TVs. Part 3. 3D. Types, differences, sources of reproduction and content. My choice of TV
Hello again.
This is the third, final, biggest and in my opinion the most interesting part of my short story about modern televisions. In the first part you could read general information about the types of modern TVs, the used backlight technologies, their practical differences. In the second part, I tried to systematize everything I learned about the chassis, diagonals, motion transmission, color transmission features, and the effects of televisions on vision.
In the third part, I want to share with you my thoughts on stereo (or as it is called 3D), to understand the main differences between active and passive 3D, their technical implementation. Tell how, what and most importantly - what this 3D play. Well, actually, what kind of TV did I choose and why. And there will be photos
And no less important - I want to say a special thank you to everyone who read and commented on the previous 2 articles.
')
All judgments in the article - the personal opinion of the author and may not coincide with the opinions of other people.
Each person (if he has both eyes in place) has binocular vision, that is, looks at an object with two eyes, but sees one picture. For the reduction of 2 images into one image corresponds to the visual analyzer - the cerebral cortex (is not it, computers are built in our image? Or we for them). As a result of the effect of binocular (stereoscopic) vision, we see a three-dimensional image.
Everything new is well forgotten old. It is worth saying that a stereo-kinocograph is a pretty old thing. Its basic principles were formulated at the end of the distant 19th century, and the demonstration of real stereo films began at the beginning of the 20th century. There were difficulties, problems, not everything was possible (and what can I say, there is still no ideal 3D display method), but the middle of the 20th century is considered the golden age of stereo movie. In general, throughout the entire second half of the 20th century, the popularity of stereo films flashed and then went out.
All this I lead to the fact that the so-called 3D is not a new thing, but the innovation is that it has now reached our televisions. When we look at the screen - we see one image with both eyes. A logical conclusion suggests itself: if we force each eye to see its image (the “other” side of the object), then we will be able to see a three-dimensional image. But how to implement it technically? There are several ways to do this.
The very first method of obtaining a stereo image. Currently outdated and does not apply to TVs. It consists in color coding of images that are intended for the left and right eyes. The glasses have light filters installed, thanks to which each eye sees its own part of the image intended for it.
There is one drawback, but it overlaps all the advantages - this is a color rendition completely distorted by light filters.
Also known as active 3D. Along with the polarization ("passive") method is widely used in modern televisions. Based on inertia of view. It consists in alternately displaying images for the left and right eyes. It requires sophisticated glasses with its own power and shutters - synchronized transparent LCD displays.
The shutter method is used by manufacturers: Philips in the 5th, 7th, 9th series (referred to as “3D Max”), Samsung, Sony and Sharp (all models), in all plasma TVs, installed in Panasonic's top LCD models. It can be said that most manufacturers use this method of obtaining stereo images, and those manufacturers who combine the shutter and polarization methods in different lines call the shutter method as more progressive.
Benefits:
- Full 1080p image for each eye
Disadvantages:
- greater (in comparison with polarization) loss of brightness, which, however, is easily compensated.
- increased probability of crosstalk (when the image is split).
- Many people feel eye fatigue and this is the main drawback.
- The high cost of points.
He is also "passive 3D." The second, along with the shutter, used the method of displaying 3D on televisions. Based on the effect of polarization, when the screen simultaneously displays a picture for both eyes. Filters filter out the “alien” image.
This is the main feature - 2 images for each eye are “wired” in one video stream, which means that the resolution of each stream is 2 times lower.
Polarization technology uses LG in all types of its TVs (moreover, only LG produces matrixes of this type, which means all TVs with passive technology are built on LG matrices), Philips 6-series, Panasonic low-and middle-series, a variety of budget TVs manufacturers.
Benefits:
- reduced eye fatigue
- simple design and low cost points
Disadvantages:
- reduced by 2 times the resolution of the video stream. For vertical stereo pairs (when in one stream one image is above the other) it is 1920x540. For horizontal - 960x1080. This is the main and, in principle, the only drawback of polarization technology.
At the dawn of a new wave of 3D - in 2010, LG used the shutter method, but when faced with insane crosstalk, it retreated and took the path of polarization. Since then, the company vehemently agitates for the designated method, fighting in the courts.
As mentioned above, the image for the left and right eyes on the screen are displayed simultaneously.
For us, this means 3 things:
1) Resolution falls 2 times. Instead of 1920x1080, we get 1920x540 or 960x1080.
