Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: explain curved TV sets to me

This is topic explain curved TV sets to me in forum The Afterlife at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=001102

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 10-11-2015, 05:49 PM:

Specifically, what is the point? I understand why curved screens make sense for projection (to maintain even focus and light across the screen), but I don't get the purpose of a curved screen on a television set. Wouldn't the size of the "sweet spot" for viewing be reduced? And wouldn't the picture be objectionably distorted?

Is there any science to explain why a curved television screen is preferable to a flat one, or is this just a marketing gimmick?

I could actually see some benefits to a very large, very wide (wider than 2.35:1) computer monitor as a replacement for multiple 4x3 or 16x9 monitors, but a computer monitor is typically intended to be viewed by one user, whereas a TV set is typically intended to be watched by as many as several people at once.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 10-11-2015, 06:31 PM:

Flat screens are ubiquitous, and thus passé. Need to come up with something to get the bleeding edge types to upgrade their electronics and stay cooler than the rest.

Posted by Steve Matz (Member # 1890) on 10-11-2015, 09:37 PM:

My Friend who has been a TV Repair Tech for over 40 yrs. said to stay away from Curved Screen TV's. Nothing to do with picture quality; They are so Fragile that even casual movement of the Unit can cause cracking in the Screen. I was at his shop a few weeks back and he had 2 newer Curved Screens that he was junking out for parts as a result of broken screens. One of them was from a women who was carefully moving it to vaccum and cracked the Screen. He said you should stick with Flat Screens for now. Even LG's High End 4K $5000.00 TV Stayed with a Flat Screen ...

Posted by Scott Jentsch (Member # 1681) on 10-12-2015, 09:55 AM:

I have no idea why someone would want a curved screen in their living room or media room. We were in a Best Buy yesterday, and there was a very large Samsung unit (75" maybe) and it was huge and very odd-looking with the curves. My wife looked at it and shook her head, saying that she would never want something like that in the house.

I agree that these TV's are curved to be different, in the hopes of attracting consumers for the novelty factor. I've thought that it might be nice for a computer monitor, but I wonder if there would be distortion on vertical and horizontal lines...

Posted by Sean Weitzel (Member # 244) on 10-12-2015, 11:22 AM:

I was in my local Costco last week and walked by one on display. What immediately jumped out at me was how bad cross reflection not from the image but ambient light in the room was. Not a fan.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 10-12-2015, 11:48 AM:

There are no geometric distortions on the curved TV displays. The LCD panel itself is curved, it isn't a projection onto a screen.

There will be reflections as you walk in front of it and in low-light situations, I've noted that background light level is not uniform when it is trying to have "black."

The short answer is, they aren't perfect. I'd say that aesthetics are the chief virtue in an LCD display. And, as demonstrated here, some dislike the aesthetics to them.

I could definitely see where they would bring something to a computer display...if the background level thing was mitigated.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-12-2015, 12:18 PM:

Martin M. nailed it -- it's just the latest gimmick. The biggest problem for the TV industry is, flat panel screens last too long but cost too little, so the money is bleeding out of that industry.

The other obvious thing they're trying to do is to be "more like" real movie theaters so people can "have that cinema experience" at home. Never mind if it's something you don't need in the home.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 10-12-2015, 04:57 PM:

The bigger problem is that the over-the-air TV stations are changing digital formats in a couple of years. Yes, you will need a new set.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-12-2015, 05:23 PM:

?? They're obsoleting current HDTVs??

Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 10-12-2015, 06:17 PM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
The bigger problem is that the over-the-air TV stations are changing digital formats in a couple of years. Yes, you will need a new set.

They are? What are they changing to? And does it really matter? Over-the-air reception is down to something like 9% of HUT (homes using television). Among my circle of friends, family and TV industry professionals, I know of exactly ONE person using an antenna for reception.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 10-12-2015, 07:41 PM:

Beginning in the next 3 to 5 years the new ATSC standard will be kicking in anyway. Get as much time out of your present sets as you can! I skiped over ATSC 2.0 which will be backward compatible at this point in time.

ATSC 3.0

Another article. This one already over a year old but still interesting and I now the guy that wrote it.

