disolitude said:
Oh god...yes yes, Sony made it its amazing. Just take my money... Seriously though, it would seem like you have no clue and are just spitting out irrelevant resolution numbers. Everyone should know by now that quality of perceived resolution is dependant on viewing distance vs screen size. While its amazing that they crammed 720p in to 0.7 inches of screen, to a user this apparently has a screen size of 750 inches from 20 meters away. Lets take a smaller perceived screen as an example. If you take a 42 inch screen at 720p, the optimal viewing distance is 8.5 feet. If you sit any closer you will be able to make out individual pixels on a 42 inch screen, doing 720p. Now this visor screen appeas as a 750 inch screen to the viewer...750 inch screen needs a distance of 146 feet in order for viewers not to see individual pixels. The Sony 3D visor has a viewing distance of 65 feet (20 meters) which is 2.3X closer than recomended viewing distance for such a screen. You will see some major pixelation using this product... Funny thing is, the product I mentioned before has a resolution of 852 x 480 and shows a 75 inch image at 10 feet - http://www.avforums.com/forums/tvs/312431-optimum-screen-size-viewing-distance.html These glasses actually have better resolution to distance/screen size ratio than Sony is offering with their glasses, as the screen is only 2X closer than recomended viewing distance. Not much better, but better enough to make your statement of "nothing compares to these on the market" look foolish. I suggest you google screen size vs distance calculator next time before you say things like "720p on 0.7 inch screen, Amazing!". And yes OLED is better than LCD, but at that resolution both will look pixelated.
Edit - I don't want to come of like Im hating on this cause its a neat concept. At 299, sign me up...399, maybe. But this will be 1000 bucks by the time it gets to America. I can buy a 3D projector for that much money and have just as big of a screen on my wall which my friends can share with me. Too costly for what it offers...
|
Have you looked at any third party sources? Any of the previews on this gadget? With all due respect, every publication out here that have looked at this thing, and oogling over it. I've literally seen no negative responses towards this thing other then people saying it looks silly. Also your wrong, it APPEARS as being 20 feet away, its a visual trick concerning the specialized optics and lens' in the device itself, as normally you wouldn't even be able to see something this close due to eye distance and the eyes ability to focus pertaining to relative distance. Also, you seem to insist that this has been done before, and there are very comparable items on the market, regardless of the fact that every person who has used the device, seems to have stated in their previews that this is a whole different level and standard then anything that has been done as of yet.
Honestly, its like you refuse to admit that this is as good as it actually is, its COMPLETELY living up to the hype, by all means, yet you still shoot it down. With all due respect, its thickheaded thinking, nothing less. How about you actually reserve your opinion until you try it out? I'm basing my opinion, moreso then anything, on third party, professional previews of the device for instance.
Also, just to throw some salt in the wound, as you don't seem to understand this yet, it's been stated multiple times, that this devices screen/picture quality surpasses that of the majority of the HDTV's out there today, in case you wanted to know. Rendering most of your argument pointless. Also, the price is more then justified, its nothing short of cutting age screen technology. However, with time, prices will go down. This is no different then any new tech entering the market.
