When watching blu-ray or 1080p... Does size matter? - Blu-ray Forum

JLaSoul · 04-28-2007, 04:27 AM

When watching any kind of HD programming, well except HD-DVD, what is better, a small tv or a big tv. The reason I ask is because I can usually tell more sharpness or crispness to smaller tvs like a 30 or 27 tv when comparing at stores, I have a 40in tv and never been higher on lcds and it looks good don't get me wrong, but I am thinking of getting a larger one, deciding on a 46 or 52in, can anyone help me with this, I would like to know because if it looks worse on a bigger tv than I can make my decision more better. Oh and my father in law has a 27in and when i took my ps3 over there it looked a little more better apposed to mine, maybe my size tv is caught in the middle of good picture? Thanks for anyones help.

vektar · 04-28-2007, 04:50 AM

I think it dose, i have a 50" Sony 1080p tv and the picture really dose look worse on it then it dose on a smaller tv. It looked so nice in the store but when i brought it home it wasnt what i wanted at all. Only ps3 games looks nice on it everything else is just to blurry. So I would stick with a smaller tv if i was you.

Heavens Downfall · 04-28-2007, 04:54 AM

I have 40" sony bravia and it looks great. I have a Direct TV HD reciever and every channel looks amazing, even the non-HD channels look good.

From what Ive heard you need a big tv to see the differences in 720p and 1080p.

The brand of the tv will matter as well, i love sonys picture quality. If i were you i would go to best buy and check out all of the tv's and see which one you like the best. If your going to get an hd tv i would highly recomend getting direct tv HD

JLaSoul · 04-28-2007, 05:32 AM

thanks both of you. I have dishnetworkhd and standard channels, they look freakin' amazing even blu-ray but like vektar I see that to, but I understand what you are saying to, it's just not consistant. I have samsung but I like because the picture is more brighter and basically no cloud affect and more vivid colors, but i might give the sony one a try this time around, maybe.

Filterlab · 04-29-2007, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vektar

I think it dose, i have a 50" Sony 1080p tv and the picture really dose look worse on it then it dose on a smaller tv. It looked so nice in the store but when i brought it home it wasnt what i wanted at all. Only ps3 games looks nice on it everything else is just to blurry. So I would stick with a smaller tv if i was you.

Only if one is not watching an HD programme. That's why HD was created, because a big screen showing a low res picture looks naff.

Feed your 50" with an HD signal and the detail will be superb.

dakota81 · 04-28-2007, 05:39 AM

A bigger set will highlight the flaws, or high compression, in the source video. That's a fault of the source video, though. Whatever set you get it'll take a while. I went from a 32" to a 56", and took me couple weeks to get used to it all, and now I wouldn't want any other size.

Whatever you do, get a 1080p set so you can take full advantage of the PS3. I don't remember the exact details, but with a 720p set, and a 1080p game or movie, I think the PS3 currently brings the video down to 480i or p output, not 720p.

Going to Best Buy will not help you compare picture quality, unfortunately, unless it has a Magnolia section it's fine, but the other sets usually have a highly compressed sample video snet to the displays that look horrendous. I don't know why, they just do.

JLaSoul · 04-28-2007, 06:55 AM

that makes alot of sense, maybe that's why it only looks really clear with my ps3 and anything that does not require a signal or when the signal is real strong on my satellite it looks awsome too.

POOPonYOU · 04-28-2007, 07:51 AM

I always thought SD TV looked best on (HD Monitors only listed) LCD/Plasma > DLP > rear projection LCD

I have a 61" Samsung DLP and it looks shitty when I watch SD channels on Directv. The HD channels look a lot better but they still don't look as good as I think they should. Anyone got any ideas on what would be the optimal settings?

howlinrock · 04-28-2007, 02:11 PM

1st post..I'll chime in as I have a Sony 50 SXRB that looks as good as the one's in the stores showing a demonstration disc. (Gotcha wallet)

How may you ask? I calibrated the picture settings. You can find them here after a search for your model TV. Or have a tech or by a clibration disc.

For Help Go here:

http://www.avsforum.com

This made the biggest difference to the TV out of the box.