2) No flicker shutter glasses, glasses simple and cheap.
3) No need for special playback devices. All that reproduces Full HD - will be able to play a stereo pair (video stream, with images sewn to both eyes).
As you know, the human eye also has its resolution, and if the TV is too far away, it may be unable to distinguish all 1080 lines, and distinguish, for example, 500. Then the difference between the shutter and polarization technology is leveled. So how do you know if we can see the resolution drop?
Recall the table of diagonals:
We look at the distance column and 1080p and 720p speakers. Choose a diagonal and if your viewing distance falls within the range of 720p-1080p, it means that the difference will be clearly visible. Further - it is unlikely, if in your relatives there were no eagles.
1) We see a peremptory image - full FullHD.
2) Many users get increased eye fatigue due to flicker.
3) We need special playback devices.
The content for the slide technology is called Blu-Ray 3D (BD3D). It is in this format that films are released on discs (they are not produced in stereo pairs). BD3D ISO - an image taken from a Blu-Ray 3D disc.
So after all, what do we need so that we can watch Blu-Ray 3D on our TV? Option only 2:
3.1 Blu-Ray 3D Disc Player. The easiest and most expensive way, ultimately. We are talking about players that play Blu-Ray-discs, that is, these same drives will have to buy (and this is not a cheap pleasure, I tell you). Choose any Blu-Ray player you like (by the way, they are included with home theater systems with BD support), for example, Sony BDP-S495 (I brought the best-selling player, you can buy absolutely any). Buy discs - enjoy watching.
3.2 BD3D ISO players. That is, those players that can play images of Blu-Ray discs (which, by the way, lie on any tracker. I download from here ). There are a lot of stereo pairs on the rutracker, but very few BD3D images. And here the main problem arises - there are practically no devices capable of reproducing BD3D ISO without problems and with the support of all functions. Those that reproduce without problems do not have a menu and cost $ 350 (for example, Popcorn Hour A-400). Cheap (~ $ 125) players like IconBIT XDS73D , not only do they not support the menu, they are buggy and do not perform all tasks.
Of course, you can play an ordinary stereo pair on the TVs with shutter technology, but this is the same as buying a Ferrari and driving along country roads. In this case, all the benefits of the slide method are leveled.
The conclusion suggests itself: isn't there a full-featured BD3D-ISO player for little money? In general, there is, with one reservation. I think it is worth highlighting in a separate section.
It is time to talk about Pioneer BDP-140 Blu-Ray player. This is a player from the 1st section, that is, it has a BD-drive and can play purchased discs, but the cunning Chinese wrote an alternative firmware for it (in a word, quite a long time ago) and about the miracle - with the alternative firmware BDP-140 without any problems or The glitches are reproduced by the BD3D ISO, as well as supporting the Blu-Ray disc menu (which their analogs for $ 350 cannot boast of. Its price is ~ $ 120.
“There must be defects” - you will think. They are, but do not belong to the main function. Among them:
1) Large size (really big, like all Blu-Ray players) - 40 cm. In length and 5 in height.
2) Lack of network functions in alternative firmware.
3) It is completely unsuitable for reproducing alternative formats. Since this player was originally sharpened for playing Blu-Ray in its 2D and 3D forms, it’s a big problem with all kinds of MKV. It is not suitable as a replacement for the universal player.
The result is a great Blu-Ray 2D player (i.e., folders and remuxes from discs) and Blu-Ray 3D. At the same time, the player shows the menu that is not available for players of the lower price category. Plus, it has a drive and can reproduce the good old warm "blue" and not very discs.
This player is a real life hacking - cheap, buggy, with menu support.
If you are interested in such a review - write in the comments.
Let's go back to 3D in general. It should be said about the use of these 2 types of 3D TVs in various price categories. As already mentioned, LG and Toshiba use polarization technology in all TVs. In contrast to it, Samsung always uses shutter technology. Also active 3D have all the plasma. Philips and Panasonic use the polarization method in cheaper televisions and the shutter in expensive ones. But, for example, active 3D is in the 5th Philips series (and this is a relatively cheap TV).
There is a small rule, if I may say so, which I brought out for myself: in cheap TVs, passive 3D is preferable (as it doesn’t change its quality very much depending on the cost of the TV). Active 3D is very different - in cheap TV it is almost impossible to watch, and it can be a great picture for expensive ones.
