Is your TV doing an injustice to your Movie viewing enjoyment?

[HTfreak2004]

Not kidding at all! Room size dictates display size. If a screen can do the same at 65” as one at 100” in the same room then we should save the money!

But a 32” cannot bring the impact that a 65” can regardless of apples to apples or apples to oranges comparisons and nor can a 65” compete with the “image size” of 100” or bigger that is a fact!

You traded image size for picture quality let’s not excuse that fact! I can enlarge my image to over 30’ diagonal but my room cannot contain that image however it does allow for the 100” and could have been maybe maxed at 120” yet my sound stage is in front and not behind the screen and my rack occupies the front right corner which reduces wall area available!

I’m not arguing for any projector trumping a smaller display with the same tech or superior tech on the premise of quality but I am arguing that 100”+ will bring the action to a more upfront in your face impact!

Your point regarding my screen size being tiny relative to the commercial theatre is unfortunately pointless because the commercial theatre is seating hundreds of people and really only benefits those sitting at least half way back or at the very rear to see the full screen, halve that screen size and where would the in your face impact go?...to the front of the theatre! Now they can only seat 150 instead of 500!(out of business inevitable) Don’t tell me they are planning to give us an Oled picture quality there and will agree a smaller screen at 8 times the quality will puts asses in seats but it will cost huge revenues!

It’s not hard to trump a projector with higher quality picture on a smaller display just as it’s not hard to trump the commercial theatre with a dedicated home theatre using a mid grade projector and screen! But if you skimp in size and use no surround gear your not doing any justice to the film creators!

Those creators used home video transfers that had huge loss in picture and sound quality for years which we purchased and then upgrade as the transfers to DVD then Blu ray became more available.

You need an upscaled image from blu Ray to 4K at the source component and a Tv that further upscales the image plus graphics manipulation (Dolby Vision) which is a post recording process to pop the colour up to HDR.

Even a projector at 720p high Def ready fed a 4K ultra HDR signal from an upload to YouTube down sampled will blow your mind. No BluRay even touches that down sample feed. Heck even a Dolby Atmos or DTSx Master audio feed fed to my SSP over a coaxial audio interconnect improves sound immersion immensely and all with out upgrading anything.

That says the signal fed to any component is by far the most critical element to super maximize both the sound or displays potential!

Although I like the new formats for picture and sound and the new tech available it’s not one of my must haves to enjoy a truly mind blowing HT experience.

When you spend as much time as we have to get a very memorable experience in our HT’s there will always be another level and another “opportunity cost” to achieve that level!

No one yourself included can say that you have not sacrificed screen size for a smaller quality image! You might as well use your displays built in speakers and sell the 7.2.2 setup! It just is funny to have a monster system around a puny screen no matter which way I try to wrap my head around it I’m left baffled

 

[Pogre]

My system is a music first system. Nothing baffling there, imo.

 

[HTfreak2004]

I seen that movie, it was OK. That's the main issue, a movie with good story will captivate you on a decent screen with just using the TV speakers. In my opinion, too many HT enthusiast these days buy movies to experience their equipment and not to enjoy some of their favorite films. Not everyone can set up a dedicated HT room most won't even if they could.

A massive part of enjoyment is all the parts, pictured, sound and plot. Unless your watching the Notebook you will not get your socks knocked off watching Casino Royale with just tv speakers and a 65” display.

Agreed most don’t want the expensive costs to knock their socks off so they suffer through all kinds of movies that never came to life because of a high end 65” display! They did it with the 27” the 32” the 50” and now the 65”. All the while trying to make the image larger than life but it is always left leaving them wanting(if it’s not true then buy a 21” monitor sit 15’ away watching through your telescope listening to the built speakers and be satisfied with all the room shaking bass it produces!)

One day when displays are 120” and cost 1500.00 people will finally get what they wanted all along which is to be inside the action instead of needing a telescope to graduate the image to life size!

Projectors and Screens are true components of the cinematic picture experience. Films are designed for them. Call it Nostalgia. Small displays are multi purpose never really a specialist at any one of them but most people like an all in one unit so now we have a really smart TV as well

 

[HTfreak2004]

My system is a music first system. Nothing baffling there, imo.

