[mythtv-users] OT: Buying a new TV - Sharp Quattron or 3D?

[Raymond Wagner]

On 6/3/2011 16:29, Kingsley Turner wrote:
> Does anyone have a Quattron?  I am hoping to get decent skin-tone colour
> reproduction.

Video is captured in RGB, converted to YUV, the color channels are 
spatially quartered, and then it's further compressed using whatever 
codec.  When you display video, you decode it, convert back to RGB, and 
display on a RGB monitor.  Adding that additional yellow channel does, 
well... nothing.  It can do nothing but detract from the reproduction of 
the original signal.  The best you could hope for is that it somehow 
produces a more pleasing image.  Much like a Hemi, it's nothing more 
than a marketing gimmick, intended to distance itself from the rest of 
the pack, and sell more units.

Just like a Hemi, the Quattrons are Sharp's high end brand, so bundled 
with that additional pixel, you get the highest response panel, the best 
video processor, a bunch of inputs, and everything else you would expect 
from a $6K TV.

> Is 3D TV that much of a must-have? To be honest I'm not really so impressed with this "new" 3D - watching the 3D movies is only OK for me (went to see "Tangled" with the kids), and only looked at 3D-TV demos in the shops. But then again, more and more 3D content is coming out, and for a 10-year investment I don't want to be left out if everything becomes 3D.

First, there really isn't all that much stereoscopic content (I refuse 
to call it 3D).  Computer animated cartoons are easy enough to do, you 
just render from a second angle, however there are only a handful of 
live action stereoscopic films made each year.  The rest are all just 
faked during post processing.  Your brain is going to do a better job at 
filling in the depth than some artist sitting at a video edit 
workstation.  Better to just skip the glasses, the fuzziness, the 
headaches and eyestrain, and just watch the movie.

Second, stereoscopic films are either going to be in-your-face, throwing 
things out of the screen at you like some cheesy B horror movie, or they 
will be subtle, adding largely unnoticeable hints of depth into the 
video.  If there's stuff coming at you like a bad movie, personally, I 
don't want that.  If it's just unnoticeable hints, why bother with all 
that extra hassle and cost?

"3D" TVs are again, nothing more than a marketing ploy.  First rear 
projection HDTV came out to drive sales, and then flat screens, and 
1080p, and 120Hz and 240Hz displays.  By now, all the early adopters 
have them, and all the mid adopters have them, while the late adopters 
are still happy with their CRTs.  TV sales are in a lull, so "3D" TV is 
something new that was manufactured in an attempt to get everyone to buy 
all new TV sets.  But as before, the "3D" TVs are always the higher end 
sets, and if you want the higher end features, you have to get one 
whether you want it or not.