I've played countless hours of gaming via my xbox for over three years (and a Wii). Many games have static menu items during game play. Still, no burn-in. Maybe certain manufacturers are prone to burn-in than others, but I don't have any after years of using the TV.
question Larger TVs
- Thread starter LunarMist
- Start date
I've played countless hours of gaming via my xbox for over three years (and a Wii). Many games have static menu items during game play. Still, no burn-in. Maybe certain manufacturers are prone to burn-in than others, but I don't have any after years of using the TV.
My screen is only about a foot off the floor, screen center is about normal.
On the plasma thing I was under the impression that plasma burnin was on par with LCD burnin these days?
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
It is apparant that what it takes to cause burn-in is unknown here as well as what it takes to prevent it.
In 2008, people were talking about accidentally leaving a static image on screen for 3 days that did not result in permanent burn-in.
If it was such an acute problem then the manuf. would give guidelines about care and maintenance. If the rate was unknown then they would not be able to defend their warranties. This is starting to look a lot like FUD.
In 2008, people were talking about accidentally leaving a static image on screen for 3 days that did not result in permanent burn-in.
If it was such an acute problem then the manuf. would give guidelines about care and maintenance. If the rate was unknown then they would not be able to defend their warranties. This is starting to look a lot like FUD.
timwhit
Hairy Aussie
My cheap Westinghouse 42" LCD has burn in.
timwhit
Hairy Aussie
I use the TV with my HTPC. I believe it burned in because the computer didn't turn off the monitor for quite a while (several house). Next time I will also purchase a reputable brand.
sdbardwick
Storage is cool
My 83+ year old grandparents have used their Panasonic 42" plasma for 3-4 years now without developing burn-in. You can be damn sure they aren't taking any special care; grandfather leaves CNBC on for hours most mornings.
Last edited:
Looking up at a TV hour after hour cannot be good for the ergonomics. :santa:
I doubt it it worth stressing over. If you bought a decent quality TV, you'll likely be fine.
I'm glad to hear someone else with a plasma also shares a similar experience. I know a coworker or two that also have them and also do not have burn-in issues even with hundreds of hours of gaming on an xbox.
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
Remember they are in torch mode on the sales floor. If 3D matters to you the xx30 series has faster response phosphors and a different drive sequence for less 3D crosstalk, in addition to less external reflection.
Will Rickards
Storage Is My Life
I'm not really that interested in the 3D but the difference in price is like $25 (for the TV anyway). The glasses are another expense.
I think I'll stick with the plasma.
I think I'll stick with the plasma.
time
Storage? I am Storage!
The Panasonic plasma FAQ says the first 100 hours are the vulnerable period for burn-in. After that, it's no different than for CRT (which of course led to the advent of screen savers ...).
Will Rickards
Storage Is My Life
Why don't the manufacturers just run them for the first 200 hours before sending them out to customers? Seems silly to me that we have to be careful for that time.
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
Seriously.
Stereodude
Not really a
I agree, but I decided to not argue about the location of the TV.
Yeah, that sure would add significant cost.
Will Rickards
Storage Is My Life
Yes it would probably add significant production lag and possible cost. But they have to test it anyway so....
We'll get a tilting mount so the viewing angle is more direct.
I've attached a sketch of the room layout.
It kind of sucks where the TV is now. The windows reflects on it even with the roman shades down. It is a 32" tube TV. I imagine it will be unbearable with a flat screen so we decided to move the TV. I wish it could be mounted lower or something. But I just don't see a good place except over the fireplace. The fireplace is kind of high at shoulder height. So about 5 feet high.
We'll get a tilting mount so the viewing angle is more direct.
I've attached a sketch of the room layout.
It kind of sucks where the TV is now. The windows reflects on it even with the roman shades down. It is a 32" tube TV. I imagine it will be unbearable with a flat screen so we decided to move the TV. I wish it could be mounted lower or something. But I just don't see a good place except over the fireplace. The fireplace is kind of high at shoulder height. So about 5 feet high.
time
Storage? I am Storage!
Thoughts:
Ten-foot ceiling, I take it?