2) Diagonal. If your viewing distance falls within the range of 720p — 1080p, then plus in favor of the shutter method.
3) The price of the TV. If the TV is inexpensive - plus polarization. If it's expensive, you should think about active 3D.
4) The number of viewers. Glasses for TVs with passive 3D cost about $ 10-15. With active - $ 60-80. If there are a lot of viewers, the conclusion suggests itself.
5) Do not choose TV by type 3D. Perhaps this item will seem strange to you, but this is my conviction. Stereokino extremely imperfect, straining the eyes and over time will be ousted. This is an hour of spending time, at best, in a week or two. High-quality 3D content is not so much.
This section will be unexpectedly short, as the author has never considered smart TV to be a useful addition. Not because the author is a dinosaur and lives in a prehistoric cave, but because I do not consider this a very useful thing. Please note that this is a very subjective thing and many people like Smart TV. This is my personal opinion and it may not coincide in yours.
A separate vat in hell was made for developers of torrent clients, one of whom I had a chance to test on the DuneHD TV-101W media player. First of all, only drives with ext3, and secondly, the speed is limited to 1 megabyte per second. Thirdly, when these same torrents swing, the prefix hangs tight and responds to commands from the console with a delay of 10 seconds.
In general, I am pretty cool about “smart” TVs, as I used to, first of all, get the maximum quality - and this, as you know, is Blu-Ray or at worst BDRip. This content, of course, in the depths of the television "brains" do not get it.
I would not recommend paying any attention on Smart TV to those who choose a television for home theater.
3 years in a row, I looked pretty good in every sense of Philips 42PFL8404 . Over time, he stopped me to arrange. In what, apart from the black level and the diagonal, I could not formulate. I wanted a more lively and deep image. Immediately it should be said that my viewing distance is 2.5 m.
I realized that a jump of 42 "—46" would not be significant and began to focus on 55. "At first it seemed great, but in the process it became clear that this was not enough for a full immersion. There was only enough money for 55" and I decided that This thing is not for one day and it is worth a little to pick up. So began my 2 months of choice.
And the reason for this is one simple fact: I live an average of the population of a city, and although we have many different electronics supermarkets, there are no acceptable plasmas in any of them. Sellers claimed in chorus that the plasma was obsolete. Techies on the forums assured that this is the best choice for the movie.
It's time to choose a model.
I started reading reviews. Virtually all authoritative sources ( CNET , AVForums , Digitalversus ; even our Hi-tech.mail.ru ) have argued that the best TV available today is Panasonic's Panasonic VT50 plasma. Of course, I read a bunch of reviews. They talked about an incredible black level, an amazing picture.
Philips 60PFL9607 was chosen as a competitor for the VT50 from the LCD camp. He was awarded EISA as the best LCD-TV in Europe, had a Sharp UV²A matrix, a segmented LED backlight promising MLL = 0.2 nit. In general, an interesting option.
As the challenger was still considered 65 "Sony HX920, but it costs more, besides it is a model of last year, and even 3D at a low level.
Both applicants were not in any of the shops of the city and I took a wait-and-see attitude.
And then almost a miracle happened for our city - 46 "Philips 9707 appeared in one of the networks (an analogue of the one I needed, but with a smaller diagonal and a better anti-glare filter). I drove it decently - first I set up the mode for a long time, then reproduced the fills , test videos, real videos and advertising content.
I will not torment with stories and conclusions. The result of all was the conclusion that, in principle, there is no colossal difference in the image with my 42 "8404. Yes - the diagonal is important, yes, the black is blacker, but I didn’t see any particular difference.
Took this option to note.
1) Flicker
2) Lack of white
3) Low brightness
Looking ahead, I will say that points 1 and 2 days did not materialize me, but from the 3rd I had some problems. And this is due to the fact that, as it turned out, European and Russian models tightly stabbed brightness in the region of 80 cd / m2 in the professional mode and 90 cd / m2 in THX Cinema mode.
By the way, THX Cinema is a mode certified by George Lucas studio. Must issue a picture as close as possible to the reference - the one the director intended.
When it became clear that the VT50 was the most serious challenger, and hopes for 9607 were not justified, the decision was made to go to Kiev. By the way, the capital is 10 hours away from me by train.
I took a couple of flash drives and drove off. Really, without problems and with the lights off, I managed to watch the VT50.
