What Size Screen or Television Do I Need?

[TechToys2]

My plasma had greyish black while the OLED has black black, so to speak, and that is very noticeable when watching in dark room on dark content (say, like sci-fi). Also, Netflix shows like Altered Carbon in DolbyVision looks stunning. So for me black levels and HDR is a large improvement in picture quality for darkish content, and in general for other content as well.

Another big plus is that the LG OLED has no fan while the plasma fan was annoying on late night watching with low volume levels.

Hmm. I guess mine has a fan, bur I don't ever recall hearing it. But I do hear some buzzing at times from the plasma on bright scenes if it is really quiet. The other stuff sound like it would be a fairly big difference. I think it is the HDR that really piques my interest.

 

[Trell]

Hmm. I guess mine has a fan, bur I don't ever recall hearing it. But I do hear some buzzing at times from the plasma on bright scenes if it is really quiet. The other stuff sound like it would be a fairly big difference. I think it is the HDR that really piques my interest.

I've only tried HDR from the built-in TV apps for Netflix and Amazon Video as I've yet to buy an UHD player, and I'll assume that UHD playback will look and sound better if 1080p BluRay is any guide.

 

[TechToys2]

So I did a cardboard mockup and it seems like a 65 inch will work, but I imagine as I am not unhappy with my 51 inch plasma, a 55 inch would be fine as well. My gut tells me that smaller may make more sense for the space, but everything I read seems to suggest to go as big as possible.

Interestingly, while most of the distance calculators suggest 1 to 1.5 time the screen size is appropriate distance, Samsung's website is more conservative and uses 2 times or distance in inches x .55, which would mean that a 55 inch is more appropriate for my space.

 

[cpp]

Well the OLED is what I'm looking at. My Panny Plasma just keeps on working LOL. From what I gather, 55 OLED the best seting distance is 8.8 ft. Moving up to a 70 its a little over 11 ft/. I can handle in my cabinet a 65" which today we set 9.3 feet away. Having a new TV with some smarts at times ain't half bad. IF my Panny had eARC and a few more HDMI ports who knows, but new features to match the AVR is a nice to have.

 

[TechToys2]

Well the OLED is what I'm looking at. My Panny Plasma just keeps on working LOL. From what I gather, 55 OLED the best seting distance is 8.8 ft. Moving up to a 70 its a little over 11 ft/. I can handle in my cabinet a 65" which today we set 9.3 feet away. Having a new TV with some smarts at times ain't half bad. IF my Panny had eARC and a few more HDMI ports who knows, but new features to match the AVR is a nice to have.

So at 9.3 feet are you going to go with a 65 or 55 inch? My couch is 8 feet from the opposite wall, but I can add about another foot to 18 inches to where my eyeball are when sitting. lol

 

[cpp]

So at 9.3 feet are you going to go with a 65 or 55 inch? My couch is 8 feet from the opposite wall, but I can add about another foot to 18 inches to where my eyeball are when sitting. lol

That's kinda my dilemma as well. I actually need a 60", but I guess it depends on the "deal". 65" well would work if I move the seats back 7 ". I guess it comes to, the eyes. As I get older that larger is better seems to work a lot better. LOL

 

[TechToys2]

That's kinda my dilemma as well. I actually need a 60", but I guess it depends on the "deal". 65" well would work if I move the seats back 7 ". I guess it comes to, the eyes. As I get older that larger is better seems to work a lot better. LOL

Just to add confusion, here's a counter view to what everyone says about optimal viewing distance. 5 times screen size seems a little ridiculous, but the eye strain thing can definitely be real and is something worth thinking about, I guess. I tended to be someone who sits about 3/4 or more of the way back when I went to the movie theater.

Can a Close TV Damage Your Eyes?

How far you should sit from the TV depends on screen size and room layout. Sitting too close can cause eye strain. Here’s the best viewing distance.

www.verywellhealth.com

 

[cpp]

Just to add confusion, here's a counter view to what everyone says about optimal viewing distance. 5 times screen size seems a little ridiculous, but the eye strain thing can definitely be real and is something worth thinking about, I guess. I tended to be someone who sits about 3/4 or more of the way back when I went to the movie theater.

Can a Close TV Damage Your Eyes?

How far you should sit from the TV depends on screen size and room layout. Sitting too close can cause eye strain. Here’s the best viewing distance.

www.verywellhealth.com

Neat article, I read this and went , say what ! "" example, if your television is 32 inches wide, the optimal viewing distance is 160 inches or about 13 feet. ""

32" = 13 feet, talk about eye strain LOL

 

[BMXTRIX]

Just to add confusion, here's a counter view to what everyone says about optimal viewing distance. 5 times screen size seems a little ridiculous, but the eye strain thing can definitely be real and is something worth thinking about, I guess. I tended to be someone who sits about 3/4 or more of the way back when I went to the movie theater.

