Hisense - 100" Class U76 Series QLED 4K Google TV..$2000 with install from Best Buy

TripleAgent

Instructing Space Cowboy's mama on the blade
Supporter
Joined
May 28, 2012
Messages
35,226
Reputation
4,984
Daps
88,749
Reppin
Baltimore

TripleAgent

Instructing Space Cowboy's mama on the blade
Supporter
Joined
May 28, 2012
Messages
35,226
Reputation
4,984
Daps
88,749
Reppin
Baltimore
Picture quality isn't a replacement for image size. A 65" OLED isn't the same as a 100" LCD TV. If so, more people would notice just how crappy the image is when you pay $15 for a movie ticket.
Screen size makes bad pictures worse. A budget Chinese brand like Hisense or TCL will be exposed further when the screen is huge. I wouldn't be surprised if they artifact and error more, especially if they use the same weak processors they do in the smaller TVs.

Look at SD material upscaled to 1080 or 4K on a computer monitor or small (32" or less) TV, then the same material on a 65" or bigger set. The bigger set, no matter how good the upscaling, will look like an absolute mess.
 

Cakebatter

All Star
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
3,007
Reputation
791
Daps
10,473
Screen size makes bad pictures worse. A budget Chinese brand like Hisense or TCL will be exposed further when the screen is huge. I wouldn't be surprised if they artifact and error more, especially if they use the same weak processors they do in the smaller TVs.

Look at SD material upscaled to 1080 or 4K on a computer monitor or small (32" or less) TV, then the same material on a 65" or bigger set. The bigger set, no matter how good the upscaling, will look like an absolute mess.
Size is relative to distance, and when you increase resolution (1080p to 4k), you have to increase the display's size for a given distance so your eyes are able to resolve the details in the image. 100 inches is fine. At the typical sitting distance (8'-10') 4K on a 65" TV is too far to resolve the fine details. I use to own a high end AV store, and I had a 12 foot wide 2.35 aspect ratio screen, and due to the year (2009) there was only 1080p content. It would still look good today. If 100" were so large, no one would be able to stomach those 60 foot wide screens at the cinema. Cinemas are only displaying 4k content by the way. Yet, the large screen size offers a WOW factor than overshadows the other aspects of the image. It's a trade off and one that I typically recommend to potential TV buyers.
 

TripleAgent

Instructing Space Cowboy's mama on the blade
Supporter
Joined
May 28, 2012
Messages
35,226
Reputation
4,984
Daps
88,749
Reppin
Baltimore
Size is relative to distance, and when you increase resolution (1080p to 4k), you have to increase the display's size for a given distance so your eyes are able to resolve the details in the image. 100 inches is fine. At the typical sitting distance (8'-10') 4K on a 65" TV is too far to resolve the fine details. I use to own a high end AV store, and I had a 12 foot wide 2.35 aspect ratio screen, and due to the year (2009) there was only 1080p content. It would still look good today. If 100" were so large, no one would be able to stomach those 60 foot wide screens at the cinema. Cinemas are only displaying 4k content by the way. Yet, the large screen size offers a WOW factor than overshadows the other aspects of the image. It's a trade off and one that I typically recommend to potential TV buyers.
Theater projection equipment and cheap Chinese chips are worlds apart. A huge screen has "wow factor" to the uninformed, but that requires a certain amount of ignorance hence "don't go look at OLEDs". You'll go home and look at your huge, mediocre at best picture like :hhh:
 
Top