Why get TVs? (1 Viewer)

[Tim K]

If you have legitimate reasons for having a TV in other rooms that's great. There are many reasons to stick with a traditional TV.

That is the point which Sacha does not seem to get. I think the issue is that Sacha is not seeing that there are reasons why an FP is not the best solution for many people, especially when we are talking about a "livingroom theater" not a dedicated room.

1) Light Control. Most livingrooms have ALOT of windows. Most people don't want blackout shades in the livingroom or simply cannot blockout light. Most people also don't want to watch TV in the dark, especially if they have company or are watching casually. For example, my livingroom is not a distinct room. My livingroom and diningroom are one large open space. My diningroom opens up to the 2nd floor with 18ft ceilings. The diningroom is also attached to the kitchen via a 40" doorway with no door. My livingroom has stairs going up to the 2nd floor and another set of stairs going to the basement. Did I mention the 80" wide bay window in my livingroom? FP would not work!

2) Picture quality. I don't know about everyone else, but around here the PQ from cable and satelite are poor. Blown up to 53 inches on an RPTV is just barely tolerable. Those same flaws on a 70-100" FP would be unwatchable.

3) Appearance. Even though an RPTV or Tube may be large and unsightly, it can pretty easily be incorporated into an entertainment center. Without spending a fortune on a powered screen that rolls into the ceiling, you can't exactly hide a 100" projector screen in your livingroom. Project onto the wall you say? Sure, let me take down the pictures we have hanging up...the huge blank wall will look great in our livingroom. As for the projector itself, where would I mount that? On/In my coffee table? Oh wait, my table is not in the center of the room. What about hanging from the ceiling? My wife would love that.

4) Ease of use/setup. RPTV or Tube...plug it in, connect cable, watch. Out of the box, the picture will be watchable (granted contrast, etc should be changed but most regular folk don't know that). As for the FP, who is going to set this up? A professional?

As most people can see, there are numerous, legitimate reasons that FP is not the answer for everyone. Hopefully Sacha will eventually come to understand this.

 

[Dwight Amato]

As most people can see, there are numerous, legitimate reasons that FP is not the answer for everyone. Hopefully Sacha will eventually come to understand this.

I highly doubt this.

 

[John S]

LOL, this was a great fun thread really....

I can see some insult being taken, when the reasons given for going with anything else are dissmissed and not addressed.

I have not seen an FP yet, that I think would work well, while reading / detail work lights are in use. Let alone, large naturally lit areas. I would love details on how this is delt with. I don't always want to watch in low light situations, I would not even say half my viewing is done in low light situations.

As I said, I go to the brick and motor stores who use relatively low lighting on the sides of their fp ht demo rooms, and even that low of lighting just washes the intensity right out of the picture.

 

[Sacha_C]

"Sacha, you still haven't answered why everyone doesn't drive the same car?"

Thats like asking why not everyone has the same TV, which is not at all what I was asking.

"He is apparently so tickled pink by his Projector that he won't go back to TV."

I dont even have my projector yet, in a fews days I will, and I still dont even watch a TV, I watch TV on my PC because the quality is at least 10 times better thanks to my ATI all in wonder card, not to mention I can put it on pause, record in DVD quality or better, and work at the same time.

"Sure, let me take down the pictures we have hanging up...the huge blank wall will look great in our livingroom."

And why wouldnt you have to take the pictures on the wall where the TV would be? Plus the TV will use up lots of space.

As I said when I started this post, I said I understood why a TV is better in rooms with no ligth control or if the budget is below $1000, and I do agree there should be at least a small 20" TV for "casual" viewing (news and stuff like that), I use my PC for casual viewing and I'm sure most of my TV watching will still be on the PC even once I get my projector.

What I dont understand, keeping what I said above in mind, is why people go pay $5 000 for a 50" TV when they can get a 100" for $1000.

 

[John S]

I like very large casual vewing. Of course I have had a 48" RPTV for several years now, so that is what I am used to and expect. I can't see having two different sets in the room, that is for sure.

Your $5000 50" will/can certainly have a better picture than the $1000 projector solution.

If you stated about the light control in your posts, I missed it. I will be very curious as to your experiences with your FP setup.

At 100" your lumins will be very very low in the $1000 solution.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

You guys must not have read my post a while back.

Look, I understand totally where Sacha is coming from. Yes, projectors are cheap that give you a huge, and decent picture. Yes you get a much bigger picture than you could get with a big huge RPTV.

And then the very logical thinking is why would anyone NOT want this? As described above people approach these things with VERY diffirent skills, budgets, and goals. You can't assume that because it's right for YOU, that it should be right for everyone else too.

As noted, I approach this baffled that anyone would buy a digital projector when CRT projectors can be had for the same, that TOTALLY hands down smokes them in image quality, and still gives you a great big screen. I exaggerate of course, there are MANY reasons why digitals are so popular, and why most people who buy projectors don't buy CRTs. so there are also many reasons that people will buy a TV instead of a projector. This is a silly discussion indeed.

I could just as easily say:

Why do people bother with digital projectors, their picture sucks in comparison to an RPTV.