Can a Close TV Damage Your Eyes?

How far you should sit from the TV depends on screen size and room layout. Sitting too close can cause eye strain. Here’s the best viewing distance.

www.verywellhealth.com

My issue is this line: "The general rule of thumb is to be at least 5 times the distance from the screen as the screen is wide."

There is no reference for this statement which is made. I have no idea where they are pulling this distance from whatsoever and it certainly doesn't match up to any current industry standards that I am aware of. There are some statements that the back row shouldn't be more than five times the screen width, but that is absolute furthest seating.

I did find this statement on a couple of other websites with absolutely zero explanation or context as to the reason why. I mean, you can't read the freaking TV Guide when sitting 12' away from a 32" display. I don't even have any displays 42" or smaller left in my home and nothing we view from more than about 12' away.

I think that when trying to prevent eye fatigue, they shouldn't focus on screen size as much as distance. I can see that sitting 3 or 4 feet away from any screen forces you to focus your eyes closer. Perhaps too close. So, moving back to 10' or more makes a lot of sense. But, screen size is irrelevant to focus distance with eyesight. So, if the screen was 50" or 85" or 120" would be irrelevant to eyestrain as you are still a good viewing distance away. Instead, you get greater immersion as the size goes up until you reach a point where things are just too large and too difficult to take in all at once. You end up moving your eyes all over the screen to see what's going on.

But, that 5:1 distance is simply ridiculous.

 

[TechToys2]

My issue is this line: "The general rule of thumb is to be at least 5 times the distance from the screen as the screen is wide."

There is no reference for this statement which is made. I have no idea where they are pulling this distance from whatsoever and it certainly doesn't match up to any current industry standards that I am aware of. There are some statements that the back row shouldn't be more than five times the screen width, but that is absolute furthest seating.

I did find this statement on a couple of other websites with absolutely zero explanation or context as to the reason why. I mean, you can't read the freaking TV Guide when sitting 12' away from a 32" display. I don't even have any displays 42" or smaller left in my home and nothing we view from more than about 12' away.

I think that when trying to prevent eye fatigue, they shouldn't focus on screen size as much as distance. I can see that sitting 3 or 4 feet away from any screen forces you to focus your eyes closer. Perhaps too close. So, moving back to 10' or more makes a lot of sense. But, screen size is irrelevant to focus distance with eyesight. So, if the screen was 50" or 85" or 120" would be irrelevant to eyestrain as you are still a good viewing distance away. Instead, you get greater immersion as the size goes up until you reach a point where things are just too large and too difficult to take in all at once. You end up moving your eyes all over the screen to see what's going on.

But, that 5:1 distance is simply ridiculous.

Agreed. I currently have a 51 inch plasma and sit a bit more than about 8 feet away. I feel that is pretty comfortable for me. According to the standard in the article I should be sitting 20 feet away, which is absurd. I haven't a clue where that comes from.

I've been thinking about an OLED and am looking both at 55 inch and 65 inch models. I have seen suggestions that for 4K 1 to 1 1/2 times screen size is an appropriate distance, which would suggest that a 55 inch is too small at 8-9 feet distance. I'm not sure if that is right either.

 

[cpp]

Agreed. I currently have a 51 inch plasma and sit a bit more than about 8 feet away. I feel that is pretty comfortable for me. According to the standard in the article I should be sitting 20 feet away, which is absurd. I haven't a clue where that comes from.

I've been thinking about an OLED and am looking both at 55 inch and 65 inch models. I have seen suggestions that for 4K 1 to 1 1/2 times screen size is an appropriate distance, which would suggest that a 55 inch is too small at 8-9 feet distance. I'm not sure if that is right either.

After I posted yesterday the wife and I took a trip down to Daytona and we checked in to a few TV sells businesses, I told the guy my dimensions of my cabinet and our setting distance and he said sure a 65" will fit and I mentioned, I tell ya, you send a guy out with a 55 and a 65 and whichever one fits I'll buy one and I'll leave you a credit card number. He checked with boss, and the boss said oh we can't do that, I said, well you just lost a $2500 sell, but the store owner will be in Friday. I said call me. .

 

[BMXTRIX]

Agreed. I currently have a 51 inch plasma and sit a bit more than about 8 feet away. I feel that is pretty comfortable for me. According to the standard in the article I should be sitting 20 feet away, which is absurd. I haven't a clue where that comes from.

I've been thinking about an OLED and am looking both at 55 inch and 65 inch models. I have seen suggestions that for 4K 1 to 1 1/2 times screen size is an appropriate distance, which would suggest that a 55 inch is too small at 8-9 feet distance. I'm not sure if that is right either.