Anyone in the recliner will have to tilt their head slightly to the left as well as up; could be a strain if the angles are too acute.
The recliner needs to be 15ft away to limit the viewing angle to the top of the screen to 20°. Anything over 20ft is less than 15°, which is within the generally accepted comfort range. It's probably fine anyway, but I'd try staring fixedly at the high part of the wall for a few minutes and check how your neck(s) feels.
As Lunar implies, that's a hell of a change in viewing distance. I'm guessing the couch will be 20-25ft away? So that's the same as shrinking your current set to a 12" model. Will you be happy with that?
The TV itself won't have the audio firepower to project that far, which will dramatically increase the too-far-away feeling. Ideally, you'd like speakers closer to the chairs.
Ten-foot ceiling, I take it?
Anyone in the recliner will have to tilt their head slightly to the left as well as up; could be a strain if the angles are too acute.
The recliner needs to be 15ft away to limit the viewing angle to the top of the screen to 20°. Anything over 20ft is less than 15°, which is within the generally accepted comfort range. It's probably fine anyway, but I'd try staring fixedly at the high part of the wall for a few minutes and check how your neck(s) feels.
As Lunar implies, that's a hell of a change in viewing distance. I'm guessing the couch will be 20-25ft away? So that's the same as shrinking your current set to a 12" model. Will you be happy with that?
The TV itself won't have the audio firepower to project that far, which will dramatically increase the too-far-away feeling. Ideally, you'd like speakers closer to the chairs.
How much reflection is there now? I was surprised that my LCD replacement for the CRT TV was less of a problem with reflections than I expected. Part of that is due to the higher brightness of the LCD and semi-matte surface. The worst-case sunlight is at a 45° angle, so it is not as bad as yours.
The recliner needs to be 15ft away to limit the viewing angle to the top of the screen to 20°. Anything over 20ft is less than 15°, which is within the generally accepted comfort range. It's probably fine anyway, but I'd try staring fixedly at the high part of the wall for a few minutes and check how your neck(s) feels.
He can solve that problem the same way I have. Put the TV on a stand in front of the fireplace. I don't need no stinkin firplace. :bglaugh:
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
People will also need to be careful. Right now, when they leave the living room, they enter the hallway. But in the future, they will have to exit by the windows or fall into the void.
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
Is the mantle removable or replaceable?
nice
Will Rickards
Storage Is My Life
I'm not sure the ceilings are 10 foot. I've never measured them.
Yes it will be further away which is why we are thinking 50" or larger.
Yes it will be further away which is why we are thinking 50" or larger.
time
Storage? I am Storage!
80" should just about do it; that's if the couch will be only 20ft away.
Unfortunately, I don't know where you'd buy a plasma in that size. The scale points more to a projector, except you've already got lighting problems.
Rather than buying a 55" screen, you could save some money by just changing the 32" TV for a 20" and leaving it where it is. :diablo:
Sorry.
Unfortunately, I don't know where you'd buy a plasma in that size. The scale points more to a projector, except you've already got lighting problems.
Rather than buying a 55" screen, you could save some money by just changing the 32" TV for a 20" and leaving it where it is. :diablo:
Sorry.
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
Ok, now that I've looked at the picture...
I would put the TV on the opposite wall as the fireplace with the couch close enough that you don't have to go crazy on TV size and otherwise not blocking the door. This large piece of furniture will tend to separate the room into two functional areas so you will want to have some comfortable chairs around the fireplace. This could be furnished as an area for reading/board games/romance(!).
Depending on the geometry of the room it may work better to replace the couch with two loveseats (ie, smaller couches) and push them toward the side walls to help maintain a good traffic pattern.
sdbardwick
Storage is cool
That seems way to far; why would I want to watch my 120" screen from 20 feet away? Also, wouldn't different aspect ratios call for different distances?
Edit: At least some agree with me; some say optimal might be as low as .84 of diagonal. (Wikipedia link)
Edit: At least some agree with me; some say optimal might be as low as .84 of diagonal. (Wikipedia link)
Last edited:
ddrueding
Fixture
I watch my 92" from about 140" away. At work my 42" screen is 36" away. At the moment my 24" screen is 24" away. It really depends on what you are doing I suppose.