That’s a home Studio not HT

 

[RTG]

I’m not sure you really understand how HDR works though. I mean that with all due respect. 35mm film has roughly 13 stops of dynamic range. Blu-Ray is only capable of 6 stops of dynamic range. Dolby Vision has 17-20+ stops of dynamic range. Your projector is not capable of delivering a cinematic picture. I’m not talking about size. I’m talking about what the cameras captured. You keep saying I sacrificed size, I can only say I haven’t so many times. I do not choose displays on its size. I base my decisions on its capabilities and their accuracy. It’s fine that you prefer size over quality, I’m happy for you but not everyone feels the same way which is why I commented.

We all have our quirks and what we like, what can live with etc. I personally haven’t been this excited about HT thanks to 4K and Atmos. I finally have a display to far exceeds what is offered in commercial theatres. I’ve seen some 10k projectors that are simply gorgeous but my OLED beats them in every way. That’s how I feel about it. I could go out and buy one tomorrow but I don’t want one. My OLED is much better IMO.

 

[HTfreak2004]

I understand your looking at the full image vs the cropped image! Either way it’s not truly necessary to have that much of the image the film recorded since our eyes cannot process that image in its entirety at the scale of a 65” display. Even with a 100” screen it’s more about overkill then the full image!

 

[Auditor55]

A massive part of enjoyment is all the parts, pictured, sound and plot. Unless your watching the Notebook you will not get your socks knocked off watching Casino Royale with just tv speakers and a 65” display.

Agreed most don’t want the expensive costs to knock their socks off so they suffer through all kinds of movies that never came to life because of a high end 65” display! They did it with the 27” the 32” the 50” and now the 65”. All the while trying to make the image larger than life but it is always left leaving them wanting(if it’s not true then buy a 21” monitor sit 15’ away watching through your telescope listening to the built speakers and be satisfied with all the room shaking bass it produces!)

One day when displays are 120” and cost 1500.00 people will finally get what they wanted all along which is to be inside the action instead of needing a telescope to graduate the image to life size!

Projectors and Screens are true components of the cinematic picture experience. Films are designed for them. Call it Nostalgia. Small displays are multi purpose never really a specialist at any one of them but most people like an all in one unit so now we have a really smart TV as well

You're having visions of grandeur. Where are people going to put 120' screens in their homes and apartments to make them the norm? I guess the next thing will be true IMAX screens in the home. If people want that ultimate larger than life movie experience they still need to attend the commercial cinema.

 

[RTG]

That doesn’t make sense. Of course your eyes can process that. HDR provides a much more cinematic experience over DVD and Blu-Ray. That’s not debatable.

 

[Pogre]

That’s a home Studio not HT

I can see your point for a dedicated HT room, but I'm talking about living rooms and daily regular use and the proper size for the distance. 120" screen would fall outside my field of view from where I sit.

 

[HTfreak2004]

No

You're having visions of grandeur. Where are people going to put 120' screens in their homes and apartments to make them the norm? I guess the next thing will be true IMAX screens in the home. If people want that ultimate larger than life movie experience they still need to attend the commercial cinema.

that’s not what I meant at all! Everyone who has purchased a TV of 32” and swore they wouldn’t upgrade to a 65” did it because the cost today made it acceptable enough for them. A 120” display isn’t affordable yet and so I was being a smart ass when I said they would eventually cost 1500.00 and people would finally be able to bring their movie viewing experience to life!

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

This thread should be titled, your tv IS doing an injustice to your movie viewing enjoyment.

 

[HTfreak2004]

I

That doesn’t make sense. Of course your eyes can process that. HDR provides a much more cinematic experience over DVD and Blu-Ray. That’s not debatable.

I can tell you that unless you look exactly where you point your eyes are out of focus until there is a deliberate decision to focus. The movement of anything outside our focus is blurred that is true for anything real life or recorded!

Once an object moves and there are many moving objects in life and video the Visual Cortex must change its focus from direct viewing to passive viewing.

That is why so much can be happening and we get the main idea without needing all the details! The mind follows the action and actually sub consciously anticipates what will happen next and that is how we know where to look and what not to look at!

Try to watch a movie and look where the action is not on the screen and you will not know what is happening! Next watch where the action is and you will miss the details your visual cortex deems irrelevant.

If you are throwing a punch at me why do I care if I can see your shoe lace? The action most relevant to convey the message is really what is important not all the extra 30 yards of desert on either side of the tank!

 

[HTfreak2004]

It is

This thread should be titled, your tv IS doing an injustice to your movie viewing enjoyment.

absolutely but if your looking in the wrong direction anything can happen without your permission

 

[RTG]

This thread should be titled, your tv IS doing an injustice to your movie viewing enjoyment.