That is an exaggeration, but true to a point.

Why would anyone buy a digital projector when CRTs are out there for the same or less money that are TOTALLY superior?

That is true, but obviously this is very technically involved.

Why would anybody NOT be using an HTPC.

Obviously they are very complicated to set up and learn about.

There are a zillion questions that I always feel like asking, but what is right for my goals of reference picture quality, damn the time and effort necessary, leads me to a dedicated, light controlled room with a 200 pound CRT behemoth and an HTPC. That is NOT right for the vast majority of people, nor would a simple digital projector.

The assumptions in this thread really are ridiculous, that's my point.

 

[Torgny Nilsson]

This thread has been an entertaining read. But I have to admit that I am really, really torn between getting a FP and one of the new Samsung DLP RPTV sets, either of which will run me between $3,000 and $4,000.

FP gives me a bigger picture. But I have to deal with a more complex and expensive set up given the longer cables and such, more calibration, replacement bulbs, the issue of how and where to mount a screen given that I have a tall entertainment center that holds all of my stereo equipment, the issue of a screen that won't block the sound from my center speaker, and the wife approval factor. Oh, yeah, there is the issue of light from 5 celestory windows that I cannot easily block.

The Samsung RPTV weighs only abouut 70 lbs, is only 17 inches deep, fits perfectly in my entertainment center, does not block my center speaker, has an easier set up, does not require any new and expensive cables, is pretty much plug and play, and is not touchy as to lighting conditions.

Both the FP and RPTV would need to be calibrated, so that is a wash. And since my viewing distance is between 6-9 feet, a 70 inch or larger screen would not work in either format.

So, while I love the idea of a FP, I may end up going with a RPTV just for ease of use, though I am torn about it because FP is definitely the wave of the future. But given PQ problems that all the lower priced FPs have today, I still think it is a future wave.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

IMO, your reasoning is a tad silly. Both digital RPTV and FP will have very similar PQ, replacement bulb, calibration etc. While I am NOT a fan of digital projection (rear or front), the setup of a digital projector is pretty simple. If you're going to undergo the poorer PQ of a digital, by all means go FP and get a great big screen. This is what they excel at, at provide a very bright image for a big screen that is extremely easy to setup.

 

[Tim K]

As I said when I started this post, I said I understood why a TV is better in rooms with no ligth control or if the budget is below $1000, and I do agree there should be at least a small 20" TV for "casual" viewing (news and stuff like that), I use my PC for casual viewing and I'm sure most of my TV watching will still be on the PC even once I get my projector.

What I dont understand, keeping what I said above in mind, is why people go pay $5 000 for a 50" TV when they can get a 100" for $1000.

It has been answered 50 times, and you have answered your own question.

1) Aesthetics
Many people don't want a projector mounted on the ceiling of their living room. Same goes for a screen.
2) Don't want a projector and regular TV in the room
Many people don't want to watch TV on a FP, or want to do other things requiring room lighting. Why would they want to buy and incorporate a 2nd TV into their living room.
3) Ease of use
I certainly don't want to open up holes in my wall and ceiling in order to run cables and mount a projector...and I am not the only one.
4) Expense of screen
As I mentioned before, who wants a 100" screen permanently mounted on their living room wall? No one. So that would require a motorized, hidden screen which are very expensive. Also, unless you use floorstanding speakers, which I don't want in my living room, where are you going to mount your center channel??? Oh, behind the screen. Then you will need an accoustically transparent screen which are also quite expensive.

I'd like to see a $1000 projector/screen combo that beats a $5000 RPTV. Bigger is not always better.

Basically, the only way I WOULD get a FP would be if I had a dedicated HT room, with total light control, aesthics were not important (WAF), I didn't mind running cables/power through the walls/ceilings, I could get an accoustically transparent screen or had a floorstanding center, never wanted to watch regular TV, read, converse, or surf the internet while in my HT. Then I would get an FP.

 

[Mike Strassburg]

OK......I'll throw in my 2 cents for what it's worth.

First off IMHO the term "home theater" means someone trying to recreate the "theater" experience in their home; large screen, surround sound, popcorn, drinks, etc....

So I get confused when people refer to a TV viewing room as a HT. You don't go to the movies to watch the Super Bowl, CSI, or whatever. I'm talking about a dedicated HT solely for viewing movies and assume that we're trying to recreate the "giant picture" offered at the local theaters. If that's the case then duplicating/exceeding the picture quality should NOT be very hard with a FP or a RPTV/FPTV as all my local theaters have poor video/audio at best.

Basically choose your weapon and have at it. Light control, viewing distance, etc... all play into the equation, but if you're building a dedicated HT then you already know that. If you're sitting in your living room watching movies then you're NOT in a HT. Again just my opinion, but the endless disagreements are pointless. Do what works for YOU and be happy with it

Throwing a few weights & a treadmill into your living room doesn't suddenly make it a gym

 

[James R. Geib]

Throwing a few weights & a treadmill into your living room doesn't suddenly make it a gym

But it does make it a HOME GYM!

Also check this definition of Home Theater:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=home%20theater

Size doesn't matter!