Resolution vs. seating distance

[ThA tRiXtA]

Hi all,

I was doing some research on optimal seating distances for various resolutions and I extrapolated some data on a couple of graphs from various authorities around the net.

I was just wondering if anyone familiar with this stuff could take a look at them to verify their accuracy before I take what I have learned and apply it to my new room I am building.

Graph 1

Graph 2

Thanks in advance.

 

[no. 5]

I cannot claim to be an expert, but from what I know, those look to be accurate.

 

[stratman]

I cannot claim to be an expert, but from what I know, those look to be accurate.

Yup, I've seen those charts around here before and as others had pointed out they seem accurate.

 

[MDS]

The charts look similar to many others I've seen and so are probably accurate. However, don't get too bogged down in those kinds of details.

The charts purport to show the maximum distance from the display you can sit and still resolve every detail in the image. In other words, if you sit farther away than the shown distance you won't notice any more detail than if you had the next lowest resolution.

HD can be viewed very closely (manufacturers usually state 1.5x the screen diagonal measurement) but will you want to sit that close? I personally can't stand to be that close.

 

[ThA tRiXtA]

Thanks all, now that I know where my couch will sit I can run the conduit and boxes for my side surrounds.

HD can be viewed very closely (manufacturers usually state 1.5x the screen diagonal measurement) but will you want to sit that close? I personally can't stand to be that close.

I know what you mean, I was surprised by the results of the graph. According to it, I should be sitting only 7.5 feet away... my room is 19 feet deep. I think I may just go 10 feet and leave it at that.

Hmm, what to do...

 

[BMXTRIX]

There is a great deal that you must add to your personal knowledge base before you actually make any final decisions.

1. Your TV size and viewing distance isn't just related to the resolution of the TV, it's related to the resolution of the SOURCE material as well as your personal preferences.

2. If your source will always be HDTV, 100% of the time, and your TV is 1080p, and you like sitting in the middle of the theater for movies, and you watch a LOT of movies and want the theater effect, then 1.5x the screen WIDTH for viewing is not a bad idea.

3. If you plan to use this as a primary system with lots of regular SDTV, as well as HDTV, have people over, mingle, and want some space in the room for things other than TV, then going 10-12 feet away from the display is common. Regardless of screen size, it's a typical way of doing things and you can basically disregard the size, resolution, or anything else related to the display.

4. If you want both - then a good way is by combining a front projection setup along with a flat panel. This way you go with a nice 50 or 60" display for normal everyday viewing and your surround system is properly located, but after dark, or with curtains drawn, you bring down a 110" or so screen and fall right into the 'theater' experience.

It really is up to you, but it isn't as simple as looking at a graph, and while you may feel that you're sitting to close, it is accurate to be sitting about 1.5x the screen width when in a movie theater in the middle seats - and that's what home theater is all about. Yet, it's only a certain amount of time that most people actually want their TV to act as a true home theater.

 

[supervij]

I'll echo what others have stated. While it's important to use those graphs as a starting point, personal preferance is more important. If a graph tells you that you'll be getting maximum resolution sitting a given distance from an HDTV or a given size, that's great. But suppose you sit there and realize that you're getting a headache from being that close. To some people, it's just too much, and they need to back away a bit. Personal preferance is king.

cheers,
supervij

 

[Pyrrho]

Hi all,

I was doing some research on optimal seating distances for various resolutions and I extrapolated some data on a couple of graphs from various authorities around the net.

I was just wondering if anyone familiar with this stuff could take a look at them to verify their accuracy before I take what I have learned and apply it to my new room I am building.

Graph 1

Graph 2

Thanks in advance.

The main use, in my opinion, of the graphs is to tell you what resolution you need with your TV. For example, I have a 42" TV, and I sit about 8 feet away. With that size and distance, there is no visual difference between a 720p set and a 1080p set (all else being equal, though all else is rarely equal). Thus, for me, it would be a waste of money to buy a 1080p set instead of a 720p set. I suggest you consider such things when buying a set, though obviously sale prices and availability will matter in one's selection of a TV.

The comments from BMXTRIX are worth thinking about as well. Also, you need to consider whether you want a larger, softer image as opposed to a smaller, sharper image. For example, you may decide to get a 1080p TV and sit "too close" to it if you want a very large picture and do not mind that it won't be as sharp as it would be at the "proper" distance.