That or dumpster fire of misinformation.

 

[HTfreak2004]

That or dumpster fire of misinformation.

William Lemmerhirt is basically saying there is many options today available to view our flavours. You have a great Oled that achieves close or perhaps even all the film had captured and we can label that as a critical viewing testament to how far we have come in display technology!

Your very accurate that I don’t understand the fine point details of HDR and the way the films are actually recorded and how much has been lost when it was formatted to fit my screen.

You are looking at this from point of view from “my perspective remember” that says if you gain picture quality and more of what the original recording device captured on scene that will actually be more immersive then a screen you retired at more than 2.5 times the size as your 65”.

First we all get that. If I throw away 50% of the background the camera man captured than technically speaking the 65” display is actually displaying more captured image than the 100”+ projector image. It looks prettier and everything about the Oled is a major selling point.

Yeah you say as the salesman proves his undeniable point and it backs up both your research and experience in this whole industry, but the fact is everyone knows they crop and smear a movie together than slap it on a disc than we buy it at a loss go crack our windows with subterranean bass and show off the cropping to our friends and family who never knew you could crack any window with bass or enjoy such a cropping of a film over and over!

Out comes the Oled and now our projector is the bad boy so it gets fired for insubordination and the surround gets its upgrade because oh you guessed it again Dolby Atmos and DTSx Master Audio are now king of the block!

Let’s remake every movie ever created so now I have to have the same movie 4 times over and so goes around the merry go round right!

It’s a selling point. Most real diehards still use a record player for music but it’s an ancient piece of gear! Most hardcore HTphiles use a projector and so did my grandfather for all his old family videos! That’s how a movie Film was really intended in good old black and white baby

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder now I know that for certain

 

[Auditor55]

No

that’s not what I meant at all! Everyone who has purchased a TV of 32” and swore they wouldn’t upgrade to a 65” did it because the cost today made it acceptable enough for them. A 120” display isn’t affordable yet and so I was being a smart ass when I said they would eventually cost 1500.00 and people would finally be able to bring their movie viewing experience to life!

75 inch TV's are now affordable, but most people aren't purchasing them simply because they don't have the real estate. My point to you is that not everyone need to have gigantic screen in their home to enjoy a movie. They don't need Atmos, Dolby Vision, or subterranean bass, that for only a criteria for small niche segment of the market that self describe as HT theater enthusiast.

 

[HTfreak2004]

75 inch TV's are now affordable, but most people aren't purchasing them simply because they don't have the real estate. My point to you is that not everyone need to have gigantic screen in their home to enjoy a movie. They don't need Atmos, Dolby Vision, or subterranean bass, that for only a criteria for small niche segment of the market that self describe as HT theater enthusiast.

What size is your tv and are you using any surround gear?

 

[lovinthehd]

Different strokes for different folks. The video part is fine with me as long as the audio is up to snuff. I don't have but a couple of 59"s, altho I am closer in the bedroom, even in the living room it works fine for me. Not a big videophile, but a large screen/projector would be nice, just haven't gone that direction due installation issues I don't want to deal with. Maybe if I had a dedicated room but I like hanging in my living room for a variety of reasons....

 

[HTfreak2004]

Different strokes for different folks. The video part is fine with me as long as the audio is up to snuff. I don't have but a couple of 59"s, altho I am closer in the bedroom, even in the living room it works fine for me. Not a big videophile, but a large screen/projector would be nice, just haven't gone that direction due installation issues I don't want to deal with. Maybe if I had a dedicated room but I like hanging in my living room for a variety of reasons....

See that’s what I mean by the room dictating the display! It’s the same with audio!

Once someone makes up their mind that they are satisfied that’s usually enough but even you clearly made your point that regardless of how good the picture is and how much of the original is recording captures everything in front of it it’s ok to sacrifice some of that sometimes even a lot for a big screen!

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

William Lemmerhirt is basically saying there is many options today available to view our flavours.

Actually no. I wasn’t saying that, although I do agree with that.
My point was, you asked a question with the title of this thread. Then someone chimes in saying no, my tv doesn’t take away from my experience, and even explained why, like 50 times. But you keep telling him all the ways He’s WRONG ABOUT HIS OWN ENJOYMENT. That’s why I said the title should be changed.