Turning a television on its side (1 Viewer)

Dave Connoy · Apr 6, 2003

By way of explanation: There are some video games that, when they appeared in arcades, utilized a "tall" screen (3:4 instead of 4:3, basically). When such games are brought home on consoles, the playfield is typically windowboxed (like a 4:3 picture is on a 16:9 set), with black boxes on the left and right.

However, one such game (Ikaruga) is soon to be released on the GameCube, and it will have a "feature" that will allow the user to turn their TV on its side to get the full, "tall" playfield to fill the screen.

I want to inquire with you experts on whether or not this practice could be potentially damaging to users' TVs. Obviously it's not a big deal with a dinky 13", but assuming I could turn my 176-pound Sony KV32FV on its side unharmed, would it be wise to do so? If not, why not? What's the largest set that (most likely) wouldn't get damaged by being used in this fashion? Or would you not advise that this be done with any set?

Thanks for your advice.

Kwang Suh · Apr 6, 2003

Do not move your 176 pound TV to its side. I would think this is common knowledge. On the other hand, if you do attempt it, tell us what happened

Bill.P · Apr 6, 2003

Tall games are called 'vertical' games.
I wouldn't agree that it is common knowledge to not rotate a display to vertical. In fact it is done frequently with CRTs and plasma screens.
Your only issue is getting the 176 lb TV to stand on end securely without falling over, or damaging the plastic chassis. If you are handy with wood, you could make a custom stand for it. Keep in mind that most tubes are secured in their chassis to the front, where all the weight is. The rear plastic portion of most TVs is not designed to support alot of weight.
Electroniclly speaking, there is nothing wrong with rotating a CRT.

Allan Jayne · Apr 7, 2003

A TV may or may not overheat if turned on while lying on its side.

If you must operate a TV on its side or upside down, a small PC type fan will usually suffice for added ventilation.

Video hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/video.htm

John-Miles · Apr 7, 2003

I would not worry so much about the tv's performance when it is on its side as i would about the structural integrity of the tv, just because it is a box shape does not eman it is built like a box (ie equal strength all around) by turning the tv on its side for extended epriods you are introducing allot of new forces into the tv, the soldering and supports WILL suffer. with a small tv you are much mroe likely to cause problems, but with a 176 pound tv it will cause problems.

the simple reason for the diffeence is when you design a 176 pound tv the strenght os the components is a very big factor so you design within reasonable safety factors, and you limit overdesign to cut costs, but on a smaller set that is much lighter they are more likely to overkill on the durability of the frame and such. just an example say the side panels on a 20" tv need to be 7/16" thick, and say a 24" tv needs 1/2" thick panels, rather than carry a stock of 7/16" material they migth just use the 1/2" over killing that design but saving the money on their cost factors. but when you get into a 32" tv that is so much bigger and heavier and needs so much more material the 1/8" of an inch difference between a 36" model and 32" model is much more likely to make a difference.

there are millions of factors, but I really dont recommend using the tv on its side..... even if you do get a stand built specifically for that, but hey thats just the opinion of this engineer.

ManW_TheUncool · Apr 7, 2003

Maybe you should get a cheap, portable/presentation-type front projector for games instead.

_Man_

Jack Briggs · Apr 7, 2003

This thread reminds me of the discomfort I have with the gaming issue as a whole. That we are even discussing the incorrect use/abuse of a set such as a 176-pound FV-series WEGA drives it all home. These monitors are designed for home-theater use and television watching. Get something else for playing games, and use it as intended.

Dave Connoy · Apr 7, 2003

I guess I should have been clearer: I have no intention of rotating my TV to get this "optimal" image. It's big enough that I'm sure I'll be able to see fine with the windowboxing in place, and I have too much respect for the set to bump it around like that. It's just that I see a lot of folks on videogame message boards promoting this idea and I wanted to check with you all to see if perhaps a voice of reason was needed before folks start hurling their TVs around.

However, opinions seem to be mixed as to whether this would be harmful, so it doesn't seem like I need to do any serious horn-blowing.

Mr. Briggs, could you clarify what you mean in your last post? Because it sounds like you're saying that "mere video games" are not "worthy" of a quality TV, or that my WEGA is "wasted" on them. I must be misinterpreting you.

Kwang Suh · Apr 7, 2003

I wouldn't agree that it is common knowledge to not rotate a display to vertical. In fact it is done frequently with CRTs and plasma screens.

Seen any 176 pound CRTs on their side recently?

Click to expand...

Scott Kimball · Apr 8, 2003

Because it sounds like you're saying that "mere video games" are not "worthy" of a quality TV, or that my WEGA is "wasted" on them. I must be misinterpreting you.

Because most games have static display areas (status indicators, HUDS and other areas where the video image does not change), too many hours of gameplay can cause burn-in on your display.

If you are a casual gamer, playing a few hours per week, you'll have no problems gaming on an expensive direct view display.

If you play a few hours per DAY, you might want to consider using a less expensive display for gaming. Burning the phosphors on a $200 TV is easier on the wallet than doing same on a high-end, high-cost display.

The damage of burn-in is cumulative and irreversible. It would likely take a couple of years playing a few hours per day on a direct view set at properly calibrated contrast levels to see a problem. Other types of sets can be damaged much quicker.

I work in a broadcast facility... we have TV monitors that display static color bars on average about 4 hours per day. We replaced a number of monitors about 3 years ago. After about 18 months, we started to see noticeable burn-in. The threat is real, but if gaming is not a high enough percentage of your TV time, then you probably won't have a problem.

-Scott

Click to expand...

Jack Briggs · Apr 8, 2003

What Scott said.

It's also worth noting that, for some here at HTF, the gaming-console chickens have come home to roost: Despite having their expensive direct-view sets and RPTVs calibrated (in some cases, ISF-calibrated), they are, after a period of time, still seeing evidence of screen burn-in.

Moral of story: Use your best display for home-theater purposes only. Get something else for enjoying video games.

Dave Connoy · Apr 8, 2003

Okay, so it's just the old "HUD burn-in" thing. I knew this was a problem with RPTVs, but I hadn't heard about direct-views suffering.

While I do game for a few hours every night, it's rarely the same game the whole time, and I don't play a lot of games with static HUDs and the like. But I will keep a closer eye on this from now on.

Kami · Apr 8, 2003

I don't know, as long as you don't get carried away and take breaks every once in a while, gaming should be fine on a calibrated RPTV set.

Not everyone can afford to buy a secondary display just for gaming either. Gaming is better on a big screen too, just like movies.

Trenton McNeil · Apr 8, 2003

Nevermind.

Allan Jayne · Apr 8, 2003

A few hours of game playing each day is dependent on having the contrast greatly reduced, perhaps 1/4 the way up at most. If the contrast is set high, phosphor damage could occur in minutes.

MarkDesMarais · Apr 9, 2003

Or get a DLP and don't worry about it at all.

Trenton McNeil · Apr 9, 2003

I just love elitist responses to very real manufacturing/engineering problems. Oh, hey if it won't work, you should just buy something MORE EXPENSIVE! Don't we all make six-figures? And if you don't, then you don't DESERVE a quality home theater experience. The answer isn't always just throw more money at the problem, guys.

MarkDesMarais · Apr 10, 2003

That wasn't really what I meant- if you are looking for a new TV, it makes sense to take burnin into consideration. I held onto a 27" direct view for 3 years saving my pennies so I could get something without burnin worries. I don't think thats elitist- just realistic. I don't have a dedicated theater room- my system has to do it all, TV, movies, video games. The new DLP RPTVss, while not cheap, are not that outrageous. A pretty good tradeoff of image quality, form factor, and no burnin.

Markd

Jesse Skeen · Apr 10, 2003

The Namco Museum games for the Playstation 1 give you this option too, though I haven't turned my 40-inch Mitsubishi on its side to take advantage of it. I did look at it with my head tilted though, looked pretty nice.

BlakeN · Apr 10, 2003

Hehe gives me and idea... lay down on the couch instead off moving the tv.. Its safer and lazier

Home Theater

Entertainment & Streaming Content

Physical Media

Home Theater Equipment and Hardware

Other Diversions

Bargains and Classifieds

Home Theater Forum

Archives

Turning a television on its side (1 Viewer)

Auditioning

Supporting Actor

Grip

Screenwriter

His Own Fool

Auditioning

Supporting Actor

Screenwriter

Auditioning

Screenwriter

Second Unit

Stunt Coordinator

Second Unit

Stunt Coordinator

Stunt Coordinator

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

Sign up for our newsletter

and receive essential news, curated deals, and much more

Similar Threads

Forum statistics