4 ms·

Recently upgraded from a 1080p 40" TV to a 4k 55". According to this, at ~12ft away, we should have bought an 85" TV?! That's crazy and dumb. Or rather, a misr

by mankyd 6y ago

Recently upgraded from a 1080p 40" TV to a 4k 55". According to this, at ~12ft away, we should have bought an 85" TV?! That's crazy and dumb. Or rather, a misrepesentation. This article states that we _could_ get away with up to an 85" TV. It is only at that limit that we'd start to see "imperfections" as they call it. I don't want to see imperfections. I also don't need a TV that will take up my whole field of view while bathing me in light. The 55" we have already feels quite large, much sharper, and is brighter. This article may be interesting from an academic point, but people shouldn't misconstrue this to think they should be getting a bigger TV. Get a TV that fits your space and feels comfortable. Bigger is not always equal to better.

hundchenkatze 6y ago
I think it's useful outside of an academic thought experiment. It hasn't encouraged me to get a bigger tv, quite the opposite. My takeaway isn't that I need a bigger tv, it's that I can get by with a smaller screen and lower resolution.
- mankyd 6y ago
  Except that at the very top is a slider that gives you a recommendation of screen distance to screen size. I think a lot of folks will encounter this and stop there.
  - hundchenkatze 6y ago
    Maybe, but the article is still useful for people that read it in it's entirety.
simlevesque 6y ago
You missed the point.
- mankyd 6y ago
  What is the point then? I feel as though lots of people will read this and say "My couch is 10+ feet from my tv. This states that I _need_ to get a giant tv".
  - aidenn0 6y ago
    That exact question is addressed almost word-for-word in TFA: You are probably now thinking something along the lines of "My couch is 10' away from my TV, which according to the chart means I need a 75 inch TV. This is insane!". Yes, if you want to take advantage of the full capacity of higher resolutions, this is the ideal size. This brings us to the main limitation for most people: the budget. The price of a TV is exponential to its size, as shown in the chart. The chart shows the price range of 2016 LED TVs by their size. As you can see, the jump to a 70 inch TV is quite a big one. For example, check out the price of our picks for the best 70"-75" TVs and the best 80-82-85" TVs. Conclusion We recommend an angle of vision of 30 degrees for a mixed usage. In general, we also recommend getting a 4k TV since 1080p choices have become quite limited and lack modern features such as HDR. To easily find out what size you should buy, you can divide your TV viewing distance (in inches) by 1.6 (or use our TV size calculator above) which roughly equals to a 30 degrees angle. If the best size is outside your budget, just get the biggest TV you can afford.
    - mankyd 6y ago
      Except that, though I can afford a bigger tv than 55" tv, I still am not going to buy one. And buying the 85" they recommend is _enormous_. It might make for a cinematic experience, but it poses additional problems beyond price: 1) You can never sit closer to the TV. I always sit ~12' from my TV, but walking by the tv at close range (between two doors on either side) is going to be jarring for passers-by. If I have friends over for a movie night, we would have to huddle at the far end of the room. 2) It doesn't fit the space, both physically and design wise. I couldn't put that big a tv in the space if I wanted. Even if I did, it's going to be ugly as sin unless the space is very specifically designed for cinema experiences. 3) That's going to be an obnoxious way to watch non-cinema content. Having a TV at the other end of a 12 foot room is not going to be an uncommon affair. Having a room where an 85" screen is appropriate is another matter all together. I feel like the article should have a big disclaimer at the top "This is the maximum size you can enjoy, not the maximum size you should necessarily buy".
- throw55 6y ago
  He didn't. His response is that the metric 'get as big tv as possible to a) fit 40% of your vision b) not waste money on the level of detail your eye won't perceive' is wrong. Analogy - it's like saying that you should get a car that can accelerate 0-60 in 5s. Maybe you don't care about acceleration and prefer 10 cupholders.
notJim 6y ago
> I also don't need a TV that will take up my whole field of view while bathing me in light. To have an immersive experience, isn't taking up your whole field of view kind of the point? I used to have a 9' projector screen in my living room, and I definitely noticed cinematography and directing a lot more with the more immersive experience.
- mankyd 6y ago
  Except I don't always want that. I can always sit closer to my TV, but I can't get farther away than the opposite wall. I would love to have a room designed for a cinema experience with comfy couches and a giant screen, (I am working on it), but my living room is not the place for it. It would just be an eye sore (figuratively and literally).