My Blu-Ray discs look stunning.

jorg · 04-28-2007, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by POOPonYOU

I always thought SD TV looked best on (HD Monitors only listed) LCD/Plasma > DLP > rear projection LCD

I have a 61" Samsung DLP and it looks shitty when I watch SD channels on Directv. The HD channels look a lot better but they still don't look as good as I think they should. Anyone got any ideas on what would be the optimal settings?

thats becuase you use direct tv same with some poeple i know direct tvs hd channels blow

haushausman · 04-28-2007, 02:25 PM

I hear component cables look better than a HDMI cable with cable television. Something about the networks not being up to snuff with the digital signal yet.

This is from a Best Buy installer who told me he does nothing but play around with connections everyday.

I think I may try his advice.

Eve6insideandout · 04-28-2007, 04:16 PM

Ok, first of all there is a mathematical reasoning on why it looks worse. Think of defination, the more pixels the better right because they are smaller and harder to see, hence high-definition. Well you take a 27" tv and have 1080 little dots on there. Then you take all 1080 dots to a 61" tv like mine and what happens to those dots, they get bigger to fit the screen size. So you see the smaller the dots the better and the smaller the tv the smaller the dots have to be. I just like the bigger tv and basically can never go back.

The reason those screens look bad on tv is right infront of you. I can literally see the dots from ten feet away. Like I said your stretching out those dots!!!! I just like the fact that I can take ease with looking from my dinning room and watching tv from 25 feet away with ease.

By the way, where were you able to hook up an HDMI cable onto a cable box just wondering? They havn't gotten the technology for that, yet!

Zaphod · 04-28-2007, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eve6insideandout

Ok, first of all there is a mathematical reasoning on why it looks worse

So sticking with the math theme I guess it would be something like this:

PQ = R / A

PQ is the picture quality per square inch (higher the better)
R is the native resolution
A is the area of the screen.

PQ (55") = (1920 × 1080) / (55" x 40")
= 2,073,600 / 2,200
PQ (55") = 943 pixels per square inch

PQ (36") = (1920 x 1080) / (36" x 34")
= 2,073,600 / 1224
PQ (36") = 1694 pixels per square inch

Of course this is a loose interpertation

bryan915 · 05-01-2007, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eve6insideandout

Ok, first of all there is a mathematical reasoning on why it looks worse. Think of defination, the more pixels the better right because they are smaller and harder to see, hence high-definition. Well you take a 27" tv and have 1080 little dots on there. Then you take all 1080 dots to a 61" tv like mine and what happens to those dots, they get bigger to fit the screen size. So you see the smaller the dots the better and the smaller the tv the smaller the dots have to be. I just like the bigger tv and basically can never go back.

The reason those screens look bad on tv is right infront of you. I can literally see the dots from ten feet away. Like I said your stretching out those dots!!!! I just like the fact that I can take ease with looking from my dinning room and watching tv from 25 feet away with ease.

By the way, where were you able to hook up an HDMI cable onto a cable box just wondering? They havn't gotten the technology for that, yet!

Time Warner has a Scientific Atlanta HD-DVR that has an HDMI, but I read somewhere that some boxes don't have them activated and it's hit or miss if you get one that has and HDMI and if it works.

Blackraven · 04-29-2007, 06:25 AM

Good point. I guess the mathematical reasoning is the explanation on why SD looks bad on HD sets.

But hold on a sec:

Isn't TV hardware also to blame for poor SD quality on HDTVs? You know, when the hardware in your HDTV is like shit, then image/video quality for SD channels is like shit too.

This could also be a main culprit, right?

Forresttheman · 04-29-2007, 07:51 AM

my 40" lcd looks fabulous on 1080p. no problems there

Piglet · 04-29-2007, 09:55 AM

OK should I get a 40' Sony B or a 46' Sony B' ? I'll be sitting around 8ft away ?

Zaphod · 04-29-2007, 10:13 AM

The rule of thumb is the distance from the TV to the viewing location should be no less than twice the length of the TV screen. So either one would be fine.

