Have your say & ask the experts

FLATSCREEN:

It was Stuff magazine that featured the 3D story and not T3.....another Hay Market publication.....just like What Hi Fi.

For people who say they are not into 3D TV, would you want to see the world with one eye[2D], if not then why say no to 3D TV. Which ever system wins - Active shutter, Polarising or Lenticular system, the technology feeds both eyes with a HD image the brain treat as one.

The world  looks better on TV not just in color but in 3D as we see the world. 

I am happy Sony will reign in the brave new TV world. I don't like Philips and their cleaver system is only suported by Fuji with the current W1 Real camera and V1 picture frame viewer.

Even Stuff mag rate the Pioneer Kuro as the most perfect exacting LCD TV ever made so these guys know their stuff. Its good to have a non monopolistic view of what is the best from more than one magazine 

The Philips is the best allrounder.....that's it. Not for image or games

I'm not entirely sure how you reach the conclusion that viewing something in 2D is like viewing something with one eye. That's baffling - close one eye and tell me if you cease to see things in 3D.

You stated previously, that Sony should have won What HiFi's product of the year, accused the publication of bias, yet now you seem to back Philips. All this leads me to my starting point, which is

The pair of human eyes are capable of steroscopic vision, if you see the world with one eye you lose that ability. To prove it, try to judge distances with one eye of say one car behind another in motion on its axis, its virtually impossible. The world looks like a 2d cardboard cut out with one eye. 

When you view a 2d TV set, having two eyes does not convey more depth info' to the brain than with with one eye as  the brain recieves the same depth info; of couse you have a wider field of vision. The essential depth cues discerning foreground to background doesn't exist. 

Steroscopic vision can not be attained with one eye, hence HD 3D glasses have two lenses. With the Philips lenticular system, where you don't wear any 3D glasses...I suspect you wouldn't see the 3D either. 

______________ 

I don't like those What Hi Fi Award categories, there should be different achivement categories. What Hi Fi have never said the Philips award winners were the Best all rounder, If it did I retract my comment. It was simply the best 32 and 42 inch TVs?? What is best??  Is a 911 turbo better than a Nissan GTR?? I say No other say Yes? It depends what you are looking at. Lap times at Nuremberg Nissan is quicker. .

In a sentence to your question htmb, yes.

With one eye, dept perception is very difficult, the brain tries to 'fill in the gaps'.....it guess what the foreground and background distance is and most likely will get it wrong. You see 2D with one eye. With 2 eyes you see 3D. The same is with hearing,can you hear sterophonics with one working ear?? 

When What Hi Fi say the Philips TV pictures have a 3D look, a cheap trick,  it's the brain and not the TV filling in 'depth dimension gap' to give that perceived 3D look. It's an illusion as both eye don't really see 3D. That's why I couldn't agree with the verdict on those sets been the best.. Philips have conjured up that 3D image look. Its as fake as a David Blaine trick!  

In true next gen 3D vision or stereo sound each eye and ear sees and hears a different phase of the same image or sound. We never notice the two sets of infomation.The brain stitches it all up. 

With 3D TV, we see the TV pictures as the eye sees what is everyday around them - its not an illusion of 3D but true 3D.

What Hi Fi were seduced by the illusion of 3D images from the Philips.....those sets should be disqualified from the awards,its an illusion of 3D, When 3D TV arrives then evaluate it on the 3D qualities but not now.

I presume you have both spent several years studying micro-brain function, cognitive perception and the intricacies of cellular optic processess? I don't normally involve myself in some of the sillier debates on this forum, but this might just be the most ludicrous yet...

For the record, 3D is likely to blow, big time -- though this is just an opinion based on the fact that I don't want to sit in my living room wearing odd looking glasses (and clearly not the outcome of the kind of rigorous scientific research you have both conducted)!

FLATSCREEN:

What Hi Fi were seduced by the illusion of 3D images from the Philips.....those sets should be disqualified from the awards,its an illusion of 3D, When 3D TV arrives then evaluate it on the 3D qualities but not now.

Your posts – and the assumptions therein – really are getting increasingly bizarre, saw5suffer...

strapped for cash:

I presume you have both spent several years studying micro-brain function, cognitive perception and the intricacies of cellular optic processess? I don't normally involve myself in some of the sillier debates on this forum, but this might just be the most ludicrous yet...

For the record, 3D is likely to blow, big time -- though this is just an opinion based on the fact that I don't want to sit in my living room wearing odd looking glasses (and clearly not the outcome of the kind of rigorous scientific research you have both conducted)!

Whilst I certainly do detect the sarcasm you used in your post, I will concede that I have never studied any of the subjects you mentioned, but then I was not purporting to act, inform or argue as though I had done so, hence the lack of any technical or scientific terms in any of my responses.

Whilst you have posted on this thread, you haven't involved yourself in the debate (if you can call it that) given that you haven't expressed an opinion on the matter and are merely providing running commentary.

As to whether or not 3D is "likely to blow, big time," I hope you're right, though quite how you can reach that assumption on the basis of your own lack of enthusiasm is beyond me. It seems quite arrogant that you should assume the failure of a technology based on your own dislike for it. Again, whilst acknowledging your use of sarcasm, I have not conducted any scientific research, rigorous or otherwise, nor have I, at any time, stated anything to the contrary. 

