Forum search & shortcuts

Massive TVs - how b...
 

[Closed] Massive TVs - how big is too big

Posts: 13554
Free Member
 

with £125 a roll wallpaper on it.

Wallpaper? STW is moving from middle aged to old aged by the day!


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 6:27 pm
Posts: 13496
Full Member
 

Wallpaper was in again.....but that was a couple of years ago. Might be passé again by now.


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 6:30 pm
Posts: 13496
Full Member
 

re the settings - if they could invent a wife lock that would be marvellous. A bit like a child lock but it prevents ones nearest and dearest switching the telly back to some horrific 'vivid' setting after you have spent minutes fine tuning an acceptable custom setting that stops everyone looking like they have a Trump tan.


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 6:33 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

thats because I have 42″ tv I got secondhand – like I buy most of my consumer goods. I don’t even know what definition or anything else it is and I don’t care.

Jeez, then it's even worse. You should be 1 8m for regular viewing and 1.5 or so for films!

Actually, in all seriousness, at that size if it's a bit older, it might be 720p, which would explain why you can't sit closer because at that pixel density you may start to see image degradation before you get to 'optimum' distance.


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 7:15 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

they could invent a wife lock that would be marvellous

A mate used to put dead batteries in the remote when he wasn't using it. He told his wife and kids it was broken. He knew they couldn't be arsed to read the manual to figure out how to change it through the buttons on the tv.


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 7:17 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Except, they generally have a separate “store” setting for that.

Here, yes. Walmart and Costco in the US, not so much. Guess where they sell more tvs!


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 7:19 pm
Posts: 14817
Full Member
 

£125 a roll wallpaper on it.

I wouldn't brag about having wallpaper. Hateful stuff - never had it in 28 years of homeowning

 if they could invent a wife lock that would be marvellous

I quite often bollock the Mrs for recording stuff on Sky in SD. She can't be arsed to find the HD channel. She can barely tell the difference between SD and UHD HDR FFS


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 9:01 pm
Posts: 16534
Full Member
 

PSA: 10% off *all* Tv's at Argos at the moment. Online/in store.

Code is online.


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 9:49 pm
Posts: 44824
Full Member
 

don't worry chomolly - its not that old 🙂    I just find it highly amusing that you guys sit with your noses pressed against the screens and have these huge tellys dominating your rooms.  But then I probably watch it 2 or 3 hours a week !  It hasn't been turned on for a couple of days

I don't sit closer because it bloody uncomfortable to sit so close with such a wide viewing angle -


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 9:53 pm
Posts: 78596
Full Member
 

I quite often bollock the Mrs for recording stuff on Sky in SD. She can’t be arsed to find the HD channel.

I really don't understand why "use best source" isn't a feature in 2021. My other half will watch say BBC1 in SD because on the HD channels you get what is effectively a test card whilst it switches to regional programming like the local news and she gets sick of pressing ONE BUTTON to change it. Then I came in and think I've grown cataracts.

It surely can't be that difficult to auto-switch? The old Sky HD box used to annoy me for this, but my brand new supermassive TV still doesn't do it.


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 10:04 pm
Posts: 33995
Full Member
 

Thing is, tv screens are measured on the diagonal, so a 5” diagonal difference in size will be barely noticeable across the width; it’s 2.5” inches extra on each side on the diagonal, so probably not much more than an inch or so across the width.

If you’re sitting ten feet away, I reckon you could go to 75” or possibly 80”.

My telly is a fairly old, (2007), and a 42” Bravia with quite a wide bezel. I’m sat about six feet away from it, which sounds close, but if I hold my 10.5” iPad up just over a foot in front of my face, it completely covers the telly screen.


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 10:55 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

just find it highly amusing that you guys sit with your noses pressed against the screens and have these huge tellys dominating your rooms

I have a very modest sized one that I'd happily sit closer to, except it would be uncomfortable cos I'd have to pull my feet up under me. I'd also have to recalibrate the surround sound. I spent the money I saved on the tv on the sound system. The sound on flat panel tvs is atrocious.


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 11:15 pm
Posts: 2653
Free Member
 

Another 42” Panasonic plasma owner here.

My wife wants us to get a bigger set, but doesn’t want us to pay OLED money.

Looks like we will be sticking with the Panny for a bit then.


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 11:25 pm
Posts: 1015
Free Member
 

I checked the price of our 42” panny plasma, it was £800 11 years ago, a 48” LG OLED can be got for £799 at the moment so prices actually seem on a par with my old set, possibly even cheaper if you work out 11years inflation. Damn, why is the picture still so good, would love a slightly larger set!


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 11:37 pm
Posts: 597
Free Member
 

The reason we’re “racing towards extinction” isn’t having a BIGGER television

May not be the only reason, but is really is a reason. Trying to deflect reasonable observations that question whether we really need to constantly “go bigger” doesn’t help establish debate about what is sustainable.


 
Posted : 25/11/2021 11:42 pm
Posts: 78596
Full Member
 

Thing is, tv screens are measured on the diagonal, so a 5” diagonal difference in size will be barely noticeable across the width; it’s 2.5” inches extra on each side on the diagonal, so probably not much more than an inch or so across the width.

Your maths needs work. A 16:9 screen gives you a diagonal ratio of 18.36 (for back-of-an-envelope calculations that it isn't a million miles from Pythagoras' 3:4:5 triangle).

5 / 18.36 * 16 = 4.36 so a 5" change in screen size is a 4.36" change in width. Or 2.18" by your "each side" reasoning.


 
Posted : 26/11/2021 12:45 am
Posts: 656
Free Member
 

checked the price of our 42” panny plasma, it was £800 11 years ago, a 48” LG OLED can be got for £799 at the moment so prices actually seem on a par with my old set, possibly even cheaper if you work out 11years inflation. Damn, why is the picture still so good, would love a slightly larger set!

was similar in my case, 50" plasma was £1200 about 9 years ago and at the start of this year the 55" OLED was £1100 although i ended up going 65" which added about another £500. the plasma was a bit higher up the range though.


 
Posted : 26/11/2021 9:41 pm
Posts: 3409
Full Member
 

The amount of over-processing and nonsense settings I see on friends’ setups makes decent films look like they’re budget daytime tv productions, especially when watching HDR content.

This to some degree. I like that my TVs set the frame rate to match the 'source'. But the out of the box settings were awful: smoothing, 'AI' blah blah. Awful. Turned all of that nonsense off and things were much better.


 
Posted : 26/11/2021 11:13 pm
Page 4 / 4