By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

General - Is this a good tv? - View Post

Lafiel on 07 May 2013
Edit Thread
Kaizar said:


Even if thats so, it's still a more better deal to get a Smart 3D TV for that price & size.

You want a TV you don't have to replace for at least 15 years, and this year alone has 67 3D Movie premieres vs. 45 3D movie premieres in last year.

With more & more movies being made in 3D like Iron Man 3 & Iron Man 4 & Avengers 2 & the new superman movies & the new X-Men movies like the Wolverine & the new star trek movies & all the other new action and other genre movies. So you really don't want to spend $700 twice to upgrade to a 3D tv in the next 3 years when you can pay $700 one time only and be cover with over 100 3D movies coming out each year starting in 2014 or 2015.

Plus VuDu streams 3D movies & Hulu Plus will start streaming 3D movies later this year. Netflix will get around to it LOL.

Plus 60 fps is the standard for 3D content since e 1930's but 24 fps is e standard for 2D content since the 1930's, so 2D HD movies are still recorded in 24 fps, while 3R movies are recorded in 60 fps like Dial M for Murder (1954) & Avatar 2, just to name a fraction of a fraction, even the Hobbit 3D is recorded in 48 fps. Only 3D Blu-Rays can do 1080p at 60 fps per image and while showing 2 images at once with 22.5 MB a second disc speed. 2D Blu-Rays can only do 1080p at 30 fps.

You know, personally I'm totally pro-3D, but I'm sure it will always remain an option and Gilgamesh seems to be not interested in using that, so he really is fine with a 2DTV.

Btw The Hobbit currently is the only recent 3D movie (shot within the last 30 years) that features a higher fps rate than 24 fps per eye and then there will be Avatar 2 like you mentioned. But even the 3D BR of The Hobbit only contains the movie in 24fps per eye, because there is no specification for higher than that meaning that 3D BR players wouldn't be able to play the content if it was in 48fps per eye and HDMI 1.4 a/b can't transmit the image in higher than (frame-packed) 24fps per eye. So a TV really would need HDMI 2.0 (expect first sets in 2014) or maybe atleast full-duplex DVI or display port to be able to receive a 48fps/60fps per eye 1080p 3D signal.