LED vs Plasma

killadoob said:
I hate those tv's that are very wide. Normally shorter than my 46" as well, so width and less height = fail for gaming in my opinion.
Click to expand...

What?

You make it sound like the TV's in question are wider than they are tall, which is impossible as the aspect ratio remains 16:9 whether it's 46, 48, 51 or 100 inches.

*****

And you really shouldn't be sitting 1m away from a 46-inch.

That's more like 32-inch territory.
 
My Plasma has an auto-off after a set amount of hours of not using the remote...think it's 2 hours.

That being said if PC use was my primary goal I would also stick with LCD technology.
 
SauRoNZA said:
What?

You make it sound like the TV's in question are wider than they are tall, which is impossible as the aspect ratio remains 16:9 whether it's 46, 48, 51 or 100 inches.

*****

And you really shouldn't be sitting 1m away from a 46-inch.

That's more like 32-inch territory.
Click to expand...

They are all wider than they are tall. Are you fking kidding me LOL. I will take my current monitor as a guideline for you.

52 cm x 30cm, all/most monitors/tvs these days are wider because there is something called wide screen :D. you measure the "s from the bottom left to the top right. that is how you get your size.

my 46" is wider than it is tall, i have seen 51-55" tv's that are shorter height wise than my 46" tv. Go take a measuring tape to game and do your own research. Most if not all will be wider. The bigger you go the wider the tv becomes but it doesn't get much higher.

http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/UN46C7000WFXZA
http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/PN51E550D1FXZA
 
Last edited:
Gerhardva said:
I have the Samsung PS51D550 and it's excellent for gaming.
Click to expand...

Can you measure the width of your tv and the height, starting from the frame, i will do the same when i am back from gym with my 46" tv.

Just out of curiosity i want to see :D.

Please note this is not a plasma vs led argument postman, this is a size argument now.
 
killadoob said:
They are all wider than they are tall. Are you fking kidding me LOL. I will take my current monitor as a guideline for you.

52 cm x 30cm, all/most monitors/tvs these days are wider because there is something called wide screen :D. you measure the "s from the bottom left to the top right. that is how you get your size.

my 46" is wider than it is tall, i have seen 51-55" tv's that are shorter height wise than my 46" tv. Go take a measuring tape to game and do your own research. Most if not all will be wider. The bigger you go the wider the tv becomes but it doesn't get much higher.

http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/UN46C7000WFXZA
http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/PN51E550D1FXZA
Click to expand...

Kaaaaaaaaaaak.
 
SauRoNZA said:
What?

You make it sound like the TV's in question are wider than they are tall, which is impossible as the aspect ratio remains 16:9 whether it's 46, 48, 51 or 100 inches.

*****
Click to expand...
I am also confused about this

the aspect ratio should be the same whether its a 46, 51 or 32" tv
what you on about killadoob??
 
killadoob said:
Can you measure the width of your tv and the height, starting from the frame, i will do the same when i am back from gym with my 46" tv.

Just out of curiosity i want to see :D.

Please note this is not a plasma vs led argument postman, this is a size argument now.
Click to expand...
measuring from the frame is pointless
measure from the inside of the frame rather
 
rodga said:
I am also confused about this

the aspect ratio should be the same whether its a 46, 51 or 32" tv
what you on about killadoob??
Click to expand...

I am talking about the size and length not suiting certain people, the bigger you go the wider the screen becomes, so it makes the tv look very long, so if you sit right up close to you have to move your head.

i understand about the aspect ratio but the wider you go the further away you have to sit.
 
killadoob said:
Explain further please. Are they are all square?
Click to expand...

All widescreen TVs have a width to height ratio of 16:9

So if it's 9 inches high it will be 16 inches wide.
Double the width to 32 inches, you'll find it's 18 inches high. En so voorts.

So you don't reach a point where the screen gets wider and wider and wider without getting higher.
 
From the Samsung website, a 51" and 46" example :

51" - 47.1 x 28.2
46" - 43 x 25.72
 
rodga said:
measuring from the frame is pointless
measure from the inside of the frame rather
Click to expand...

Well either way i want a screen i don't to have to move head to see :D. It looks shorter with more width than anything else.

Ok i see my error, it just looks shorter because it's so much wider.
 
Last edited:
SauRoNZA said:
What?

You make it sound like the TV's in question are wider than they are tall, which is impossible as the aspect ratio remains 16:9 whether it's 46, 48, 51 or 100 inches.
Click to expand...

You sure about that? 16:9 will naturally dictate that the screen is wider than it is tall...
 
Last edited:
killadoob said:
Well either way i want a screen i don't to have to move head to see :D. It looks shorter with more width than anything else.

Ok i see my error, it just looks shorter because it's so much wider.
Click to expand...

It's not disproportionally wider. It would just look like a bigger version of a smaller screen.
 
Maverick Jester said:
You sure about that? 16:9 will naturally dictate that the screen is wider than it is tall...
Click to expand...

how I understand is that killadoob was saying that 51" is wider in proportion compared to a 46"
when in fact the are the same proportion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X