After I looked at the VT50, all doubts disappeared - I saw a completely different level of the picture, completely different from what I had seen before, but the problem with brightness, mentioned above, was partly real.
It lies in the fact that the “slaughtered brightness” is not slaughtered much - at night there is enough brightness with the head, but in the daytime there are not enough THX Cinema and Professional modes, and the only mode with enhanced THX brightness The bright room has an overexposed gamut curve, as if bleached. seems possible.
And then I came across one Ukrainian website, where they promised 65 "VT50 for $ 3,800. I called them 2 months ago, at the very beginning of my wanderings and received an answer that they were bringing to order and required an advance payment of $ 1000. I was not ready to go to such risks, unconfirmed by nothing and put this option in a deep box.
But about a month ago I decided to call them again and oh, a miracle! - I was told, 2 TVs have already been ordered and one of them is “bezzozny”, that is, no one’s. That is why I went to Kiev, looked at the VT50, terribly wanted it and went to the guys from the office, left a prepayment of $ 300, received the document and waited about 2 weeks.
About 2 weeks ago, an American 65 "VT50 came to me.
The most important thing is to understand that everything has its own task. TV for home theater is one thing, but for a pleasant and unpretentious movie watching in the evening is another. TV to give - the third.
I just needed a small second TV in the second room and I will most likely opt for the Philips 32PFL5007. It is a pretty good black level and it offers a general set of functions.
1) Do not choose a TV only for 3D. Firstly, there is little quality 3D content, and secondly, it's fun to watch in a week or two. Thirdly, it is harmful to the eyes.
2) When choosing a 3D technology, rely, first of all, on comfort for your eyes. Go to the store and take a stereo pair to watch on a TV with polarization technology, but do not forget that the store most likely will not have the correct BD3D playback device (if you play something on an active TV, it will not look better, than on the passive). Look for places with competent sellers, where you can show all the benefits of the barrier technology. Secondly, focus on the diagonal. At large angular dimensions of the screen, it will be advisable to pay attention to the shutter method, and small ones - to the polarization method.
Thanks to everyone who left comments and just read.
This is the third, final, biggest and in my opinion the most interesting part of my short story about modern televisions. In the first part you could read general information about the types of modern TVs, the used backlight technologies, their practical differences. In the second part, I tried to systematize everything I learned about the chassis, diagonals, motion transmission, color transmission features, and the effects of televisions on vision.
In the third part, I want to share with you my thoughts on stereo (or as it is called 3D), to understand the main differences between active and passive 3D, their technical implementation. Tell how, what and most importantly - what this 3D play. Well, actually, what kind of TV did I choose and why. And there will be photos
And no less important - I want to say a special thank you to everyone who read and commented on the previous 2 articles.
')
All judgments in the article - the personal opinion of the author and may not coincide with the opinions of other people.
3D. Some theory
In fact, no 3D (from dimension - dimension) in modern TV and does not smell. Just now it is so called stereo image. I will follow this fashion.Each person (if he has both eyes in place) has binocular vision, that is, looks at an object with two eyes, but sees one picture. For the reduction of 2 images into one image corresponds to the visual analyzer - the cerebral cortex (is not it, computers are built in our image? Or we for them). As a result of the effect of binocular (stereoscopic) vision, we see a three-dimensional image.
Everything new is well forgotten old. It is worth saying that a stereo-kinocograph is a pretty old thing. Its basic principles were formulated at the end of the distant 19th century, and the demonstration of real stereo films began at the beginning of the 20th century. There were difficulties, problems, not everything was possible (and what can I say, there is still no ideal 3D display method), but the middle of the 20th century is considered the golden age of stereo movie. In general, throughout the entire second half of the 20th century, the popularity of stereo films flashed and then went out.
All this I lead to the fact that the so-called 3D is not a new thing, but the innovation is that it has now reached our televisions. When we look at the screen - we see one image with both eyes. A logical conclusion suggests itself: if we force each eye to see its image (the “other” side of the object), then we will be able to see a three-dimensional image. But how to implement it technically? There are several ways to do this.
Anaglyph
The very first method of obtaining a stereo image. Currently outdated and does not apply to TVs. It consists in color coding of images that are intended for the left and right eyes. The glasses have light filters installed, thanks to which each eye sees its own part of the image intended for it.
There is one drawback, but it overlaps all the advantages - this is a color rendition completely distorted by light filters.