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 10-12-2015, 11:13 PM:

quote: Mark Ogden
They are? What are they changing to? And does it really matter? Over-the-air reception is down to something like 9% of HUT (homes using television). Among my circle of friends, family and TV industry professionals, I know of exactly ONE person using an antenna for reception.

Short answer is UHD/4K, probably with higher dynamic range and a larger color space. Audio wise we'll get something more than 5.1, probably immersive object-based audio (Dolby AC4 and a variant of MPEG-H are the two submissions). It will be groovy!

I suspect we'll see set-top boxes that will output a 1080p signal compatible with our current HDTVs and a transcoded AC3 signal. I'm not worried about us consumers - my bigger question is given the relatively small size of the broadcast viewership market, will the broadcasters be willing and/or able to invest in the infrastructure upgrade to do all this? As an antenna user I hope so...

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-13-2015, 03:04 AM:

Your current sets won't be obsolete. You can get a stand-alone tuner and just plug it in via HDMI. Any word on if they are sticking with the evil MPEG-2? Or are they just increasing the bit rate? SURELY they are doing away with interlacing altogether. Interlacing is dumb and has no place in the world today. It should be illegal.

I'd be doubtful of any real increases in quality because stations will just make 20 "HD" subchannels. Stations LOVE making subchannels. They should be illegal as well. You have one channel. Deal with it. Want another one? Then it needs its own 25mbps stream.

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 10-13-2015, 08:34 AM:

I would never pay the price they are currently asking for curved TV's, just as I never would have paid the price they were asking when flat screens first came out, but I can see the appeal. I was highly impressed with image quality when I saw them in Best Buy. I don't know if I'd want one in my living room, but if I had a proper theater room (not to mention the money, which I don't!), sure. It's all a matter of preference. Some like 'em, others hate 'em. However, the fragileness that Steve points out is something I wasn't aware of.

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 10-13-2015, 10:07 AM:

quote: Joe Redifer
Your current sets won't be obsolete. You can get a stand-alone tuner and just plug it in via HDMI. Any word on if they are sticking with the evil MPEG-2? Or are they just increasing the bit rate? SURELY they are doing away with interlacing altogether. Interlacing is dumb and has no place in the world today. It should be illegal.

Definitely moving on from MPEG, they're using HEVC. No interlacing, image will be 2160p.

Back to the OP, I'm in the anti-curve camp, I just don't get it. Added reflections, image distortion, reducing the number of "sweet spots" for viewing...makes no sense to me.

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 10-14-2015, 02:44 AM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
The bigger problem is that the over-the-air TV stations are changing digital formats in a couple of years. Yes, you will need a new set.

Big whoop- 99% of TV is an unwatchable mess (presentation-wise), and the current digital format uses far too much compression- even on stations that don't have sub-channels. I didn't get an HD TV til about a year after the analog stations went off and it was very nice not having that crap coming into my living room at all!

Curved TVs are dumb- for decades we put up with imperfect geometry on CRTs, now they can actually make the damn screen perfectly flat as it should be and someone decides to mess that up.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 10-14-2015, 08:22 AM:

I think that curved TVs fall into the category of "just because you can, doesn't mean you should."

It's nothing more than a sales gimmick. Since 3D didn't cause people to replace TVs and 4k doesn't have nearly enough content yet to cause people to replace TVs, they had to come up with something different.

Posted by Daniel Schulz (Member # 1881) on 10-14-2015, 09:58 AM:

quote: Jesse Skeen
Big whoop- 99% of TV is an unwatchable mess (presentation-wise), and the current digital format uses far too much compression- even on stations that don't have sub-channels.

I really beg to differ. Program quality is hit-or-miss, as it's always been, but there's great TV on air right now. As far as picture quality, on my plasma TV, over an antenna, on the prime time shows that the networks really care about I am getting stunning picture quality.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 10-14-2015, 02:32 PM:

quote: Daniel Schulz
Back to the OP, I'm in the anti-curve camp, I just don't get it. Added reflections, image distortion, reducing the number of "sweet spots" for viewing...makes no sense to me.

