lcd panel size calculator brands

A lot goes into determining the best viewing distance, and there are several different criteria you can use. Aside from size, things like resolution and even how strong your eyesight is can affect how you see the screen. Because everyone"s eyesight is different, this is less an exact science and more of a general guide based on scientific principles of vision and resolution.

Our size and distance tool above is based on the 30° guideline that is suitable for mixed usage, but you can find distances for a variety of sizes at 40° here.Learn more about the human visual field.

This chart shows the point at which an upgrade in resolution becomes worth it depending on size and distance to the TV. Each line represents the optimal viewing distance for each resolution, but any TV that falls within the range of that color will be suitable to notice a difference in picture quality. So, for example, if you have a 65 inch TV, the viewing distance at which the eye can actually process the details of 4k content is about 4 feet. However, any distance between 4 and about 8.5 feet will be enough to appreciate the difference between 4k and 1080p on a 65 inch TV. Go too far, and the image will look identical to 1080p HD.

The chart suggests that at a certain point, 4k UHD may not be worth the upgrade—if you"re sitting more than 7 feet away and have a 55" TV, for instance. Really, though, this chart is just a guide, and as 4k TVs have become the standard, the question of whether it"s worth it or not is a moot point. While your eyes may not be able to tell the difference at a certain point, your next TV will more than likely be a 4k TV anyway. Knowing the optimal viewing distance for the resolution can help you determine a living room setup that takes full advantage of your TV"s resolution, but since angular resolution is almost a non-issue with UHD content, we recommend using our calculator tool at the top of the page, which is based on the optimal field of vision.

You"re probably thinking something along the lines of "My couch is 10" away from my TV, which according to the chart means I need a 75 inch TV. This is insane!" It"s true that if you want to take full advantage of higher resolutions, that"s the ideal size you should get. That said, this may not be possible for everyone, which brings us to budget.

The price of a TV is usually exponential to its size. Size isn"t the only factor though, as resolution, panel type, and features all play into it as well. Looking at 65 inch TVs, for instance, an OLED like the LG CX OLED is inevitably going to cost more than a budget LED TV like the Hisense H8G, and both of these will seem downright cheap compared to an 8k TV like the Samsung Q900TS 8k QLED. Fortunately, though, as technology improves and the availability of higher resolution TVs expands, larger TVs have become more common and therefore more affordable. Feel free to compare the prices of our picks for the best 65 inch TVs, the best 70 to 75 inch TVs, and the best 80 to 85 inch TVs to really see the difference that size makes.

We recommend a field of vision of about 30 degrees for mixed usage. In general, we also recommend getting a 4k TV since lower resolution TVs are becoming harder to find. To easily find out what size you should buy, you can divide your TV viewing distance (in inches) by 1.6 (or use our TV size calculator above) which roughly equals a 30-degree angle. If the best size is outside your budget, just get the biggest TV you can afford. These are guidelines, after all, and since most TVs nowadays are 4k, you can"t really go wrong with the size that works for you, especially since picture quality also depends a lot on the content and viewing conditions. Ideally, you would optimize the capacity of your TV by getting one that"s large enough for you to notice all the visual detail that 4k has to offer, but ultimately, you should watch however feels most comfortable to you, whatever the size and distance may be.

a line of extreme and ultra-narrow bezel LCD displays that provides a video wall solution for demanding requirements of 24x7 mission-critical applications and high ambient light environments

All of this may seem self-explanatory, but TV sizing can get tricky. That"s because screen size and overall dimensions do not necessarily correlate. The screen size of a TV is measured diagonally from one corner of the panel to the opposite corner. This does not include the bezels or any other outside surface of the TV.

Many models in a particular sizing category -- such as 55 inches, 65 inches, etc., -- are not strictly the size in which they are labeled. The viewable display size is sometimes a little smaller or even a little bigger than the category it is in. The differences tend to be less than an inch either way and are usually within round-up distance of the appropriate size. For example, a 50-inch TCL 4-Series TV has a 49.5-inch viewable display. And the side of the bezel, or frame around the screen itself on the top, bottom and sides, also varies somewhat.