Gate method
Also known as active 3D. Along with the polarization ("passive") method is widely used in modern televisions. Based on inertia of view. It consists in alternately displaying images for the left and right eyes. It requires sophisticated glasses with its own power and shutters - synchronized transparent LCD displays.
The shutter method is used by manufacturers: Philips in the 5th, 7th, 9th series (referred to as “3D Max”), Samsung, Sony and Sharp (all models), in all plasma TVs, installed in Panasonic's top LCD models. It can be said that most manufacturers use this method of obtaining stereo images, and those manufacturers who combine the shutter and polarization methods in different lines call the shutter method as more progressive.
Benefits:
- Full 1080p image for each eye
Disadvantages:
- greater (in comparison with polarization) loss of brightness, which, however, is easily compensated.
- increased probability of crosstalk (when the image is split).
- Many people feel eye fatigue and this is the main drawback.
- The high cost of points.
Polarization method
He is also "passive 3D." The second, along with the shutter, used the method of displaying 3D on televisions. Based on the effect of polarization, when the screen simultaneously displays a picture for both eyes. Filters filter out the “alien” image.
This is the main feature - 2 images for each eye are “wired” in one video stream, which means that the resolution of each stream is 2 times lower.
Polarization technology uses LG in all types of its TVs (moreover, only LG produces matrixes of this type, which means all TVs with passive technology are built on LG matrices), Philips 6-series, Panasonic low-and middle-series, a variety of budget TVs manufacturers.
Benefits:
- reduced eye fatigue
- simple design and low cost points
Disadvantages:
- reduced by 2 times the resolution of the video stream. For vertical stereo pairs (when in one stream one image is above the other) it is 1920x540. For horizontal - 960x1080. This is the main and, in principle, the only drawback of polarization technology.
At the dawn of a new wave of 3D - in 2010, LG used the shutter method, but when faced with insane crosstalk, it retreated and took the path of polarization. Since then, the company vehemently agitates for the designated method, fighting in the courts.
3D. Practice
So we got to the most interesting point. How do both technologies actually behave and which one should be preferred?Passive (polarizing) 3D
This stereo display technology is used only in LG matrices, which is a passive 3D locomotive. This means that all 3D-capable TVs with an LG matrix carry the polarization technology.As mentioned above, the image for the left and right eyes on the screen are displayed simultaneously.
For us, this means 3 things:
1) Resolution falls 2 times. Instead of 1920x1080, we get 1920x540 or 960x1080.
2) No flicker shutter glasses, glasses simple and cheap.
3) No need for special playback devices. All that reproduces Full HD - will be able to play a stereo pair (video stream, with images sewn to both eyes).
1. Resolution
Is the resolution drop noticeable when watching stereo pairs? Absolutely you can say yes. For the viewer, this is manifested by reduced clarity (as it happens in ordinary films) or a ladder effect. But there is one very important reservation - with the correct diagonal (a sufficiently large angular size of the screen).As you know, the human eye also has its resolution, and if the TV is too far away, it may be unable to distinguish all 1080 lines, and distinguish, for example, 500. Then the difference between the shutter and polarization technology is leveled. So how do you know if we can see the resolution drop?
Recall the table of diagonals:
We look at the distance column and 1080p and 720p speakers. Choose a diagonal and if your viewing distance falls within the range of 720p-1080p, it means that the difference will be clearly visible. Further - it is unlikely, if in your relatives there were no eagles.
2. Lack of blink
This is the most subjective characteristic. Many people from the shutter 3D tired eyes. For many, they get tired of any 3D. You need to take a 3D movie, go to the store, where they will calmly make a choice, and for about 10 minutes (at least) look at the shutter 3D (your eyes should get used to it), then passive. If your eyes get tired of active 3D, but not passive, then the last is your choice.Active (shutter) 3D
As I have already said, in the slide technology, the image is formed by alternately demonstrating FullHD-pictures for each of the eyes. What does this mean for you and me:1) We see a peremptory image - full FullHD.
2) Many users get increased eye fatigue due to flicker.
3) We need special playback devices.
