Options
Is 26" the minimum size for HDTV
![[Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/114931e7c85211f7bb8d29c0005d621b.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 189 Forum Member
✭
Ive read that 26" is the smallest size for HDTV reception but I have also seen 23" HDTV ready sets on the market .....im confused ??? I am looking at getting a 2nd set and would prefer a 23" for that room ....
cheers
Paul
cheers
Paul
0
Comments
Of course, the bigger the TV the better you'll be able to see smaller details
I've just ordered a Dell 24" PC display, and the image will be relatively big as I sit very close.
a 7" x 3.5" (roughly, for example) screen just wouldn't sell well, even though that could quite easily support say 1920x1080.
i suppose it's a bit like the smaller (sub 20") widescreen tvs that just didn't do the business and were dropped early on.
Thus there is no point in having a display which has a pixel size that is less than this at normal viewing distances.
So as you have larger displays ( and assuming that your living room does not expand!!) - SD has will not resolve as fine as you can see and thus HD will certainly look better. for 1080i or 720p (which have the same Vertical resolution) this works OK up to around 42" to 50" - above that 1080P ....
So if you are closer ...HDTV will give a benefit - and LCDs are made for Broadcasters -
I forgot that the viewing distance for HD is specified ... AFAIK it is between three and four times the height of the display ... so the larger the screen the further away and vice-versa. - and therefore you should look at where you sit and where the display will be to decide how big it should be - a large screen in a room where you cannot get far enough away will be very overpowering. 32" screens are about 43cm high - so the (minimum) viewing distance is therefore about 1.3 - 1.8 m - which would seem quite close compared with what we are used to !
Do remember that SDTV on the same device will be appalling at these distances so untill HDTV is de-rigeur we may wish to watch at rather greater distances than the 'ideal'
WRT computers - we find it very noticeable that users changing from a CRT monitor to a similar sized LCD monitor move the display away - roughly to the back of where the CRT monitor was. This is not for space reasons as many have plenty of space behind the CRT and plenty between the keyboard and the LCD. Often the resolution jump from (say) 800x600 to commonly 1280x1024 gives them much smaller Icons - but they barely notice except they wonder why the trash can that was at the bottom right is now near the middle of the display. BTW - do not bother with 19" LCDs - they cost more but (usually) have the same resolution as 17" ones - a 20"+ LCD does have a higher resolution though (often 1600x1200).
The eyes don't like having to accommodate things that are close ... I take your point about CRTs not being moved back, but I reckon that's a combination of (a) people not understanding how things would improve if they did, combined with (b) CRTs being heavy and hard to lift when on a desk. LCDs are light, so folks can easily discover that moving one away is more comfy.