I'm of the same opinion, and for a spaced group viewing, an inwardly curved screen is a disadvantage. Probably only ideal fro single viewing, but again I can't see much point.It's not a curved screen. After looking at them, I really can't see the point, but that's personal taste as I'm sure that they suit some people.
That's an FST......Hello Tosh, gotta Toshiba?Then in the 80's i remember Toshiba making a big thing of their flatter square tube.
Yeah, i remember it well...... I think that slogan in their ads was a take on Alexei Sayles 'Ello John Gotta New Motor'That's an FST......Hello Tosh, gotta Toshiba?
3D agreed, but 4K is a huge improvement for TV on large screens, particularly 55" and above. I certainly wouldn't step back now. It's not so much faces as things like scenery, landscapes, wildlife where the greatly improved fine detail wins out. Another benefit is when small print, documents etc are shown on screen, for once they can actually be read.3D = waste of time. 4K is handy for looking at photos but there isn't much need other than that
I've heard that too, but I'm very satisfied with the upscaling on my Sony. It does a great job on everything, including the inputs from my recorders.One of downside of the large screen TVs (55") is that SD sourced material isn't always too hot, some of the TVs don't upscale that well.
To some extent, I think this is where part the price differential between sets / models lies. Upscaling was an important consideration for me as most, if not all, of my viewing will be upscaled HD broadcast programmes. Some sets make a good job of it, others are terrible.One of downside of the large screen TVs (55") is that SD sourced material isn't always too hot, some of the TVs don't upscale that well.
My computer is my TV (on my second monitor). and I can adjust the size of itMy computer is a computer I don't need my TV to be one too.