Ascended_Saiyan · 04-29-2007, 10:32 AM

I would also like to point out that a larger screen size (up to a point) is required to see a lot of the extra details. If you pack 2 million pixels in too small of a space, you can't see much of the added details. But, 2 million pixels in a smaller space will look sharper. That's why it has been said that you need a certain screen size to really benefit from HD. Otherwise, you won't be able to see that much of a difference between DVD and HD titles.

04-28-2007, 04:27 AM	#1
JLaSoul Active Member Member since:Mar 2007 Blu-ray collection:219	When watching blu-ray or 1080p... Does size matter? When watching any kind of HD programming, well except HD-DVD, what is better, a small tv or a big tv. The reason I ask is because I can usually tell more sharpness or crispness to smaller tvs like a 30 or 27 tv when comparing at stores, I have a 40in tv and never been higher on lcds and it looks good don't get me wrong, but I am thinking of getting a larger one, deciding on a 46 or 52in, can anyone help me with this, I would like to know because if it looks worse on a bigger tv than I can make my decision more better. Oh and my father in law has a 27in and when i took my ps3 over there it looked a little more better apposed to mine, maybe my size tv is caught in the middle of good picture? Thanks for anyones help.

04-28-2007, 04:50 AM	#2
vektar Senior Member Member since:Apr 2007 Location:san jose ca 4K collection:160 Blu-ray collection:542 DVD collection:24 Blu-ray reviews:28	dose size matter I think it dose, i have a 50" Sony 1080p tv and the picture really dose look worse on it then it dose on a smaller tv. It looked so nice in the store but when i brought it home it wasnt what i wanted at all. Only ps3 games looks nice on it everything else is just to blurry. So I would stick with a smaller tv if i was you.

04-28-2007, 04:54 AM	#3
Heavens Downfall Active Member Member since:Feb 2007 Location:Colorado	I have 40" sony bravia and it looks great. I have a Direct TV HD reciever and every channel looks amazing, even the non-HD channels look good. From what Ive heard you need a big tv to see the differences in 720p and 1080p. The brand of the tv will matter as well, i love sonys picture quality. If i were you i would go to best buy and check out all of the tv's and see which one you like the best. If your going to get an hd tv i would highly recomend getting direct tv HD Last edited by Heavens Downfall; 04-28-2007 at 04:57 AM.

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
Does size matter?	Plasma TVs	Pigskincoach	31	10-29-2009 10:27 PM
Is watching a blu ray on a laptop comparable to watching it on a stand alone?	Blu-ray PCs, Laptops, Drives, Media and Software	mcdaking84	26	08-06-2008 04:46 AM
TV Size for Viewing 1080p	Display Theory and Discussion	EQ3282	30	07-04-2008 01:04 AM
1080p Does Matter Here's When (Screen Size vs. Viewing Distance vs. Resolution)	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	Porfie	3	09-27-2007 05:25 AM
1080p Does Matter - Here’s When (Screen Size vs. Viewing Distance vs. Resolution)	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	Dave	11	11-30-2006 12:37 AM

04-28-2007, 05:32 AM	#4
JLaSoul Active Member Member since:Mar 2007 Blu-ray collection:219	thanks both of you. I have dishnetworkhd and standard channels, they look freakin' amazing even blu-ray but like vektar I see that to, but I understand what you are saying to, it's just not consistant. I have samsung but I like because the picture is more brighter and basically no cloud affect and more vivid colors, but i might give the sony one a try this time around, maybe.

04-28-2007, 05:39 AM	#6
dakota81 Expert Member Member since:Apr 2007	A bigger set will highlight the flaws, or high compression, in the source video. That's a fault of the source video, though. Whatever set you get it'll take a while. I went from a 32" to a 56", and took me couple weeks to get used to it all, and now I wouldn't want any other size. Whatever you do, get a 1080p set so you can take full advantage of the PS3. I don't remember the exact details, but with a 720p set, and a 1080p game or movie, I think the PS3 currently brings the video down to 480i or p output, not 720p. Going to Best Buy will not help you compare picture quality, unfortunately, unless it has a Magnolia section it's fine, but the other sets usually have a highly compressed sample video snet to the displays that look horrendous. I don't know why, they just do.

