speedy Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 Has anyone got one of these? Thinking of getting one...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris`I Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Has anyone got one of these? Thinking of getting one...... www.avforums.com/ - THE definitive place for all things AV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy Posted December 21, 2010 Author Share Posted December 21, 2010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 i'm not bothering with 3D tv, its just a fad, they tried it twice before and it died a death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy Posted December 21, 2010 Author Share Posted December 21, 2010 Yeah i wasnt sure about it either.....may go a samsung instead (not 3D) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris`I Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 i'm not bothering with 3D tv, its just a fad, they tried it twice before and it died a death. I'm (un)fortunate that I dont see with stereo vision, so its completely wasted on me. I do hope its a fad otherwise I cant go to the cinema any more depending on the system they use Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoff-r Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 i'm not bothering with 3D tv, its just a fad, they tried it twice before and it died a death. I'm (un)fortunate that I dont see with stereo vision, so its completely wasted on me. I do hope its a fad otherwise I cant go to the cinema any more depending on the system they use How does that work mate? Does it affect depth perception and things like that? I have to say I'm not a fan of 3D, it seems forced, I don't particularly like wearing those glasses in the cinema and it makes my eyes feel funny not sure if it's down to the fact that I wear contacts. I hope it dies a death, I just don't see the appeal at all, unless of course I owned the company that made the glasses and film companies charging extortionate fees for cinema tickets... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris`I Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 i'm not bothering with 3D tv, its just a fad, they tried it twice before and it died a death. I'm (un)fortunate that I dont see with stereo vision, so its completely wasted on me. I do hope its a fad otherwise I cant go to the cinema any more depending on the system they use How does that work mate? Does it affect depth perception and things like that? It does in the sense that my brain cant use convergence to percieve depth, but there are other ways to percieve it - such as what is in focus when looking at something, and also perspective (how big/small something is compared to its surroundings). So the brain does compensate for it, but I'm not as accurate with depth as someone with stereo vision - fast moving objects coming straight at me can be kinda hard to catch. But it does mean that I dont merge the 2 images from my eyes into one, and as such cant do magic eye pictures or watch 3D films "properly" Depending on the tech used, I can watch it, just they look a bit like I'm watching a film with sunglasses on. Its better than the old green/red filter glasses as they meant all I could see was green and red with lines all over the shop New ones mean I can watch just its not 3D, but can give me a headache due to the picture switching as I only see half of the images at a time so can be flickery if their refresh rate isnt high enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricey Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Not seen it yet but I've heard that it looks very much like 'bits' of what ever your watching are in 3D then the rest is 2D which makes it look a bit shash. +1 on the cinema thing........makes my eye kill and I get a right headache. I get robbed 10 quid by Sky every damn month for HD which is a bloody con........I'll be damned if I'm forking out any more for a headache too ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Not seen it yet but I've heard that it looks very much like 'bits' of what ever your watching are in 3D then the rest is 2D which makes it look a bit shash. +1 on the cinema thing........makes my eye kill and I get a right headache. I get robbed 10 quid by Sky every damn month for HD which is a bloody con........I'll be damned if I'm forking out any more for a headache too ! i'm trying to work out if i keep paying for HD, it is good, but there aren't many channels with it, and i'm planning on scrapping the movie package as i'm bored of paying so much for all the flipping repeats. and if i don't have the movie channel whats the point of HD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricey Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 My TV is alright but its about 4 years old now so it won't be top spec for watching HD (let along 3D). If your HDMI cable is kack apparently it make the picture worse, half the junk is upscaled rather than true HD..........about the only thing that is significantly better is the footy. The 3D footy would be an interesting one (not seen it yet)........I can see that being proper rubbish! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris`I Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 As HDMI is digital, you will either get a perfect picture or it will break up. Its not like old analogue where you can get fuzzy pictures. So with HDMI, dont read into all this guff about buying expensive cables. Get ones that are good enough to cover the distance you need and be done with it. Only when running like 10m do you need something better than adequate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 yeah some people were paying mental prices on 1m cables Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricey Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 As HDMI is digital, you will either get a perfect picture or it will break up. Its not like old analogue where you can get fuzzy pictures. So with HDMI, dont read into all this guff about buying expensive cables. Get ones that are good enough to cover the distance you need and be done with it. Only when running like 10m do you need something better than adequate. cheeky thieving git in currys......tried to tell me that the playstation was practically unusable without a 90 quid lead......I obviously told him to jam it but I thought it would of at least made a bit of difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoff-r Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Sky is a joke, there's bugger all on anyways and they wonder why piracy is such commonplace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilp Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 i have 2 cables which are the same length but very different thickness. One was a freeby from virgin media the other i bought... on the ps3 i do notice that when i use the thin lead i need to adjust my screen sharpness and colour. Although it is a digital signal im sure that the materials the lead is made with determines the quality of data transfer as with anything there is always energy loss.. just my thought Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris`I Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 If you get a picture that is not breaking up, there is no way from what I know of the HDMI standard, that it could give 2 different pictures. Its all encoded in digital, 1's and 0's. Theres no way that it can get a 0.5 Better cables will allow the signal to travel further before it breaks up and will support higher resolutions for longer distance, but it wont improve the actual picture itself if 2 given cables are managing to get a good signal from one place to another. I've tried £3 cables and £30 cables, no difference what so ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris`I Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Or you can think of HDMI as the same as USB. Would you buy a different USB cable to get better transfers? How the hell do you get beter transfers from USB you ask? Well you dont, it either works or it doesnt. You may find a cheap one doesnt perform as it should over say 5m which a slightly more expensive one will, but you cant get one transfer "better" than the other, it either works or it doesnt. Over short distances these things make little difference, its only when the signal has change to attenuate that you need better quality wires and connectors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRH 350Z Posted December 23, 2010 Share Posted December 23, 2010 Bought a 3D Samsung TV this month. Pleased with it; the 3D films (I only have Shrek) look pretty good. Also, there is an option to upgrade 2D to 3D; I appreciate it is NOT true 3D but it looks quite good - adds a bit more depth and crispness to normal images and makes the Xbox 360 look pretty cool (this is the thing that has impressed me the most to be honest). I do love a sharp image! Thing is though there is not that much available in 3D - I can't see it being a big thing either!? For me: buy a good TV first and foremost - if it has 3D well that's a bonus... apart from the need for a 3D HDMI cable and 3D Blu-ray player (and a 3D sound system if you choose to go that far..!!!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.