1. Full Full HD resolution
This is the main and very important advantage of the shutter 3D, which for many eliminates all the disadvantages. Here, in general, there is nothing to say - FullHD it is FullHD, of course, with the right diagonal. We look at the table of diagonals in the "resolution" of the passive technology. If for your diagonal the distance falls in the range of 720p — 1080p, then you should see the difference. Beyond the 720p limit is unlikely.2. Flicker
Here everything is accurate to the word repeated with the paragraph “Lack of flicker” in the description of passive technology a couple of paragraphs above. You need to go and see for yourself.3. Special playback devices
Since the content for 3D shutter has a resolution of 1920x1080 pixels for each eye, it is required to output a FullHD picture at a frequency of 48 fps (which the TV artificially magnifies). With some practical nagging this is a big problem for playback devices.The content for the slide technology is called Blu-Ray 3D (BD3D). It is in this format that films are released on discs (they are not produced in stereo pairs). BD3D ISO - an image taken from a Blu-Ray 3D disc.
So after all, what do we need so that we can watch Blu-Ray 3D on our TV? Option only 2:
3.1 Blu-Ray 3D Disc Player. The easiest and most expensive way, ultimately. We are talking about players that play Blu-Ray-discs, that is, these same drives will have to buy (and this is not a cheap pleasure, I tell you). Choose any Blu-Ray player you like (by the way, they are included with home theater systems with BD support), for example, Sony BDP-S495 (I brought the best-selling player, you can buy absolutely any). Buy discs - enjoy watching.
3.2 BD3D ISO players. That is, those players that can play images of Blu-Ray discs (which, by the way, lie on any tracker. I download from here ). There are a lot of stereo pairs on the rutracker, but very few BD3D images. And here the main problem arises - there are practically no devices capable of reproducing BD3D ISO without problems and with the support of all functions. Those that reproduce without problems do not have a menu and cost $ 350 (for example, Popcorn Hour A-400). Cheap (~ $ 125) players like IconBIT XDS73D , not only do they not support the menu, they are buggy and do not perform all tasks.
Of course, you can play an ordinary stereo pair on the TVs with shutter technology, but this is the same as buying a Ferrari and driving along country roads. In this case, all the benefits of the slide method are leveled.
The conclusion suggests itself: isn't there a full-featured BD3D-ISO player for little money? In general, there is, with one reservation. I think it is worth highlighting in a separate section.
Reproduction of Blu-Ray 3D from images (BD3D ISO)
It is time to talk about Pioneer BDP-140 Blu-Ray player. This is a player from the 1st section, that is, it has a BD-drive and can play purchased discs, but the cunning Chinese wrote an alternative firmware for it (in a word, quite a long time ago) and about the miracle - with the alternative firmware BDP-140 without any problems or The glitches are reproduced by the BD3D ISO, as well as supporting the Blu-Ray disc menu (which their analogs for $ 350 cannot boast of. Its price is ~ $ 120.
“There must be defects” - you will think. They are, but do not belong to the main function. Among them:
1) Large size (really big, like all Blu-Ray players) - 40 cm. In length and 5 in height.
2) Lack of network functions in alternative firmware.
3) It is completely unsuitable for reproducing alternative formats. Since this player was originally sharpened for playing Blu-Ray in its 2D and 3D forms, it’s a big problem with all kinds of MKV. It is not suitable as a replacement for the universal player.
The result is a great Blu-Ray 2D player (i.e., folders and remuxes from discs) and Blu-Ray 3D. At the same time, the player shows the menu that is not available for players of the lower price category. Plus, it has a drive and can reproduce the good old warm "blue" and not very discs.
Future Pioneer BDP-140 Review
I just bought this player, and if the community is interested (I understand that this topic is much narrower than TVs), then I will write a review: what it looks like, how I bought it, flashed it, where I download images, where I record it and ddThis player is a real life hacking - cheap, buggy, with menu support.
If you are interested in such a review - write in the comments.
Let's go back to 3D in general. It should be said about the use of these 2 types of 3D TVs in various price categories. As already mentioned, LG and Toshiba use polarization technology in all TVs. In contrast to it, Samsung always uses shutter technology. Also active 3D have all the plasma. Philips and Panasonic use the polarization method in cheaper televisions and the shutter in expensive ones. But, for example, active 3D is in the 5th Philips series (and this is a relatively cheap TV).
There is a small rule, if I may say so, which I brought out for myself: in cheap TVs, passive 3D is preferable (as it doesn’t change its quality very much depending on the cost of the TV). Active 3D is very different - in cheap TV it is almost impossible to watch, and it can be a great picture for expensive ones.
Brief 3D Selection Guidelines
1) It is necessary to go and see for yourself if the eyes from the shutter technology are more tired. If you get tired - plus in favor of polarization.2) Diagonal. If your viewing distance falls within the range of 720p — 1080p, then plus in favor of the shutter method.