04-28-2007, 06:55 AM	#7
JLaSoul Active Member Member since:Mar 2007 Blu-ray collection:219	that makes alot of sense, maybe that's why it only looks really clear with my ps3 and anything that does not require a signal or when the signal is real strong on my satellite it looks awsome too.

04-28-2007, 07:51 AM	#8
POOPonYOU Member Member since:Feb 2007 Location:Beaumont, California	I always thought SD TV looked best on (HD Monitors only listed) LCD/Plasma > DLP > rear projection LCD I have a 61" Samsung DLP and it looks shitty when I watch SD channels on Directv. The HD channels look a lot better but they still don't look as good as I think they should. Anyone got any ideas on what would be the optimal settings?

04-28-2007, 02:11 PM	#9
howlinrock Junior Member Member since:Apr 2007 Location:Napa, CA	1st post..I'll chime in as I have a Sony 50 SXRB that looks as good as the one's in the stores showing a demonstration disc. (Gotcha wallet) How may you ask? I calibrated the picture settings. You can find them here after a search for your model TV. Or have a tech or by a clibration disc. For Help Go here: http://www.avsforum.com This made the biggest difference to the TV out of the box. My Blu-Ray discs look stunning.

04-28-2007, 02:25 PM	#11
haushausman Special Member Member since:Jan 2007 Location:Chicago Home Theater Gallery:12 Blu-ray collection:343 Blu-ray reviews: 5	I hear component cables look better than a HDMI cable with cable television. Something about the networks not being up to snuff with the digital signal yet. This is from a Best Buy installer who told me he does nothing but play around with connections everyday. I think I may try his advice.

04-28-2007, 04:16 PM	#12
Eve6insideandout Power Member Member since:Mar 2007 Trading Score:491	Ok, first of all there is a mathematical reasoning on why it looks worse. Think of defination, the more pixels the better right because they are smaller and harder to see, hence high-definition. Well you take a 27" tv and have 1080 little dots on there. Then you take all 1080 dots to a 61" tv like mine and what happens to those dots, they get bigger to fit the screen size. So you see the smaller the dots the better and the smaller the tv the smaller the dots have to be. I just like the bigger tv and basically can never go back. The reason those screens look bad on tv is right infront of you. I can literally see the dots from ten feet away. Like I said your stretching out those dots!!!! I just like the fact that I can take ease with looking from my dinning room and watching tv from 25 feet away with ease. By the way, where were you able to hook up an HDMI cable onto a cable box just wondering? They havn't gotten the technology for that, yet!

04-29-2007, 06:25 AM	#15
Blackraven Expert Member Member since:Jan 2005 Location:Makati, Philippines	Good point. I guess the mathematical reasoning is the explanation on why SD looks bad on HD sets. But hold on a sec: Isn't TV hardware also to blame for poor SD quality on HDTVs? You know, when the hardware in your HDTV is like shit, then image/video quality for SD channels is like shit too. This could also be a main culprit, right?

04-29-2007, 07:51 AM	#16
Forresttheman Active Member Member since:Apr 2007 Location:Seattle, Washington Blu-ray reviews:2	my 40" lcd looks fabulous on 1080p. no problems there

04-29-2007, 09:55 AM	#17
Piglet Member Member since:Mar 2007	OK should I get a 40' Sony B or a 46' Sony B' ? I'll be sitting around 8ft away ?

04-29-2007, 10:13 AM	#18
Zaphod Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Apr 2007 Location:A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. Blu-ray collection:350 Trading Score:4	The rule of thumb is the distance from the TV to the viewing location should be no less than twice the length of the TV screen. So either one would be fine.

04-29-2007, 10:32 AM	#19
Ascended_Saiyan Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Sep 2006 Location:Atlanta, Georgia Blu-ray collection:608 Trading Score:1	I would also like to point out that a larger screen size (up to a point) is required to see a lot of the extra details. If you pack 2 million pixels in too small of a space, you can't see much of the added details. But, 2 million pixels in a smaller space will look sharper. That's why it has been said that you need a certain screen size to really benefit from HD. Otherwise, you won't be able to see that much of a difference between DVD and HD titles.

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals