[waldojim]

RobertSmithrlp7, on 08 February 2012 - 08:45 PM, said:

I have a passive 3D one because the idea of paying for all those glasses for sporting events made me crazy, also the first couple TVs I tried active on it could see extra cross talk and flicker for sure. These were expensive TVs also.

I never tried a DLP in person though.

With Oled right around the corner I can't imagine looking at one now though.

We didn't pay that much for the glasses - Fry's had a set on clearance, and we got both glasses for about $50 as I recall. Which, compared to some of the Samsung, or Sony sets I have heard about, is pretty darned cheap. On Panasonic, Sony, and Samsung sets, I could clearly see the flickering, but more often than not, it was with equipment sitting next to the TV, something that wasn't in Sync with the TV. The Mitsubishi DLP has been extremely nice, with no flicker, and minimal crosstalk. Noting of course, that even with passive sets, there is a certain amount of crosstalk (as you cannot avoid it all). The Mits glasses have decent enough contrast though, that when we kill the lights for a movie night, we can truly enjoy 3d movies.

With OLED's, I am not worried about getting one of them for about 10 years. Probably more. Plasma took about that long to get to a price reasonable enough for the common man, and OLED is starting out at about the same extreme. For now, I think I can wait.

[RobertSmithrlp7]

waldojim, on 10 February 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

With OLED's, I am not worried about getting one of them for about 10 years. Probably more. Plasma took about that long to get to a price reasonable enough for the common man, and OLED is starting out at about the same extreme. For now, I think I can wait.

The big difference with Oled and plasma is that OLED is printable on a inexpensive substrate with inexpensive materials (for a better picture quality). Mass producing them is not nearly as hazardous(good for the environment) or cost prohibitive.

[waldojim]

RobertSmithrlp7, on 12 February 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

waldojim, on 10 February 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:

With OLED's, I am not worried about getting one of them for about 10 years. Probably more. Plasma took about that long to get to a price reasonable enough for the common man, and OLED is starting out at about the same extreme. For now, I think I can wait.

The big difference with Oled and plasma is that OLED is printable on a inexpensive substrate with inexpensive materials (for a better picture quality). Mass producing them is not nearly as hazardous(good for the environment) or cost prohibitive.

The manufacturing costs alone are not the only thing to consider. R&D has to be paid for some how. Consider the 25" Sony OLED that saw its debut just last year. $28,000 is a LOT of money for a TV by any standard. When the plants producing them are all tooled up, and the R&D costs are paid off, then the TV's will come down in price. As they always do. Until then, let the winners of the lottery buy up the $25,000+ TVs.

[axe40]

yadai1, on 31 July 2011 - 10:20 PM, said:

I would recommend the Cinema 3D TV. People have said it before but basically, the 3D glasses are battery free which means no need for recharging! Also, this makes your glasses so much lighter! If you buy Cinema 3D TV, you get four pairs for free and can easily buy more to share with your friends. It's so easy to impress guests with this TV!
I've realized that Cinema 3D TV makes images brighter than other TVs and it's also flicker free so you won't get headaches and such. Also, you can watch the 3D effect from anywhere, since your glasses don't contain any liquids or batteries... if you move from your upright position with other brands, the image is broken, see..

Oh! And another great feature is the 2D to 3D conversion! this is so amazing! you can watch any movie, drama or show in 3d!! It's so easy to switch and the effect is satisfactory!

hope this helps!

When I read your post, I was somehow hesitant since I have a problem with my eyes. I have a totally different condition however. My eyes water intensly when exposed to UV light. Does this TV have any sort of UV light projected from it?

[RobertSmithrlp7]

axe40, on 14 February 2012 - 12:51 AM, said:

When I read your post, I was somehow hesitant since I have a problem with my eyes. I have a totally different condition however. My eyes water intensly when exposed to UV light. Does this TV have any sort of UV light projected from it?

I can't imagine any TV putting out light into the non visible spectrum. So no.

[LincolnSpector]

RobertSmithrlp7, on 15 February 2012 - 04:55 PM, said:

I can't imagine any TV putting out light into the non visible spectrum. So no.

I could imagine it easily. Not intentionally, of course, but as a side effect. In the days or CRTs, there was concern over the health effects of Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) Radiation coming from computer monitors.

Not that I'm saying they do, or--if they do--that there are health issues involved. Just that it's possible.

Lincoln

[RobertSmithrlp7]

LincolnSpector, on 17 February 2012 - 08:48 AM, said:

RobertSmithrlp7, on 15 February 2012 - 04:55 PM, said:

I can't imagine any TV putting out light into the non visible spectrum. So no.

I could imagine it easily. Not intentionally, of course, but as a side effect. In the days or CRTs, there was concern over the health effects of Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) Radiation coming from computer monitors.

Not that I'm saying they do, or--if they do--that there are health issues involved. Just that it's possible.

Lincoln

For analog displays(crts and the like) that makes sense for OLed technology they need it to represent as much of the color gamut as possible so having it emit any other type of light would be waste full. It is possible other parts of the TV would emit some type of non visible light or similar.

[waldojim]

Light bulbs only need to produce light in a specific spectrum. As it stands, they end up with light in different bands than intended simply because of how they work.

Is it possible the oled to have unintended nonvisible bands? Yes.

[RobertSmithrlp7]

waldojim, on 20 February 2012 - 09:55 AM, said:

Light bulbs only need to produce light in a specific spectrum. As it stands, they end up with light in different bands than intended simply because of how they work.

Is it possible the oled to have unintended nonvisible bands? Yes.

The would have to be manufactured to do so as they are essentially small cathodes that react to a specific electric current and do not display when not under that current. So the only way one would display a photon in the non visible light section would be either by design or manufacturing errors. So no. Each sub pixel is tuned to display an exact color range.

[LincolnSpector]

RobertSmithrlp7, on 20 February 2012 - 09:05 PM, said:

The would have to be manufactured to do so as they are essentially small cathodes that react to a specific electric current and do not display when not under that current. So the only way one would display a photon in the non visible light section would be either by design or manufacturing errors. So no. Each sub pixel is tuned to display an exact color range.

And what if it's cheaper to leave in those manufacturing errors than to build a TV that doesn't have them?

Lincoln

[RobertSmithrlp7]

LincolnSpector, on 21 February 2012 - 08:44 AM, said:

And what if it's cheaper to leave in those manufacturing errors than to build a TV that doesn't have them?

Lincoln

Well it would not be, it would be more expensive the farther out in the display color gamut you go with Oled the harder it is to produce ultra violet and infrared are examples that would have to be made just to produce those types of light.

It is cheaper to make a limited light spectrum. And because the Oled will only light up under a certain charge it could not even produce light in that range if you tried to make it do so.

I can see people marketing a "healing TV" with some near visible light that is good for you but it would b all crap any ways. That would be more expensive to produce.

Analog displays like plasma and CRT have a very different system that hey use to produce photons and hence can produce unnecessary or unexpected results.