I looked at one of those at Costco, and my impression was they went way overboard, looking for demo images with lots of well-defined, sharp edges... just like you see everywhere in real life ( [Roll Eyes]

). Then, just to make sure you noticed, they found a 70's vintage comb filter and ran everything through it.

Yes... they can draw a line so sharp you might feel just looking at it could cut your eyeballs. What makes something like that a "must have" for nearly $4kBucks?

Then, there's the issue of content. Is it true that none of the current live distribution schemes can take full advantage of what these things can display? Are you then left to build a Blu-Ray library?

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 10-14-2015, 02:41 PM:

Do people still watch TV in groups? I don't have a TV or family, so I really don't know. If everyone watches on their own, theoretically having various sweet spots won't matter. Assuming those single people watching are fixed in the sweet spot and not wandering around doing dishes or chatting on the phone, etc.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-14-2015, 04:35 PM:

I agree applying a curve to a TV screen is a gimmick. It's meant to imitate a curved movie theater screen, but without actually delivering any real viewing benefit over a normal flat TV screen.

I would be suspicious of curved computer monitors. Unless the unit is a high quality monitor its color uniformity and accuracy might stink at any viewing angle. It might be kind of cool to have three curved monitors in a wrap-around configuration for some kinds of gaming.

I think LG had a curved smart phone. Not sure if that thing is selling at all.

They're even doing this curved screen stuff with some LED jumbotron signs. The Cleveland Cavaliers have a huge new scoreboard hanging over the court featuring four curved LED displays. Two are 56¾' X 31½' in size, flanked by 33' X 30' boards on the ends. The builder, ANC Sports, says the new scoreboard will give the highest paying customers near courtside the best views. Meanwhile everyone else will get a more shitty view.

I think the novelty of those curved screens will wear off soon.

Some OLED TVs are starting to come down in price. LG has a 55" model that has come down to $3000, which is a bargain compared to what big OLED TV sets normally cost. I wonder if this means electronics companies are finally overcoming the production challenges to making large OLED panels in quantity.

I think OLED, in combination with things like REC 2020 color space, HDR, Dolby Vision, etc. will sell a lot of TV sets -at least a lot more than those curved models. But then again, the price has to be right. It's a lot easier to pull the trigger on a TV purchase when the price is under $2000. When it's over $3000 it's easier to wait.

quote: Daniel Schulz
I really beg to differ. Program quality is hit-or-miss, as it's always been, but there's great TV on air right now. As far as picture quality, on my plasma TV, over an antenna, on the prime time shows that the networks really care about I am getting stunning picture quality.

The image quality I get from my outdoor antenna easily blows away the re-broadcast version coming from Dish. There just isn't any contest.

It seems pretty logical for ATSC 3.0 to leave behind MPEG-2, jump over MPEG-4 and go with HEVC. I'm a little concerned about the variable bit rate nature in the new standard. It's probably a given TV stations will keep on multi-casting multiple channels in their frequency space. But the efficiency of HEVC could give some bean counter the idea of dividing the TV station's spectrum into a bunch more channels rather than have a nice 4K channel.

Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 10-16-2015, 05:38 PM:

quote: Daniel Schulz
As far as picture quality, on my plasma TV, over an antenna, on the prime time shows that the networks really care about I am getting stunning picture quality.

So stunning that you get to stare at a constant network logo, in the 4x3-safe area no less. NBC even puts up full-time text promos for other shows next to it now, and I see that ABC now puts the word "FUNNY" onscreen during all of its comedy shows, I guess so you don't forget to laugh. And even on shows without these annoyances, I've NEVER seen a broadcast here that didn't have noticeable compression artifacts. The CW (Can't Watch!) station here runs all of its non-network shows bug-free in 1080i and has NO subchannels taking away bandwidth, yet whenever I turn that on and a show has a dark scene, there's dancing pixels. If it were something I actually wanted to watch, I'd be pretty upset.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-16-2015, 08:33 PM:

I had "The Price is Right" on yesterday morning and they had a "countdown to Thursday Night Football" thing in the bottom 1/4 of the screen. And the networks why they're losing audience share.