Will Rickards
Storage Is My Life
I measured. Room has 8 ft ceilings. Mantle is 52 inches high (4ft 4in).
Room is 132in wide and 233in (@19.5ft) long.
On the right wall we have measurements from mantle side to other side of the room of 76in (wall) + 55in (entraceway) + 102in (wall).
On the left wall we have measurements from mantle side to other side of the room of 46 + 38 (window) + 69 + 38 (window) + 42.
When we were at the store looking at the TV we tried to stand as far away as we thought the couch would be. It seemed pretty far but not too bad. We'll probably try it out where it is (since the cable is already there) before we try it at the fireplace (since I'll have to run cable over there). Now that I know it is about 17-18 feet from the TV I can actually try it out at the store.
Room is 132in wide and 233in (@19.5ft) long.
On the right wall we have measurements from mantle side to other side of the room of 76in (wall) + 55in (entraceway) + 102in (wall).
On the left wall we have measurements from mantle side to other side of the room of 46 + 38 (window) + 69 + 38 (window) + 42.
When we were at the store looking at the TV we tried to stand as far away as we thought the couch would be. It seemed pretty far but not too bad. We'll probably try it out where it is (since the cable is already there) before we try it at the fireplace (since I'll have to run cable over there). Now that I know it is about 17-18 feet from the TV I can actually try it out at the store.
ddrueding
Fixture
So have I. That is the number I've seen just about everywhere. I'm just saying that it doesn't seem to matter all that much in my experience. Anything from 2.5x down to 1x seems to be just fine for me.
Also, I noticed a friend of mine with vision problems does just fine with a 24" monitor at 2x, but the 92" doesn't work for him at all; by the time he is close enough to see anything, he can't see the whole thing at once.
Stereodude
Not really a
Assuming you have 20/20 vision 1.54x the diagonal is supposed the proper seating distance to fully resolve 1920x1080.
time
Storage? I am Storage!
There is actually a scientific basis for that number. 20/20 vision is assumed to be able to resolve details down to one arcminute; that distance correlates to 1080 arcminutes and therefore should yield maximum visible detail.
Coincidentally (or not), it also corresponds to a total horizontal viewing angle of 30°, which is widely considered to be the threshold of 'immersion'. I suspect this means that you can no longer see everything happening on the screen at once and start to rely on peripheral vision.
Personally, I think videophiles ignore the huge part that the brain's image processing plays in vision. Our eyes aren't cameras, they only supply pieces of image and movement information which the brain uses to maintain the 'model' that is your visual perception; it fills in the blanks as required.
Sound provides additional clues. IMO it's essential if you want the experience to be truly immersive and more important than how far away you're sitting from a screen. Try closely watching ads without sound and see how their impact is completely neutered.
Coincidentally (or not), it also corresponds to a total horizontal viewing angle of 30°, which is widely considered to be the threshold of 'immersion'. I suspect this means that you can no longer see everything happening on the screen at once and start to rely on peripheral vision.
Personally, I think videophiles ignore the huge part that the brain's image processing plays in vision. Our eyes aren't cameras, they only supply pieces of image and movement information which the brain uses to maintain the 'model' that is your visual perception; it fills in the blanks as required.
Sound provides additional clues. IMO it's essential if you want the experience to be truly immersive and more important than how far away you're sitting from a screen. Try closely watching ads without sound and see how their impact is completely neutered.
Howell
Storage? I am Storage!
Does a projector's image suffer at short distances? I'm thinking fisheye-like.
ddrueding
Fixture
Mine doesn't, at least down to it's minimum focusing distance. When I was first testing it I was making a very bright ~30" image on the wall next to my desk. Looked as sharp and square as anything.
Stereodude
Not really a
That depends a lot on the technology the projector uses and the screen material. Sit too close and you can see the screen itself rather than the image projected on it. And, the interpixel spacing changes from projector to projector which you can also see.