|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bofur01
Lorien
Mar 28 2015, 6:27pm
Post #1 of 5
(1136 views)
Shortcut
|
On the current Hobbit-related tech advice...
|
Can't Post
|
|
...Would anyone who has any knowledge of 3D be able to recommend a 3D TV for watching the Hobbit? The max price we can afford is around £1000, and it'd need to be quite small, around 30". And also any advice on Active vs. Passive would be greatly received, especially from anyone with first-hand experience.
|
|
|
QuackingTroll
Valinor
Mar 28 2015, 11:31pm
Post #2 of 5
(1028 views)
Shortcut
|
If you can get to a store that has 3D TVs on display I recommend doing so. I have a 50" ACTIVE Samsung TV. Samsung are incredible when it comes to picture quality, probably the best - I have never had any faults, I love, love, love this TV. I've had the TV for a few years and very rarely use the 3D (despite being a big fan). The reason for this is that the heavy uncomfortable flickery glasses are awkward and give me a headache. amazing TV, not good 3D. My girlfriend has an LG 42" PASSIVE TV. Hers was about £500, mine was £1500. While the picture quality is obviously not as good, it still looks really, really great and the 3D in my opinion is much, much better. The glasses are the same cheap plastic ones that most cinemas use and you can even get little clip-on flip lenses if you wear prescription glasses. It's much more comfortable, there's no flickering and it generally has less issues. We both own 3D TVs but I'll always use her TV to watch a 3D movie or play a 3D game, because active has too many problems. On the passive TV, the 3D has little horizontal lines going through the picture. They're not noticeable from the right distance, so for me it's really not an issue, but if you're close-up you might notice them. Active doesn't have this problem, but I personally cannot handle the weird flickering, and the glasses are so expensive that I only own two pairs! The good thing about active is that you get a full 1080p image in each eye, whereas passive will show half to one eye and half to the other - But I have a good eye for picture quality and barely notice a difference. If you want my personal opinion, go for passive all the way. I'm really jealous of my girlfriend's TV and if it wasn't for mine having unbelievable 2D quality I would swap in an instant. (edit: To clarify, the amazing 2D quality is due to the manufacturer and the fact that it was £1500, nothing to do with passive vs active 3D.) If you want my advice, rather than my opinion, I'd say you really need to find somewhere where you can compare them for yourself and decide which you prefer. This is a very subjective issue and everyone's opinions on which is best is going to be different. Also note that my Active TV is one of the first 3D TVs ever made, so it's possible that they've improved some of the issues. The passive TV is fairly new and if I were buying a TV today I'd probably go for the exact one same model, it's a great TV.
(This post was edited by QuackingTroll on Mar 28 2015, 11:39pm)
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
Mar 29 2015, 3:31pm
Post #3 of 5
(922 views)
Shortcut
|
Well, there is Always "Consumer Reports"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Surely by Now they can do your comparison shopping for you.
www.charlie-art.biz "What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"
|
|
|
Bofur01
Lorien
Mar 29 2015, 5:28pm
Post #4 of 5
(908 views)
Shortcut
|
I trust the views of like-minded people far more than random reviewers on the Internet But yes, a fair point.
|
|
|
Magpie
Immortal
Mar 29 2015, 6:35pm
Post #5 of 5
(893 views)
Shortcut
|
Consumer Reports is quite rigorous in their testing and assement
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
and they are very transparent about what they are evaluating. They have been in existence since 1936 and they accept no advertising, pay for all the products they test, and, as a not for profit organization, they have no shareholders. They aren't random reviewers on the internet! so they are, in some ways, considerably more reliable that just 'like minded people' because like minded people are just blokes (we all are) and we make choices for all sorts of reasons and may have only researched to a point or looked at a few different models before choosing. Not to say that getting feedback from like minded people isn't useful. I would just put Consumer Reports higher than general feedback. The down side is, CR's reviews aren't (I don't think) free. One can access magazines in libraries or pay for access to their info online. You can sometimes get general info for free but more specific info is for paid subscribers. Back in the day, we always referenced the magazine for any large purchase we were making. Often, though, I'd find that if the info was even a little bit old, the models had changed enough that their top rated model wasn't the most current model. I haven't used them in years, though, so I can't say if that's the case now or not.
LOTR soundtrack website ~ magpie avatar gallery TORn History Mathom-house ~ Torn Image Posting Guide
(This post was edited by Magpie on Mar 29 2015, 6:35pm)
|
|
|
|
|