 

[KLR]

Resolution/Viewing distance

The owner's manual for my 50" Sony SXRD(LCOS Rear Projection) recommends 6.6 ft viewing distance for best quality. I tried it and thought it was too much like sitting in the front row at a movie theater. Nine ft. is a lot more comfortable and 12 ft. is just as good for me because that's best for furniture placement. After a few days with a new TV it's suddenly apparent that the program content is rarely good enough that the theoretical superiority of 1080 vrs 720 is noticeable, and even with the best quality transmission, the minute improvement in resolution at 6 ft is not nearly as important as a more comfortable viewing farther back.

 

[jostenmeat]

The owner's manual for my 50" Sony SXRD(LCOS Rear Projection) recommends 6.6 ft viewing distance for best quality. I tried it and thought it was too much like sitting in the front row at a movie theater. Nine ft. is a lot more comfortable and 12 ft. is just as good for me because that's best for furniture placement. After a few days with a new TV it's suddenly apparent that the program content is rarely good enough that the theoretical superiority of 1080 vrs 720 is noticeable, and even with the best quality transmission, the minute improvement in resolution at 6 ft is not nearly as important as a more comfortable viewing farther back.

You must use terrible source material as a norm. BTW, your viewing angle is 17.2 degrees. THX recommends 36 degrees. I use an even more immersive viewing angle than that, but its true that all I watch are movies at home.

Thanks again to ThA tRiXtA for the graphs. I've linked them innumerable times for noobies.

 

[Alex2507]

You must use terrible source material as a norm. BTW, your viewing angle is 17.2 degrees. THX recommends 36 degrees. I use an even more immersive viewing angle than that, but its true that all I watch are movies at home.

What's the view angle business all about? I can't see how that even came up,
nevermind what it means.
Let the lessons begin.

I am helping my sister set up a HT for her kids and I at least want to appear to be a brainiac. TIA.

 

[jostenmeat]

What's the view angle business all about?

Here's a calculator that I've linked countless times here.

I can't see how that even came up

It has to do with immersion.

Let the lessons begin.

Well, its important to say that the most important thing is personal perference. I'd also make sure to re-read BMXTRIX's post earlier in this thread.

I am helping my sister set up a HT for her kids and I at least want to appear to be a brainiac.

Sure, being armed with as much knowledge is a good thing, although sometimes one can be just knowledgable enough to be dangerous.

So, one has to consider source's quality, resolution + display's quality and resolution.

There is also the important aspect of, umm, aspect ratio. For instance, while I am very immersed with a 42 degree viewing angle, people with anamorphic setups are often using over 50 degrees. (1:1 screen width:viewing distance). While my screen is actually 16:9, by far most of viewing is with "wider" ARs (Aspect Ratios). Please note that the calculator can be used for 4:3 or 16:9 display. (not 1.85:1, 2.35:1, 2.40:1, etc).

I spent a week firing the pic at a blank wall before deciding. Even then did I continue to play with seating distance on multiple occasions after installing the screen.

YMMV and HTH.

 

[Alex2507]

sometimes one can be just knowledgable enough to be dangerous.

That's me!

Thanks for the wake up. I don't know how I missed BMXTRIX's post.

 

[STRONGBADF1]

If I'm reading the graphs properly...I wont see any difference from 720p to 1080p @ 12' on a 58" plasma...

So bluray is a waste for me???

I have none of the above, but black friday is just around the corner.

SBF1

 

[jostenmeat]

SBF1

Tricky question. You may not be able to tell the difference between 1080 and 720 in display's resolution... However:

- bluray is natively 1080. So, you are getting at least 720. DVD is natively 480.

-as for upgrading displays, 1080 may not be beneficial, but newer models have superior PQ anyways, for other reasons.

-Bluray will also get you more variation in color palette.

-Lossless audio.

*maybe buy a projector, and screen to fall over the plasma?

 

[STRONGBADF1]

SBF1

Tricky question. You may not be able to tell the difference between 1080 and 720 in display's resolution... However:

- bluray is natively 1080. So, you are getting at least 720. DVD is natively 480.

-as for upgrading displays, 1080 may not be beneficial, but newer models have superior PQ anyways, for other reasons.

-Bluray will also get you more variation in color palette.

-Lossless audio.

*maybe buy a projector, and screen to fall over the plasma?

Hi jostenmeat,

I new that last bit was coming!

I'm still using a 36" 4:3 tube...not even flat...

Thanks for your thoughts. I have not gave much thought to it yet other then getting a bigger screen for the living room. This thread has me wondering how much I want to spend.

