Super hd
![[Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/43ba752b56a974ad5e3a1936306c1870.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 140 Forum Member
✭
http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/toshiba-55zl2b-super-hd-55-led-3d-tv-12787020-pdt.html
What would you have Oled or super Hd.
What would you have Oled or super Hd.
0
[Deleted User]
Posts: 140
Comments
Not even sure if that resolution would be supported by most computer graphics cards?
'tis the future though, and points to the time when a large screen in the lounge is used for more than just TV IMO.
I'd rather have an OLED TV because there's virtually no Super High Definition sources to hook that TV up to.
Maybe Ultra High Definition is the next level. In other words, no Super High Definition, only this for the next level.
Neither really matter - current HD is limited by the excessive compression used, using decent bandwidth would improve the pictures more than enough.
Any higher resolution would just require viewing even closer, and make SD too poor to watch.
There is no broadcast of super/ultra hd discs anyway.
Not on 55 inch sets it isn't the future. You'd need to sit 2 or 3 feet from it to see all the detail - even if the detail was broadcast, which it isn't. You'd need to sit so close that you'd have to cut a hole in your wall for your feet!
It's an utterly ridiculous piece of equipment but I'm sure a few gullible millionnaires or "up with the Jones's" technophiles will buy one. As for the 3D thing, well there's another gimmick, needing glasses or not.
Give me a 55 inch 1920x1080 OLED TV and 2D material, any day of the week. Or a plain old 55 inch Panasonic plasma for a third of the cost.
The more pixels the more realistic the image will look.
Whether broadcasts will ever get up to this level is another matter, but disks or downloads may eventually be available in super or ultra HD.
And there's no reason SD would look any worse on this than on a 1080 set of the same size, because the resolution is just being scaled up.
I have my computer connected to a 23" 1080 monitor and to my 40" 1080 TV, and the desktop looks better on the 23" because the pixels are smaller, and the text looks smoother. On the 40" you can see the pixelsthat make up the text and images. So if you scaled that up to 55" the pixels would look comparatively huge at 1920x1080.
I suspect the likes of gamers will fuel a demand for large super (ultra) high def displays, even if it makes little difference for normal telly viewing.
Having said that, it'll only be a niche market until the price comes below £1000.
I have to disagree. By changing from a 32" TV to a 50" TV you are more than doubling the surface area and viewed from the same distance the loss in resolution is very noticeable. To have the same clarity as the 32" on the 50" TV must be stunning.
There appears to be a lot in High Definition. I can't see what other channels could be in High Definition.
BBC HD
BBC One HD
ITV 1 hd
4HD
5HD
NHK World HD
Sky Atlantic HD
Sky 1 HD
Sky Living HD
Sky Arts 1 HD
Sky Arts 2 HD
Sky Sports F1 HD
FX HD
Comedy Central HD
SyFy HD
Universal HD
Sky News HD
Food HD
Dave HD
Alibi HD
Watch HD
E4 HD
ITV 2 HD
ITV 3 HD
ITV 4 HD
MTV HD
Star Plus HD
Discovery HD
History HD
National Geographic HD
Nat Geo Wild HD
Animal Planet HD
Eden HD
Disney HD
Disney XD HD
Cartoon Network HD
Nickelodeon HD
Eurosport HD
MTV Live HD
Sky Movies Premiere HD
Sky Movies Showcase HD
Sky Movies Comedy HD
Sky Movies Family HD
Sky Movies Action & Adventure HD
Sky Movies Modern Greats HD
Sky Movies Sci Fi & Horror HD
Sky Movies Drama & Romance HD
Sky Movies Crime & Thriller HD
Sky Movies Classics HD
Sky Movies Indie HD
Disney Cinemagic HD
MGM HD
ESPN HD
ESPN America HD
There you go.
You forgot:
Sky Sports 1 HD
Sky Sports 2 HD
Sky Sports 3 HD
Sky Sports 4 HD
Sky Sports News HD
How about all the vastly higher number of SD only channels?
Only if you have Sky+HD....
Otherwise, BBC 1 HD, BBC HD, ITV1 HD,C4hd, and......thats about it. Dont even have Ch5hd yet!
CH5-HD is free on a Sky box if you have a expired subcscription card.
Dont have a Sky box.