3) The price of the TV. If the TV is inexpensive - plus polarization. If it's expensive, you should think about active 3D.
4) The number of viewers. Glasses for TVs with passive 3D cost about $ 10-15. With active - $ 60-80. If there are a lot of viewers, the conclusion suggests itself.
5) Do not choose TV by type 3D. Perhaps this item will seem strange to you, but this is my conviction. Stereokino extremely imperfect, straining the eyes and over time will be ousted. This is an hour of spending time, at best, in a week or two. High-quality 3D content is not so much.
Smart tv
This section will be unexpectedly short, as the author has never considered smart TV to be a useful addition. Not because the author is a dinosaur and lives in a prehistoric cave, but because I do not consider this a very useful thing. Please note that this is a very subjective thing and many people like Smart TV. This is my personal opinion and it may not coincide in yours.
Youtube
I'll start with the good. This is the only feature that I find useful. It is convenient to lie on the couch and watch videos from their subscriptions. But "computer" Youtube is more convenient anyway. I occasionally (when special phases of the Earth and the Moon converge, which is extremely rare) I watch Youtube on Apple TV.TV series
Also potentially useful service. I was unable to find and protest a similar service for Samsung TVs, but I have at my disposal a DuneHD TV-101W media player, where I once installed the HDSerials plugin. In general, it’s quite a working thing, but the fate of us has divorced it with different poles and the aforementioned Apple TV is to blame for everything. Soaps are pumped out, sorted and put in iTunes, and then scatter to iPhone and Apple TV.Social networks, browser, torrents
But this is something for which I do not like "smart" TVs. I do not know for whom these functions are intended, but it is absolutely impossible to use them. Try typing on Facebook (moreover, the Facebook curve) something from the console, be it at least three times beautiful and even with a keyboard (but alas, with English). It just seems simple, in fact - hellish torments.A separate vat in hell was made for developers of torrent clients, one of whom I had a chance to test on the DuneHD TV-101W media player. First of all, only drives with ext3, and secondly, the speed is limited to 1 megabyte per second. Thirdly, when these same torrents swing, the prefix hangs tight and responds to commands from the console with a delay of 10 seconds.
In general, I am pretty cool about “smart” TVs, as I used to, first of all, get the maximum quality - and this, as you know, is Blu-Ray or at worst BDRip. This content, of course, in the depths of the television "brains" do not get it.
I would not recommend paying any attention on Smart TV to those who choose a television for home theater.
How I chose TV
This is a small historical excursion about how I still chose what I chose. For those who find this not interesting, I recommend skipping this part. I also want to say that this section is completely subjective and determines only my choice.3 years in a row, I looked pretty good in every sense of Philips 42PFL8404 . Over time, he stopped me to arrange. In what, apart from the black level and the diagonal, I could not formulate. I wanted a more lively and deep image. Immediately it should be said that my viewing distance is 2.5 m.
I realized that a jump of 42 "—46" would not be significant and began to focus on 55. "At first it seemed great, but in the process it became clear that this was not enough for a full immersion. There was only enough money for 55" and I decided that This thing is not for one day and it is worth a little to pick up. So began my 2 months of choice.
Model selection
If everything became clear almost immediately with the diagonal, then it was not easy to choose which technology to choose. Looking ahead to say that with this item, I decided only 2 weeks before ordering a TV.And the reason for this is one simple fact: I live an average of the population of a city, and although we have many different electronics supermarkets, there are no acceptable plasmas in any of them. Sellers claimed in chorus that the plasma was obsolete. Techies on the forums assured that this is the best choice for the movie.
It's time to choose a model.
I started reading reviews. Virtually all authoritative sources ( CNET , AVForums , Digitalversus ; even our Hi-tech.mail.ru ) have argued that the best TV available today is Panasonic's Panasonic VT50 plasma. Of course, I read a bunch of reviews. They talked about an incredible black level, an amazing picture.
Philips 60PFL9607 was chosen as a competitor for the VT50 from the LCD camp. He was awarded EISA as the best LCD-TV in Europe, had a Sharp UV²A matrix, a segmented LED backlight promising MLL = 0.2 nit. In general, an interesting option.
As the challenger was still considered 65 "Sony HX920, but it costs more, besides it is a model of last year, and even 3D at a low level.