Thanks again,
SBF1

 

[jostenmeat]

I new that last bit was coming!

Heeheehee. Sorry, I do that a lot!

Thanks for your thoughts. I have not gave much thought to it yet other then getting a bigger screen for the living room. This thread has me wondering how much I want to spend.

Thanks again,
SBF1

Welcome. Read option #4 in BMXTRIX's post. Its what I recommend to those who have a nice fat AV piggy bank.

FWIW, I did recently list a 720p 42" $699 Panasonic plasma listing recently. You can use that for background stuff, news, daytime viewing (if room has poor light control). Save money on bulbs.

Decent screen can be had for a few hundred dollars, depending on size. Remaining budget on a nice PJ. Check out the Panny 3000.

 

[BMXTRIX]

The owner's manual for my 50" Sony SXRD(LCOS Rear Projection) recommends 6.6 ft viewing distance for best quality. I tried it and thought it was too much like sitting in the front row at a movie theater. Nine ft. is a lot more comfortable and 12 ft. is just as good for me because that's best for furniture placement. After a few days with a new TV it's suddenly apparent that the program content is rarely good enough that the theoretical superiority of 1080 vrs 720 is noticeable, and even with the best quality transmission, the minute improvement in resolution at 6 ft is not nearly as important as a more comfortable viewing farther back.

KLR - The improvement you get will be based both upon personal preference as well as (VERY IMPORTANT!) your source material. So often, people make the mistake of buying a 1080p display, but then hook it up with composite video, or just hook up HDMI, then watch a DVD, and wonder why the image doesn't really look 'phenomenal'.

It means that you've armed yourself with just short of enough information to get the most out of your system.

Similarly, at 12 feet, there is almost no movie theater you would go to that would make the screen that small. That is, 6.6 feet from that screen would put you in the MIDDLE of the average decent movie theater. Maybe you don't like to be that close, but it is accurate for the screen size for the immersive, center of the theater, feel.

Which, I must say, can be imposing for day-to-day viewing. 10-12' for a 60" diagonal screen is very comfortable for me and my family day-to-day. It's about 50" smaller than my projection screen though, and with a Blu-ray or HD source, and front projection, at 12' from a 106" screen, it's a much different experience than the 60" display can hope to provide.

I think part of the deal is that front projection vs. 42"-60" displays allows your eyes to relax more. You aren't in the 'tight' area of focus for your eyes so it's a bit less strenuous to fill that much of a viewing angle when you can be at 12' instead of 5 or 6 feet.

I'm a big proponent that enthusiasts owe it to themselves to have a truly immersive front projection experience. But, I'm realistic enough to say that for casual viewing that everyone should also have something that is just relaxing and appealing to their environment. So, if you are comfortable at 12' from your 50" display, then by all means enjoy it. But, you definitely have no reason to expect any visible image improvement between 720p source material or 1080i/p source material. Your biggest jump is the jump in color accuracy, lower compression, etc. that you typically see with HD material vs. standard definition TV.

Enjoy!

 

[BMXTRIX]

If I'm reading the graphs properly...I wont see any difference from 720p to 1080p @ 12' on a 58" plasma...

So bluray is a waste for me???

I consider myself a 'realist' videophile. That is, when the beginning of the year rolled around, and I wanted to increase the size and quality from my 50" Sampo display, I opted for a $3,000 Pioneer 768p display.

This is where it all gets super tricky:
What you can possibly see at 12' depends on screen size... easy enough.
What you can see at ANY distance is lousy color, poor motion handing, bad processing (typically), cruddy black levels, and blown out whites.

Color accuracy and good black levels are by far and away more important than resolution, and ANY TV can take advantage in the boost that HDTV and Blu-ray offers over SDTV and DVD. The lower compression, the better colors, the simple fact of better accuracy may offer only small differences on certain shows & movies, but on others the differences can be dramatic.

So, while you won't likely see a visible difference between 1080p and 720p from 12' at 50" or so, you will see the difference between Blu-ray/HDTV and DVD/SDTV for the reasons outside of resolution. Likewise, get the lower resolution but BETTER display instead of the higher resolution, cruddier display any day of the week.

Add the front projection later.

 

[ThA tRiXtA]

Nice discussion guys, thanks for all the info.

I've a question, I'm going to guess that once you move up to a projector with like a 100" + screen viewing distance gets a lot more loosely ruled than with an actual TV?

Thx.