If you read the What Hi Fi Award issues, there are oddities and inconsistences in the reviews that questions how good the Philips 32 and 42 inch sets are:-

1.Of all the TV set categories featured on the winning rostrum, only the 32 and 42 sets from Philips are described as giving a three diamensionality to the image, no other set from Sumsung, Sony, etc has ever been described with that quality in even previous reviews.I have read them all. Did the Pioneer Kuro get that 3D treatment lavished on it?

This proves that only Philips TV are designing to exaggerate diamensional depth in the image. This has becomes an almost 'must have' quality to be an award winner???  How so.   

Specifically for the Philips 32 inch award winner, the sound is described as good as the other TVs, but then read the advert later on in the mag and you see that the sound quality is described as superb giving way to a winning 32 inch set???

What is also odd is that the online reviews of the two Tvs are not worded the same as the Award winning reviews.The reference of the image depth diamensionality of the Philips are absent on the online article?? Reading the online reviews you wonder how much better it is to the Sony W or Z series??

 The whole review system measure needs to be more objective and disciplined

FLATSCREEN:

If you read the What Hi Fi Award issues, there are oddities and inconsistences in the reviews that questions how good the Philips 32 and 42 inch sets are:-

1.Of all the TV set categories featured on the winning rostrum, only the 32 and 42 sets from Philips are described as giving a three diamensionality to the image, no other set from Sumsung, Sony, etc has ever been described with that quality in even previous reviews.I have read them all. Did the Pioneer Kuro get that 3D treatment lavished on it?

This proves that only Philips TV are designing to exaggerate diamensional depth in the image. This has becomes an almost 'must have' quality to be an award winner???  How so.   

Specifically for the Philips 32 inch award winner, the sound is described as good as the other TVs, but then read the advert later on in the mag and you see that the sound quality is described as superb giving way to a winning 32 inch set???

Its all waffle from what HiFi. The Philips aren't the best 32 and 42 inch TV, and  save the 3D banter for the next gen of TV.  

Its poor review and journalism. The facts are put to you all. Defy it?

No.

I'm sure Andrew will have something to say in the morning if he hasn't already had enough of replying to your bizarre posts (this is in fact most likely).

Maxflinn's right it is past bedtime, and on that note..........

hmtb:

strapped for cash:

I presume you have both spent several years studying micro-brain function, cognitive perception and the intricacies of cellular optic processess? I don't normally involve myself in some of the sillier debates on this forum, but this might just be the most ludicrous yet...

For the record, 3D is likely to blow, big time -- though this is just an opinion based on the fact that I don't want to sit in my living room wearing odd looking glasses (and clearly not the outcome of the kind of rigorous scientific research you have both conducted)!

Whilst I certainly do detect the sarcasm you used in your post, I will concede that I have never studied any of the subjects you mentioned, but then I was not purporting to act, inform or argue as though I had done so, hence the lack of any technical or scientific terms in any of my responses.

Whilst you have posted on this thread, you haven't involved yourself in the debate (if you can call it that) given that you haven't expressed an opinion on the matter and are merely providing running commentary.

As to whether or not 3D is "likely to blow, big time," I hope you're right, though quite how you can reach that assumption on the basis of your own lack of enthusiasm is beyond me. It seems quite arrogant that you should assume the failure of a technology based on your own dislike for it. Again, whilst acknowledging your use of sarcasm, I have not conducted any scientific research, rigorous or otherwise, nor have I, at any time, stated anything to the contrary. 

Hi HTMB. 

No personal offence intended. I'm not a bad fella... honest. I just wanted to point out how abstract the discussion on this thread had become. I also have no scientific training, nor can I claim that any of the terms I used have any bearing, whatsoever, in scientific circles.

As for my perceived 'arrogance', I was merely expressing an opinion... after all, the whf form was designed to facilitate the expression of opinions! 

hmtb:

I'm sure Andrew will have something to say in the morning if he hasn't already had enough of replying to your bizarre posts (this is in fact most likely).

Maxflinn's right it is past bedtime, and on that note..........

There's little point in replying to saw5suffer/flatscreen's posts when they are edited repeatedly after posting. That last one of theirs got edited seven times in an hour – too much of a moving target...

3D TV will revolutionise the TV industry! If you are an investor you will go 'long' and reap rewards.James Murdock knows this. It will arrive first with PC games, then digital cameras[already here but needs work]. 3D TV and 3D broadcast, HD bluray will be the climax. Japan and Korea will adopt first. Those guys are aways first will  the latest..their mobiles are in 5th gen phase!

Sony intends to lead this one, Howard Stringer have issued the battle calls,don't let anyone tell you its going to falter. Hollywood wants it as bad as Sky.

Its almost virtual reality reinvented,not quite Lawnmover man stuff, for games as you enter another world......chilling implications???

What I would like to know is why do you even use these forums FLATSCREEN? 
You don't trust the reviews or the views of the staff at WHF, but you feel the need to use two different user accounts to post on their forums.

Can you explain how you know for certain that Sony will lead the way and that 3D tv will be the next best thing since sliced bread. How have you come to this conclusion when there are no consumer products available, have you seen these new 3D tv's with your own eyes?

Can you see into the future, or do you have a time machine? As you are so sure of the future can you post the winning numbers for next weekends lottery, thanks.