Talk:Curved screen

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 March 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The whole page seems to be an ad for curved screens. The bottom line is reality is that curved screens are a tradeoff where sacrificing the perfect image quality for the sweet spot allows improving average image geometry for near sweet spot watching locations. The image is always inferior quality even for the sweet spot seat because the original camera most probably had flat image recording surface (CCD, CMOS or film) and the most true display of this information is always a screen with identical geometry - that is, a flat surface.

In addition, "pincussion effect" is normally used to refer lens rendering artefact where original flat square is not correctly projected as flat square on the recording surface. The fact that corners of projection screen end up darker without any special measures is called 'vignetting' and it does occur for both recording the original scene (camera) as well as for display (movie projector or home theater projector). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.223.134.4 (talk) 05:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs more content

I grew up with curved TVs. Then the manufactcurers started pushing flat TVs and now they are pushing curved TVs again. There is nothing in this article to explain the pros and cons of concave and convex curved TVs and comparing both concave and convex TVs to flat TVs. Also it seems to think curved TVs appeared recently - they were always curved until flat TVs came out.

(talk) 19:00, 19 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.240.194.132 (talk) [reply]

Radius of Curvature

I came to this article hoping to find useful information on the radius of curvature for curved screens, but there is none. It is my understanding that (and this info is a few years old) the radius of curvature for curved TVs is much too large given how far from the TV people sit in practice. Why is that? You would think that manufacturers would try to provide a more compelling experience by more closely matching that distance. And surely those who sit closer to their TVs would see more value in buying a curved TV, and therefore be more likely to pay the price differential for it.

I *think* the problem with doing that is that we don't always watch TV alone, so not everyone could be at the center of the circle. The radius of curvature is probably chosen so that three people on a sofa at a typical sitting distance all sit within the sector thus defined.

It also probably raises some costs to have a higher radius of curvature -- you would need larger boxes, for example, raising shipping costs.

For monitors the considerations are different -- there is typically one viewer, sitting at a distance of less than a meter. That suggests a much smaller radius of curvature than for TVs, which is feasible if you make the monitor smaller (e.g. a 34-inch monitor as opposed to a 60-inch TV).

Anyway, it would be nice to see some discussion of this. AmigoNico (talk) 02:58, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs attention

The analysis part needs to go, it's just commentary — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheFirstVicar4 (talk • contribs) 04:45, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]