Both applicants were not in any of the shops of the city and I took a wait-and-see attitude.
And then almost a miracle happened for our city - 46 "Philips 9707 appeared in one of the networks (an analogue of the one I needed, but with a smaller diagonal and a better anti-glare filter). I drove it decently - first I set up the mode for a long time, then reproduced the fills , test videos, real videos and advertising content.
I will not torment with stories and conclusions. The result of all was the conclusion that, in principle, there is no colossal difference in the image with my 42 "8404. Yes - the diagonal is important, yes, the black is blacker, but I didn’t see any particular difference.
Took this option to note.
"Forum" problems VT50 and a trip to Kiev
I need to say a few words about the VT50. Since the beginning of the selection of the TV, I firmly sat down on the forums. What did not write about him, but the main criticisms were addressed to the following:1) Flicker
2) Lack of white
3) Low brightness
Looking ahead, I will say that points 1 and 2 days did not materialize me, but from the 3rd I had some problems. And this is due to the fact that, as it turned out, European and Russian models tightly stabbed brightness in the region of 80 cd / m2 in the professional mode and 90 cd / m2 in THX Cinema mode.
By the way, THX Cinema is a mode certified by George Lucas studio. Must issue a picture as close as possible to the reference - the one the director intended.
When it became clear that the VT50 was the most serious challenger, and hopes for 9607 were not justified, the decision was made to go to Kiev. By the way, the capital is 10 hours away from me by train.
I took a couple of flash drives and drove off. Really, without problems and with the lights off, I managed to watch the VT50.
Final model selection
After I looked at the VT50, all doubts disappeared - I saw a completely different level of the picture, completely different from what I had seen before, but the problem with brightness, mentioned above, was partly real.
It lies in the fact that the “slaughtered brightness” is not slaughtered much - at night there is enough brightness with the head, but in the daytime there are not enough THX Cinema and Professional modes, and the only mode with enhanced THX brightness The bright room has an overexposed gamut curve, as if bleached. seems possible.
My solution to the brightness problem VT50
From the very beginning on the forums I read that the American versions of the VT50 are all fine with brightness. 120V, the lack of tuners did not scare me at all, but the price scared me. The only supplier I managed to find was calling such exorbitant prices that it could make your head spin.And then I came across one Ukrainian website, where they promised 65 "VT50 for $ 3,800. I called them 2 months ago, at the very beginning of my wanderings and received an answer that they were bringing to order and required an advance payment of $ 1000. I was not ready to go to such risks, unconfirmed by nothing and put this option in a deep box.
But about a month ago I decided to call them again and oh, a miracle! - I was told, 2 TVs have already been ordered and one of them is “bezzozny”, that is, no one’s. That is why I went to Kiev, looked at the VT50, terribly wanted it and went to the guys from the office, left a prepayment of $ 300, received the document and waited about 2 weeks.
About 2 weeks ago, an American 65 "VT50 came to me.
My subjective impressions
In general, I think this TV is the best for home theater. Even with the slaughtered brightness better than the TV, I did not see. Here and MLL = 0.008 nit, and very clear color reproduction and amazing depth. When I was just starting to choose a TV, I was mentally prepared for the fact that top televisions are practically the same, but I finally realized that this was not the case.The most important thing is to understand that everything has its own task. TV for home theater is one thing, but for a pleasant and unpretentious movie watching in the evening is another. TV to give - the third.
I just needed a small second TV in the second room and I will most likely opt for the Philips 32PFL5007. It is a pretty good black level and it offers a general set of functions.
Instead of conclusions:
I will try to briefly formulate everything that I wanted to convey in this part of the article, which was written the longest and was the most time-consuming to write:1) Do not choose a TV only for 3D. Firstly, there is little quality 3D content, and secondly, it's fun to watch in a week or two. Thirdly, it is harmful to the eyes.
2) When choosing a 3D technology, rely, first of all, on comfort for your eyes. Go to the store and take a stereo pair to watch on a TV with polarization technology, but do not forget that the store most likely will not have the correct BD3D playback device (if you play something on an active TV, it will not look better, than on the passive). Look for places with competent sellers, where you can show all the benefits of the barrier technology. Secondly, focus on the diagonal. At large angular dimensions of the screen, it will be advisable to pay attention to the shutter method, and small ones - to the polarization method.
Thanks to everyone who left comments and just read.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/163107/
All Articles