Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot Asks: Are Curved TVs Worth It? (cnet.com)
New submitter cherishjoo shares a report written by David Katzmaier via CNET: When the first curved TVs appeared more than three years ago I asked whether they were a gimmick. As a TV reviewer I had to give the curve a fighting chance, however, so I took a curved Samsung home to live with my family for awhile, in addition to subjecting it to a full CNET review. In the end, I answered my own question with the headline "Great picture quality, but the curved screen is a flat-out gimmick." Since then most of the video geeks I know, including just about everybody I hear from on Twitter, Facebook and article comments, pooh-poohs curved TV screens as a useless distraction. A curved TV takes the traditional flat screen and bends it along a gentle arc. The edges end up a bit closer, ostensibly providing a slight wraparound effect. Curved TV makers, citing huge curved screens like IMAX, call their sets more "immersive" than their flat counterparts, but in my experience that claim doesn't hold water at in-home (as opposed to theatrical) screen sizes and viewing distances. The only real image-quality benefit I saw to the curve was a reduction in reflections in some cases. That benefit wasn't worth the slight geometric distortions introduced by the curve, not to mention its awkwardness when hung on the wall. That said, the curve doesn't ruin an otherwise good picture. In TVs, assuming similar prices, curved vs. flat boils down to a choice of aesthetics. As Katzmaier mentioned, curved TVs have been on the market for several years now, and while manufacturers continue to produce them, the verdict on whether or not the pros outweigh the cons is still murky. Here's our question for you: Are curved televisions worth the inflated price tag? If you are in the market for a new TV, does the fact that the display is curved entice you or steer you away?
I wouldn't buy one. I can't imagine it being particularly better to watch. Given the same $$ I'll spend on higher resolution and framerate over curved.
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
Curved monitors do make sense for the desktop PC, where you're sitting very close to the screen. They make no sense whatsoever in the living room, though. You're far too far away for the curve to make any noticeable difference to viewing *other* than making it even harder to avoid reflections. Don't buy one, they're idiotic.
I have a curved ultra-wide monitor, and I like the curvature -- I think it looks better than the same sized flat monitor I use at work when I look to the edges of the screen.
But sit much closer to my monitor than I do to my TV.
However, if I had a 4K TV and sat close enough to it to see an advantage in 4K (4.5 - 7 feet for a 55" TV), then maybe I'd see a similar advantage with a TV.
This title is not an exception.
I had the benefit of being able to do a home trial of Samsung's higher end 65" 4K HDR displays for my living room. Other than the curved thing, it's my understanding that the KS9000 is pretty much the same as the KS9500. I tried them both for a week, feed them both 1080p, 4k, 4k HDR and noticed no real difference in terms of quality. I didn't care for the curve, but it didn't detract from the image....and I ended up purchasing the non-curved variant.
So for me, there was no benefit of one over the other and I preferred the aesthetics of the flat screen.
Best,
... all TVs were curved.
They also had rounded corners. Maybe the next hot thing will be TVs that have corners with acute angles.
I've had one curved TV, and it was very nice when my head was in the sweet spot at the center of curvature, but anywhere else, meh. Monitors are another thing: I've got one of the 34" Samsung monitors, whose curvature is set for a good reading distance, and it's an awesome experience. I now find extended periods with flat monitors to be awful.
Stupid marketing ploy.
As a video engineer all I can do is shake my head at the stupidity.
Betteridge's Law of Headlnes
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
For your argument to work, you should really pick something that is an insult or negative.
It's for manufacturing tolerances and component rigidity. A curved surface is more rigid, especially if it has a double-curve. Back when HDTVs had CCFL backlights and were 2-3 inches thick, the extra thickness helped to stiffen them. Just like an I-beam. The sole purpose of the middle section of an I-beam is to separate the two ends by as much distance as possible. The more you can separate them, the more the beam can resist bending moments and the more rigid it is.
But as we moved to LED backlights and HDTVs became thinner, the separation between the front and back halves became smaller and they started to lose this rigidity. When you take something very big and flat and make it thin, it loses its rigidity. It wants to flop over - just like a sheet of paper. Manufacturers wanted to make the TVs thinner, but didn't want the top half flopping over. One answer is to add thick metal stiffeners, but that adds weight. Another answer is add a slight curve. When you do that, part of the bending moment trying to flop the top over gets converted into compressive stresses in the curved parts, and the panel is easily able to resist flopping over.
My current TV is a 55" flatscreen that has been serving me well... it serves me even better now that I disabled the "smart tv" functions. xD
Here's the thing though: the way it's set up in my living room works well because it's parallel to the balcony. Unless the curved TV is made of some magical material, it'll probably reflect more light than the current setup. And no, I wouldn't trade my glossy screen for a matte one. :P
That's all, of course, not even considering price difference. My ideal TV would be a big one without any of the extra frills that the TV industry came up in the past... what? 10 years? I ended up buying a 3D smart TV because it was in promotion and it came with a second 32" TV free, which was just perfect for my needs. What I really wanted though was a big screen that had enough ports on the back with fullHD resolution and good enough quality. That's it.
No need for curve, no need for 3D, no need for crappy smart TV software that's both insecure and never updated, no need for embedded camera, voice commands, remote control that acts like a mouse... none of that crap.
Honestly, I also don't need 4K or HDR, nor I'll be paying the extra price that comes with those features. I feel like I already pushed things a bit by wanting a fullHD TV when I already had a regular HD 720p TV, but since I'm using it as a computer monitor at times I thought it was still justifiable.
Truth of the matter is that TV manufacturers have to keep pushing there extraneous features because they need to keep selling units. And hey, it's fine if it makes a difference for you, but I really don't care about those things at all.
I imagine that the next TV I'll buy will have to probably be like a magnetic flexible sheet that you can carry around and throw in whatever room you wanted too. That is, of course, if my current TV lasts that long, which it probably won't. Oh well.
Curved monitors do make sense for the desktop PC, where you're sitting very close to the screen.
But does it really? What benefit do curved monitors give? I was told "the whole the screen is more evenly at the same distance from your eyes". But what I heard was "the screen is laid out in an unexpected and distorted way that screws with your brain".
Seriously look at the history of curved images. They were all designed to completely trick the brain into creating an immerse environment. How does that help when you for example need to create a drawing, edit a word document, or god forbid try and correct lens distortion effects in a photograph?
I could see it maybe making sense for games, but even then I'd probably suggest making a jump straight to a headset.