We"ve looked at multiple models of TVs from some of the major manufacturers and averaged the typical dimensions at each size.Average TV dimensions in inches by brand and size

Now that you have a good idea of what screen size you"re looking for, it"s time to figure out what brand and model is right for you. We may be biased, but we think a great place to start is

There are lots of things to consider beyond size, from display type to picture quality and smart TV features. Here are just a few important aspects to keep in mind:Nearly every TV, includingLED LCD TVs withOLED TVs use a completely different technology to light a screen than LEDs. They have theThe ability to produce a deep shade of black -- which translates into high

The cost of TVs depends heavily on their size, with larger ones being progressively more expensive. I examine this relationship by aggregating TV price data over a range of sizes and brands. In addition, I clarify how to calculate TV screen area, height, and width. Though TV screens are universally described by the length of their diagonal, I argue that area is a more intuitive parameter for comparing their sizes.

To collect data for this investigation, I consulted The TV section of Walmart’s Canadian website. Here I found 138 TVs listed with screen diagonals ranging from 19” to 75”. I recorded the size and cost of each, summarized in the graph below.

As expected, price increases with TV size. However, size alone isn’t a tremendous predictor. For instance, there were two 32” screen TVs available which were more expensive than many of the 65” screens. We can account for this through the many features which TV models differ in, beyond size. For instance, some have curved screens, some are smart TVs, and others provide 4K ultra HD. Looking at this graph, the distribution of TV models across size is also interesting. Screen diagonals of 50”, 55”, and 65” are by far most abundant. Nevertheless, the confounding factors make it is hard to isolate the contribution of physical size to TV prices from these data. In particular, we’d require the assumption that expensive TV features are equally represented across the sizes.

To tease out the relationship between TV size and price, we must compare TVs which are identical in every way except size. Fortunately, it is possible to do this: some companies sell series of TV models which offer the same features at multiple screen sizes. Although this greatly limits the data available, it does conveniently remove the confounding factors. I selected four TV series: two by Samsung (NU6900 and Tizen Smart LED) and two by LG (UK6090 and UK6300).

Each series follows a consistent trend, but direct comparison of them is challenging since they have different intrinsic values. In the interest of fully covering the range of screen sizes, it was necessary to combine the data. I normalized the prices within each series to facilitate direct comparison. Each set contained a 50” screen, so I normalized the prices by scaling the 50” option to a value of ‘1’. For instance, The LG UK6300 series costed $448 (43”), $548 (50”), $648 (55”), and $998 (65”). I normalized these prices to 0.82, 1.00, 1.18, and 1.82, respectively. This approach was successful in making each series comparable.

Here a clear relationship emerges between cost and TV screen diagonal length. Interestingly, this relationship is not linear, note the curvature of the apparent trend. As TV screen diagonal is increased, further improvements in size become increasingly costly. We can explain this nonlinearity, to do so we must review how screen diagonal is related to its area.

The size and shape of TV screens are specified by the length of the diagonal across the screen and the aspect ratio. Despite this, I believe that screen area is a much more intuitive unit for comparing TV sizes. The screen of a TV is rectangular, so we can find its area by multiplying the length of its height (H) and width (W).

There is a strong linear correlation between cost and screen area (R^2=0.97). For comparison, correlating cost with screen diagonal gave an inferior fit (R^2=0.88). A notable exception to this trend is the outlier at 75” diagonal length (red data point). The deviation at this large size is likely due to current manufacturing limitations, driving up the cost. According to the vice president of TV product marketing at Samsung, there are very few fabrication plants currently operating that are optimized for producing LCD panels of this size.

Having established the relationship between TV screen area and cost using controlled data, we can return to the total data set to gain more insights about TV prices. There was a large range of prices at each TV size, mostly due to the presence or absence of various features in the different models. If the availability of such features is fairly equal across TV sizes, averaging the prices at each size may largely cancel out this variability. I tried this, and it afforded a surprisingly strong linear correlation with screen area.

​Given that these data are from averaging all of the TVs sold by Walmart, this is an impressive fit (R^2=0.89). Conversely, these data were less strongly correlated with screen diagonal (R^2=0.79). There are several implications of this. Firstly, it suggests my earlier observation that TV price is proportional to screen area is broadly applicable. In addition, it implies that expensive TV features are near equally represented across the range of sizes. Lastly, the 75” TVs are an outlier from this trend (red data point), reinforcing that this size of TV is disproportionally expensive in the current market.