I have yet to have anyone complain about too large of a TV and I constantly talk up to a larger size. Half the time I'm not even selling them the TV, I'm just hanging it.

We sit about 12' from an 85" TV, and if we could get a reasonably priced 98" TV, I would've used that instead. There is no fatigue, and a 1.5x viewing distance to the WIDTH is considered common. In reality, 10" to 12" of diagonal is comfortable for most viewers for each foot of viewing distance. So, yes, from 8' viewing distance (eyes to screen), having a 75" to 85" diagonal would actually be quite comfortable for most viewers. 65" is no problem at all. Be very aware of your eyes to screen distance, not the couch to screen distance. Also, try moving the couch a couple of feet closer for a day or two. See how you like the screen size. Sitting about 6' viewing distance for a 55" would be similar to sitting 8' away from a 75" screen.

 

[BMXTRIX]

After I posted yesterday the wife and I took a trip down to Daytona and we checked in to a few TV sells businesses, I told the guy my dimensions of my cabinet and our setting distance and he said sure a 65" will fit and I mentioned, I tell ya, you send a guy out with a 55 and a 65 and whichever one fits I'll buy one and I'll leave you a credit card number. He checked with boss, and the boss said oh we can't do that, I said, well you just lost a $2500 sell, but the store owner will be in Friday. I said call me. .

So, what's a bit shocking, is your $2,500 sale is about $100 or $200 profit. It's just not like it's a 30%+ markup the way it can be on certain things. The market is too competitive for people to be able to afford to go out of their way for you. It's not meant as an insult, but seriously, if you want something that fits inside your cabinet, just measure your cabinet to the nearest mm and buy a TV that fits those dimensions. They are all listed by the manufacturer.

My father did this as he converted an old 4:3 built-in setup to support a 16:9 TV. Went from something like a 32" tube TV to a 65" flat panel.

But, it wouldn't be worth it for me or most others to just go out and measure for you, to bring multiple TVs on site, and to potentially create an 'open box' item which I might lose money on to make a single sale. That's all work a consumer can perform on their own.

 

[cpp]

So, what's a bit shocking, is your $2,500 sale is about $100 or $200 profit. It's just not like it's a 30%+ markup the way it can be on certain things. The market is too competitive for people to be able to afford to go out of their way for you. It's not meant as an insult, but seriously, if you want something that fits inside your cabinet, just measure your cabinet to the nearest mm and buy a TV that fits those dimensions. They are all listed by the manufacturer.

My father did this as he converted an old 4:3 built-in setup to support a 16:9 TV. Went from something like a 32" tube TV to a 65" flat panel.

But, it wouldn't be worth it for me or most others to just go out and measure for you, to bring multiple TVs on site, and to potentially create an 'open box' item which I might lose money on to make a single sale. That's all work a consumer can perform on their own.

I already have the dimensions, and noted that in my post, and its not all about the cabinet its about seeing the TV from our viewing position to see if it works for us. I'm not going to buy two TVs to check that out. Oh PS: the store owner called this morning and would be happy to handle that for us and apologized for his employee.

 

[TechToys2]

I have yet to have anyone complain about too large of a TV and I constantly talk up to a larger size. Half the time I'm not even selling them the TV, I'm just hanging it.

We sit about 12' from an 85" TV, and if we could get a reasonably priced 98" TV, I would've used that instead. There is no fatigue, and a 1.5x viewing distance to the WIDTH is considered common. In reality, 10" to 12" of diagonal is comfortable for most viewers for each foot of viewing distance. So, yes, from 8' viewing distance (eyes to screen), having a 75" to 85" diagonal would actually be quite comfortable for most viewers. 65" is no problem at all. Be very aware of your eyes to screen distance, not the couch to screen distance. Also, try moving the couch a couple of feet closer for a day or two. See how you like the screen size. Sitting about 6' viewing distance for a 55" would be similar to sitting 8' away from a 75" screen.

Thanks for the feedback. I guess there is a little more to the issue than just size that I'm thinking about. My current set is 51 inches. Relative to the wall and space I feel like it looks reasonable.

A 55 inch OLED is about 1 1/2 inches wider and about the same height (not including the stand) as the 51 inch with the bezels so it would look similar. A 65 inch would add about another 9 inches in width which, if mounted on the wall, would need to go all to the left side due to the light switch on the right. I'm not sure, but I think it might look a bit off balance (I cut out a piece of cardboard to check out the size, but I'm still not sure -- cardboard is not the same as a picture).

Also, at the moment the very bottom of the screen is covered ever so slightly by the center channel speaker. A new TV would not be able to sit on its stand because there is no bezel like there is on the current one. If I have the set wall-mounted it would push it back probably about 8-10 inches after leaving some room for the mounting hardware,. which argues in favor of a larger set based on viewing distance, but it will also raise the TV.

