I bought a new TV (cheap) the picture is fine apart from one minor
problem. At the bottom left hand corner the picture seems to slant
up slightly. This is only ever noticable when there is text or a logo in
that
area, scrolling text tends to highlight the problem, perhaps due to some
sort of optical 'illusion'.
Its a bit hard to describe the problem exactly as things appear to be fine
futher up that side of the screen. What I would really need is a 'testcard'
but unfortunately they don't seem to broadcast one these days, the best I
can do
is something like the TV menu from my Sagem box which tends to indicate
(slightly)
that the picture is too far to the right, so there might be similar
distortion on the
other side minimised because you can't see it.
Its one of those flatscreen ones and this may be part of the problem
perhaps,
nothing on menu page looks perfectly square nut some maybe due to my
imagination (been noticing similar things on my PC monitor now!!).
A quick test on my portable reveals that the I can see more picture on the
'flatscreen' one so more oppertunity to see distortion, also the portable
is non-flat screen with curved edges, the perfectly square edges of the
new TV are only an aid to highlighting the problem.
It's only a minor issue though, 1-2 millimeters difference from one side of
the
screen to the other. I would add that the colours hold true, all distorted
equally :O)
but slightly annoying nonetheless albeit only when there is text in that
region.

One thing which occured to me was it has quite powerfuls peakers 8 Watt,
either
side but I doubt it is them.
I suspect it is none cureable but i will take the back off and have a look
to see if there
is anything I can play about with. A slight anticlockwise twist and a shift
to the left
would probably help things, as would an overall magnification of the picture
size,
although I doubt I will be able to do that.

It's really not worth taking it back to the shop or getting it 'repaired'.
Again I assume achieving a 'flatter squarer picture' is part of the problem.
Its a bit like the bottom 'deflection plate?' is slightly bent upwards on
one side.

Puting a suitable magnet at that corner of the tube might help but I guess
this would magnitise the screen, its like a 'rubber picture' which needs
stretching
down in one corner.

I would add that sometimes when watching a 4:3 picture
broadcast in 16:9 on my 4:3 set set up for letterbox, that
the right hand edge of the screen appears slightly wavy at
times, the left hand side is fairly straight.

Just to clarify what I mean, I am seeing a small 4:3 picture
which has black bars top bottom left and right due to the wonders
of widescreen technology :O)

The right hand side can appear very wavy, I am unsure if the problem is
with my TV.

"Albert Grennock" wrote in message
...
I bought a new TV (cheap) the picture is fine apart from one minor
problem. At the bottom left hand corner the picture seems to slant
up slightly. This is only ever noticable when there is text or a logo in
that
area, scrolling text tends to highlight the problem, perhaps due to some
sort of optical 'illusion'.
Its a bit hard to describe the problem exactly as things appear to be fine
futher up that side of the screen. What I would really need is a
'testcard'
but unfortunately they don't seem to broadcast one these days, the best I
can do
is something like the TV menu from my Sagem box which tends to indicate
(slightly)
that the picture is too far to the right, so there might be similar
distortion on the
other side minimised because you can't see it.
Its one of those flatscreen ones and this may be part of the problem
perhaps,
nothing on menu page looks perfectly square nut some maybe due to my
imagination (been noticing similar things on my PC monitor now!!).
A quick test on my portable reveals that the I can see more picture on the
'flatscreen' one so more oppertunity to see distortion, also the portable
is non-flat screen with curved edges, the perfectly square edges of the
new TV are only an aid to highlighting the problem.
It's only a minor issue though, 1-2 millimeters difference from one side
of
the
screen to the other. I would add that the colours hold true, all distorted
equally :O)
but slightly annoying nonetheless albeit only when there is text in that
region.

One thing which occured to me was it has quite powerfuls peakers 8 Watt,
either
side but I doubt it is them.
I suspect it is none cureable but i will take the back off and have a look
to see if there
is anything I can play about with. A slight anticlockwise twist and a
shift
to the left
would probably help things, as would an overall magnification of the
picture
size,
although I doubt I will be able to do that.

It's really not worth taking it back to the shop or getting it 'repaired'.
Again I assume achieving a 'flatter squarer picture' is part of the
problem.
Its a bit like the bottom 'deflection plate?' is slightly bent upwards on
one side.





It sounds like this set is well within tolerance for a cheap TV, to some
extent, you get what you pay for, and many TV's have shockingly bad
geometry, even some very good ones require adjustment right out of the box.