The fairness of these prices may come as a surprise to many consumers, since each additional increase in diagonal length appears progressively more expensive. I have shown that this is merely a consequence of the relationship between diagonal length and area. Though geometrically straightforward, some consumers may not have considered this point. It is unfortunate that screen area is not widely used for comparing TV sizes. In addition to being more intuitive, it also simplifies comparing TVs of different aspect ratios. Though most modern TVs have a 16:9 aspect ratio, older TVs usually had a 4:3 ratio. In such cases comparison of diagonal lengths is particularly misleading.

On 2D displays, such as computer monitors and TVs, the display size (or viewable image size or VIS) is the physical size of the area where pictures and videos are displayed. The size of a screen is usually described by the length of its diagonal, which is the distance between opposite corners, usually in inches. It is also sometimes called the physical image size to distinguish it from the "logical image size," which describes a screen"s display resolution and is measured in pixels.

The size of a screen is usually described by the length of its diagonal, which is the distance between opposite corners, usually in inches. It is also sometimes called the physical image size to distinguish it from the "logical image size," which describes a screen"s display resolution and is measured in pixels.

The method of measuring screen size by its diagonal was inherited from the method used for the first generation of CRT television, when picture tubes with circular faces were in common use. Being circular, the external diameter of the bulb was used to describe their size. Since these circular tubes were used to display rectangular images, the diagonal measurement of the visible rectangle was smaller than the diameter of the tube due to the thickness of the glass surrounding the phosphor screen (which was hidden from the viewer by the casing and bezel). This method continued even when cathode ray tubes were manufactured as rounded rectangles; it had the advantage of being a single number specifying the size, and was not confusing when the aspect ratio was universally 4:3. In the US, when virtually all TV tubes were 4:3, the size of the screen was given as the true screen diagonal with a V following it (this was a requirement in the US market but not elsewhere). In virtually all other markets, the size of the outer diameter of the tube was given. What was a 27V in the US could be a 28" elsewhere. However the V terminology was frequently dropped in US advertising referring to a 27V as a 27". This was not misleading for the consumer as the seller had to give the actual screen size by law. Flat panel displays by contrast use the actual diagonal of their visible display size, thus the size is the actual size presented to the viewer in all markets. This means that a similarly specified size of display will be larger as a flat panel display compared with a cathode ray tube display.

When the common aspect ratio went from 4:3 to 16:9, the new widescreens were labeled with a W in the US. A screen that is approximately the same height as a 27V would be a 32W. Vizio and other US TV manufacturers have introduced even wider screens with a 21:9 aspect ratio in order to match aspect ratios used in cinemas. In order to gauge the relative sizes of these new screens, the screen aspect must be considered. In a commercial market where multiple aspect ratios are being sold, it will always take two numbers to describe the screen size, some combination of diagonal, aspect ratio, height or width.

Set sizes are frequently given as a "class" as screens from different manufacturers will have slight differences in size. However the "class" should be within 1/2" of the actual size. The reasons for the different sizes within a class stem from differences in the manufacturers" equipment. As manufacturers move from one size to another, newer larger sizes must fit on the same size glass, though with fewer displays being cut from it. Some sizes fit well and maximize glass utilization, other sizes fit more poorly and waste glass. As an example, in some cases, increasing the screen size by even 0.1" can cause an LCD manufacturer to go from 12 screens fitting on their glass sheet to 9. This would make them uncompetitive with other screen makers.

The resolution of the human eye (with 20/20 vision) is about one minute of arc. For full HDTV resolution, this one minute of arc implies that the TV watcher should sit 4 times the height of the screen away. At this distance the individual pixels can not be resolved while simultaneously maximising the viewing area. So the ideal set size can be determined from the chart below by measuring the distance from where the watcher would sit to the screen in centimeters (or inches), dividing that by 4, and comparing with the screen heights below. At this distance, viewers with better than 20/20 vision will still be able to see the individual pixels.

Choosing a new TV is not a simple process. There are a number of brands available today, boasting different features and offering varied panel sizes within the same price range.

To decide which is the ideal screen size for best viewing experience, measure the distance between where the TV will be placed and your bed/couch/chair.

Go for a 46/49-inch panel if you will be viewing from 6-9 feet distance. For sets larger than 50 inches, it is best to have a viewing distance of more than 8 ft.

and a screen the image will also increase. If your projector has a zoom lens, the lens can be adjusted to change the size of the screen image without changing

the distance of the projector. Since each projector lens is different, an online projection calculator tool will help you calculate the size of an image