Samsung's Monster Smart TV Arrives in August for $10K

Status
Not open for further replies.

chromonoid

Honorable
Jul 6, 2012
5
0
10,510
0
I love it! it has all the features i need and 10k is a good price for me... but i wont buy it, 1920x1080 in a 73" TV?? no way.... maybe if it was 2560x1440 i would buy it
 

CaedenV

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2011
532
0
18,960
22
$10K and not a 4K display? what, are they kidding? We will be seeing the first high end 2K and 4K displays in Q4 (likely a bit more than $10K, but if you can afford such prices then who cares?), so the poor sucker who buys this will only be king of the hill for ~3months before something massively better comes down the pipe. This is just sad.

Also, while 1080p holds up with projector technology, it really does not stand the test on a traditional display. If you are doing anything above 60" you have to go with a projector, or go home.
 

randomoneh

Honorable
Jun 8, 2012
3
0
10,510
0
At usual distance of 9 ft, it has angular resolution of 55.34 pixels per degree. Which isn't bad, but could be better.

For example, when angular resolution (number of pixels per degree of person's field of view) is ~ 35 or higher, viewer usually can't see pixel grid / pixelation on images. On the other side, angular resolution of ~200 pixels per degree is limit for most of healthy individuals, meaning image quality is matching the limit of viewer's eye and is as good as it can be concerning resolution and viewing distance.

Benefit is, of course, non-linear. You'll benefit most with angular resolution up to ~100 pixels per degree. And then up to 200 ppd, quality will rise slowly.
 

alidan

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2009
1,681
0
19,730
0
i love how people dont understand how the human eye works.

unless a tv is over 120 inches, the average person watching a tv in their liveing room will see no bennifit from 1080p or 4k...

on a pc monitor, yea, but we are less than 3 feet away from that.
on a projector, hell yea, those can go theater size... 4k there makes sense. but just 4k in a liveing room as it currently stands... hell no, not worth it for that alone.

and now for the downvotes because i said the truth about how the human eye works, and that 4k for most people would be useless.
 

randomoneh

Honorable
Jun 8, 2012
3
0
10,510
0
[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]i love how people dont understand how the human eye works.unless a tv is over 120 inches, the average person watching a tv in their liveing room will see no bennifit from 1080p or 4k...[/citation]
So untrue. What you have said is not even close to truth. If you want to debate - I can debate. But know that I know what I'm talking about.
 

drwho1

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2010
367
0
18,930
0
Total waste from Samsung on this TV.
Like many people I want:
(A) 4K
(B) Screen no less than 70 / 80 inches
(C) Price under 3K

forget the Smart gimmick, even the 3D gimmick.
I only need a remote control, after all I'm Smart enough to use it.
 

dvo

Distinguished
Jan 16, 2008
15
0
18,560
1
actually alidan is completely right. THX recommends a 40 degree viewing angle. at 9 feet that calculates to 108 inches. even at 120 inches like alidan suggested, all you have to do is move back about a foot or so.

so yea, it is amazing how many people do not understand....
 

randomoneh

Honorable
Jun 8, 2012
3
0
10,510
0
[citation][nom]DVo[/nom]actually alidan is completely right. THX recommends a 40 degree viewing angle. at 9 feet that calculates to 108 inches. even at 120 inches like alidan suggested, all you have to do is move back about a foot or so. so yea, it is amazing how many people do not understand....[/citation]
Both of you have very bad understanding of how this works.

Your example - 40 degrees horizontally. When this TV is occupying 40 degrees of your field of view horizontally, you are standing 7.48 ft away from it. At that point, it has angular resolution (what really matters) of 46 pixels per degree.

At usual distance of 9 ft, it has angular resolution of 55.34 pixels per degree. Which isn't bad, but could be better.

For example, when angular resolution (number of pixels per degree of person's field of view) is ~ 35 or higher, viewer usually can't see pixel grid / pixelation on images. On the other side, angular resolution of ~200 pixels per degree is limit for most of healthy individuals (NHK study), meaning image quality is matching the limit of viewer's eye and is as good as it can be concerning resolution and viewing distance.

Benefit is, of course, non-linear. You'll benefit most with angular resolution up to ~100 pixels per degree. And then up to 200 ppd, quality will rise slowly.

At usual distance of 9 ft, it has angular resolution of 55.34 pixels per degree. Which isn't bad, but could be better.

For example, when angular resolution (number of pixels per degree of person's field of view) is ~ 35 or higher, viewer usually can't see pixel grid / pixelation on images. On the other side, angular resolution of ~200 pixels per degree is limit for most of healthy individuals, meaning image quality is matching the limit of viewer's eye and is as good as it can be concerning resolution and viewing distance.

Benefit is, of course, non-linear. You'll benefit most with angular resolution up to ~100 pixels per degree. And then up to 200 ppd, quality will rise slowly.

Anything more clear to you two?
 

house70

Distinguished
Apr 21, 2010
1,465
0
19,310
100
no news about Sammy getting the upper hand in UK over Apple? And how Apple is ordered to post their failure on their website? Cmon, Toms, it's been out there for a while...
 

slabbo

Distinguished
Feb 11, 2009
192
0
18,630
0
I know this is irrelevant, but...

Tom's update your site with the news that Apple has to run ads for Samsung after the judge ruled that Samsung didn't copy iPad! LOL! That judge rules!!!

"the same judge has ordered Apple to purchase and run ads in many UK newspapers and magazines that dispel the idea that the Galaxy Tab is a copy of the iPad. These include the Financial Times, the Daily Mail, the Guardian Mobile magazine, and T3. Apple was also ordered to post a notice about the court's decision on its website and keep it live for six months"
 

master_chen

Honorable
Jun 20, 2012
90
0
10,610
6
[citation][nom]drwho1[/nom]TI want:(A) 4K (B) Screen no less than 70 / 80 inches(C) Price under 3K[/citation]

...you forgot about OLED....ZZzzzZZZZzzzZzZzzzz...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T Streaming Video & TVs 1
J Streaming Video & TVs 2
M Streaming Video & TVs 1
C Streaming Video & TVs 2
Ricky Steedman Streaming Video & TVs 1
L Streaming Video & TVs 3
Jvasseur1 Streaming Video & TVs 0
Beerit Streaming Video & TVs 3
B Streaming Video & TVs 1
MortenElite Streaming Video & TVs 2
D Streaming Video & TVs 2
A Streaming Video & TVs 5
O Streaming Video & TVs 1
mailyphung Streaming Video & TVs 0
S Streaming Video & TVs 1
F Streaming Video & TVs 5
FaithAlwy Streaming Video & TVs 2
M Streaming Video & TVs 0
P Streaming Video & TVs 2
M Streaming Video & TVs 1

ASK THE COMMUNITY