then back to the left (ruining the brains chance to do all of the processing)
2. as the shutters get out of sync, you dont get as long to view each frame of video.. so you might be seeing only one frame for a fraction of the time you should be seeing it.
or
you might be seeing the television switch from one picture to the next (more blurry)
watching the television switch frames from a single eyeball means you are missing the frame entirely, on each eyeball.
the viewing experience couldnt get any more blurry unless you reduced the sharpness of the television, or smeared a liquid on the lenses of the shutter glasses.
and this is how the video information could be good.. as if a 'change' but not popping out of the screen (or giving extra depth for that matter).


Yeah that's true the process you share, but can you differentiate between the brands I've mentioned above in terms of performance.
like which one is technically sound better than the other....
m
0
l
June 8, 2011 4:58:47 PM

i cant do it.
but i havent played with a bunch of different televisions.

you would think somebody who works at best buy or some other store that sells the televisions would come along and say which brand they have played with in the store that never fails.

seems kinda strange and isolated.
m
0
l
June 10, 2011 10:55:39 AM

gaurishank said:
Brands like Sony, Toshiba, Panasonic, Samsung and LG,
all are delivering their 3D TVs with some good tech in market.

Among these prestigious TV companies, which brands 3d tv can be consider as best.

What all options and features make a 3d tv superior than the other?

If someone ever experience 3d tv,
then kindly do let me know and share the best features of a 3d tv.
Thnx!!!



There are 2 types of technology SD and FPR.


The performance of the 3DTV depends on what technology is being used by a particular brand.

FPR technology is the better and advanced than the SG 3DTV technology.
m
0
l
June 10, 2011 11:17:19 AM

gaurishank said:
Brands like Sony, Toshiba, Panasonic, Samsung and LG,
all are delivering their 3D TVs with some good tech in market.

Among these prestigious TV companies, which brands 3d tv can be consider as best.

What all options and features make a 3d tv superior than the other?

If someone ever experience 3d tv,
then kindly do let me know and share the best features of a 3d tv.
Thnx!!!


Sony’s BRAVIA NX810 is the best 3D TV in my opinion.

It’s a simple jet-black monolithic design, and there’s nothing complex at all about it...
m
0
l
!