by mankyd 6y ago

hundchenkatze 6y ago

I think it's useful outside of an academic thought experiment. It hasn't encouraged me to get a bigger tv, quite the opposite. My takeaway isn't that I need a bigger tv, it's that I can get by with a smaller screen and lower resolution.

mankyd 6y ago
Except that at the very top is a slider that gives you a recommendation of screen distance to screen size. I think a lot of folks will encounter this and stop there.
- hundchenkatze 6y ago
  Maybe, but the article is still useful for people that read it in it's entirety.

simlevesque 6y ago

You missed the point.

mankyd 6y ago
What is the point then? I feel as though lots of people will read this and say "My couch is 10+ feet from my tv. This states that I _need_ to get a giant tv".
- aidenn0 6y ago
  That exact question is addressed almost word-for-word in TFA: You are probably now thinking something along the lines of "My couch is 10' away from my TV, which according to the chart means I need a 75 inch TV. This is insane!". Yes, if you want to take advantage of the full capacity of higher resolutions, this is the ideal size. This brings us to the main limitation for most people: the budget. The price of a TV is exponential to its size, as shown in the chart. The chart shows the price range of 2016 LED TVs by their size. As you can see, the jump to a 70 inch TV is quite a big one. For example, check out the price of our picks for the best 70"-75" TVs and the best 80-82-85" TVs. Conclusion We recommend an angle of vision of 30 degrees for a mixed usage. In general, we also recommend getting a 4k TV since 1080p choices have become quite limited and lack modern features such as HDR. To easily find out what size you should buy, you can divide your TV viewing distance (in inches) by 1.6 (or use our TV size calculator above) which roughly equals to a 30 degrees angle. If the best size is outside your budget, just get the biggest TV you can afford.
  - mankyd 6y ago
    Except that, though I can afford a bigger tv than 55" tv, I still am not going to buy one. And buying the 85" they recommend is _enormous_. It might make for a cinematic experience, but it poses additional problems beyond price: 1) You can never sit closer to the TV. I always sit ~12' from my TV, but walking by the tv at close range (between two doors on either side) is going to be jarring for passers-by. If I have friends over for a movie night, we would have to huddle at the far end of the room. 2) It doesn't fit the space, both physically and design wise. I couldn't put that big a tv in the space if I wanted. Even if I did, it's going to be ugly as sin unless the space is very specifically designed for cinema experiences. 3) That's going to be an obnoxious way to watch non-cinema content. Having a TV at the other end of a 12 foot room is not going to be an uncommon affair. Having a room where an 85" screen is appropriate is another matter all together. I feel like the article should have a big disclaimer at the top "This is the maximum size you can enjoy, not the maximum size you should necessarily buy".
throw55 6y ago
He didn't. His response is that the metric 'get as big tv as possible to a) fit 40% of your vision b) not waste money on the level of detail your eye won't perceive' is wrong. Analogy - it's like saying that you should get a car that can accelerate 0-60 in 5s. Maybe you don't care about acceleration and prefer 10 cupholders.

notJim 6y ago

> I also don't need a TV that will take up my whole field of view while bathing me in light. To have an immersive experience, isn't taking up your whole field of view kind of the point? I used to have a 9' projector screen in my living room, and I definitely noticed cinematography and directing a lot more with the more immersive experience.

mankyd 6y ago
Except I don't always want that. I can always sit closer to my TV, but I can't get farther away than the opposite wall. I would love to have a room designed for a cinema experience with comfy couches and a giant screen, (I am working on it), but my living room is not the place for it. It would just be an eye sore (figuratively and literally).