The stand is about 24 inches high and the center channel is about 6 1/2 inches high, so if the TV were mounted a couple of inches above that, the top of a 65 inch set would be around 65 inches up the wall (approximately 32 plus an additional 33 inches height for the TV). The center of the set would be about 16 1/2 inches lower or around 48.5 inches. My couch/sofa is a little low so I figure my eyes would probably be at around 40 inches or a little lower when sitting. Does that seem about right? I'm afraid I might have to look up too much while viewing.

Perhaps I'm overthinking it.

 

[TechToys2]

Oh PS: the store owner called this morning and would be happy to handle that for us and apologized for his employee.

I'm interested to see what works out best for you. Please let us know and good luck.

 

[BMXTRIX]

I already have the dimensions, and noted that in my post, and its not all about the cabinet its about seeing the TV from our viewing position to see if it works for us. I'm not going to buy two TVs to check that out. Oh PS: the store owner called this morning and would be happy to handle that for us and apologized for his employee.

That's amazing! I'm happy, but yes, shocked, that they are offering to do this for you. As I said, once they are over and unbox a TV, they are on the hook for selling it as open box/used. They may be very well setup to allow for this and they may have some markup which supports this.

IMO, if it fits your space, you should expect that the larger model may be the winner. The headache is that you can't decide this in ten minutes. It often takes several days to get used to a new screen size. I've had people who I told should live with it for a week, then let me know their thoughts. They thought it was huge in the first hour. Then two days later said they were glad they went with the larger size. So, it is a real problem just looking at it and making a quick decision because anything larger than what you have WILL feel large. But, then a week later will feel quite normal.

I can say that when we went from our 65" TV to our 85" TV, my wife asked if the TV was actually any bigger. 20" bigger, and she couldn't really tell the difference.

 

[BMXTRIX]

Thanks for the feedback. I guess there is a little more to the issue than just size that I'm thinking about. I've attached a picture of the setup in the room where I am contemplating the new TV. The set in the picture is 51 inches. Relative to the wall and space I feel like it looks reasonable.

A 55 inch OLED is about 1 1/2 inches wider and about the same height (not including the stand) as the 51 inch with the bezels so it would look similar. A 65 inch would add about another 9 inches in width which, if mounted on the wall, would need to go all to the left side due to the light switch on the right. I'm not sure, but I think it might look a bit off balance (I cut out a piece of cardboard to check out the size, but I'm still not sure -- cardboard is not the same as a picture).

Also, at the moment the very bottom of the screen is covered ever so slightly by the center channel speaker. A new TV would not be able to sit on its stand because there is no bezel like there is on the current one. If I have the set wall-mounted it would push it back probably about 8-10 inches after leaving some room for the mounting hardware,. which argues in favor of a larger set based on viewing distance, but it will also raise the TV.

The stand is about 24 inches high and the center channel is about 6 1/2 inches high, so if the TV were mounted a couple of inches above that, the top of a 65 inch set would be around 65 inches up the wall (approximately 32 plus an additional 33 inches height for the TV). The center of the set would be about 16 1/2 inches lower or around 48.5 inches. My couch/sofa is a little low so I figure my eyes would probably be at around 40 inches or a little lower when sitting. Does that seem about right? I'm afraid I might have to look up too much while viewing.

Perhaps I'm overthinking it.

I don't necessarily believe you are overthinking it. I know that I am spoiled. I have a VERY large TV viewing wall. 10+ feet wide. All my AV gear is located elsewhere. I am using Def-Tech Mythos speakers. An on-wall center that I can put anywhere, and my slim floorstanding models which are WAY out to the sides. I have tons of room and forget how tight some setups are. I do have my TV fairly low to the ground. Maybe even lower than yours. I'd need to measure. I put it lower after I had it a bit higher at my last home and found that I didn't like it. I'm very happy with the image height now. The 65" and 85" were both at the same height to the bottom of the TV, so I will measure and let you know. But, you could always put a few books under the TV for a day or two to see if you are okay with it a few inches higher. It may not bug you at all.

If at all possible, I really am a fan of trying things out before you get stuck with something you may not like.

 

[fmw]

We have two TV's. In the bedroom we have a 55" that is about 10 feet from our heads. In the family we watch a 65" that is about 16 feet from the watching position. Neither one is too large for the application. We get crisp sharp images on both of them in regular HD.

 

[Wardog555]

We have two TV's. In the bedroom we have a 55" that is about 10 feet from our heads. In the family we watch a 65" that is about 16 feet from the watching position. Neither one is too large for the application. We get crisp sharp images on both of them in regular HD.

Actually it's too small for those distances imo.

You will enjoy a 40 degree viewing angle minimum much more than the 22 degree for the 55 inch you currently have!

Try out 5 feet maxium distance and decide whether you enjoy seeing more image over a smaller one.