"Albert Grennock" wrote in message
...

snip

It's only a minor issue though, 1-2 millimeters difference from one side
of
the
screen to the other.

Unless you spend a few thousand pounds on a studio monitor, that's perfectly
acceptable. 1-2mm over the width of the screen is actually rather good, even
on a smallish screen. You could probably improve it slightly with a bit of
work, but only if you're experienced on setting up CRTs.

Dave

"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:i120f.7094$JY6.6837@trnddc02...

"Albert Grennock" wrote in message
...
I bought a new TV (cheap) the picture is fine apart from one minor
problem. At the bottom left hand corner the picture seems to slant
up slightly. This is only ever noticable when there is text or a logo in
that
area, scrolling text tends to highlight the problem, perhaps due to some
sort of optical 'illusion'.
Its a bit hard to describe the problem exactly as things appear to be
fine
futher up that side of the screen. What I would really need is a
'testcard'
but unfortunately they don't seem to broadcast one these days, the best
I
can do
is something like the TV menu from my Sagem box which tends to indicate
(slightly)
that the picture is too far to the right, so there might be similar
distortion on the
other side minimised because you can't see it.
Its one of those flatscreen ones and this may be part of the problem
perhaps,
nothing on menu page looks perfectly square nut some maybe due to my
imagination (been noticing similar things on my PC monitor now!!).
A quick test on my portable reveals that the I can see more picture on
the
'flatscreen' one so more oppertunity to see distortion, also the
portable
is non-flat screen with curved edges, the perfectly square edges of the
new TV are only an aid to highlighting the problem.
It's only a minor issue though, 1-2 millimeters difference from one side
of
the
screen to the other. I would add that the colours hold true, all
distorted
equally :O)
but slightly annoying nonetheless albeit only when there is text in that
region.

One thing which occured to me was it has quite powerfuls peakers 8 Watt,
either
side but I doubt it is them.
I suspect it is none cureable but i will take the back off and have a
look
to see if there
is anything I can play about with. A slight anticlockwise twist and a
shift
to the left
would probably help things, as would an overall magnification of the
picture
size,
although I doubt I will be able to do that.

It's really not worth taking it back to the shop or getting it
'repaired'.
Again I assume achieving a 'flatter squarer picture' is part of the
problem.
Its a bit like the bottom 'deflection plate?' is slightly bent upwards
on
one side.





It sounds like this set is well within tolerance for a cheap TV, to some
extent, you get what you pay for, and many TV's have shockingly bad
geometry, even some very good ones require adjustment right out of the
box.

Picture quality is not a function of price, the picture on my £49 portable
is
great, I am sure televisions for 5-10 time price have poorer pictures.
TV show rooms would never display a picture which would allow you
to ascess picture quality.

Picture quality is not a function of price, the picture on my £49 portable
is
great, I am sure televisions for 5-10 time price have poorer pictures.
TV show rooms would never display a picture which would allow you
to ascess picture quality.





Great compared to what? Sure you don't automatically get a better picture by
spending more on a TV, but higher end sets do have far more adjustments,
higher quality video amps, and generally have tighter tolerances on the CRT.
Properly tuned I guarantee that a £49 portable would pale next to a £500
CRT.

"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:bVl0f.5569$YH6.2895@trnddc06...


Picture quality is not a function of price, the picture on my £49
portable
is
great, I am sure televisions for 5-10 time price have poorer pictures.
TV show rooms would never display a picture which would allow you
to ascess picture quality.





Great compared to what? Sure you don't automatically get a better picture
by
spending more on a TV, but higher end sets do have far more adjustments,
higher quality video amps, and generally have tighter tolerances on the
CRT.
Properly tuned I guarantee that a £49 portable would pale next to a £500
CRT.


I am sorry you are wrong, there would be no difference whatsoever, infact
the expensive TV is likely to be worse.
The technology required to produce a *perfect* TV picture is not expensive,
infact it is pretty cheap. By perfect I mean as good as the signal recieved.
Also due to the economies of scale more work goes into mass
producing cheap sets than building a handfull of expensive models, which
due to their high price makes a repair worthwhile.
The cheaper sets have to right first time.
Same goes for Rolls-Royces and Ford Focus's, the engineering on the
Ford is vastly superior.
Go into any TV show room and there will be no correlation between
picture and price, usually the more expencive sets have the worst piccture.

Peope pay more for a TV set because they believe that they must pay a price
to suit their 'status', the picture is the same.

On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 02:36:55 GMT, "James Sweet"
wrote:



Picture quality is not a function of price, the picture on my £49 portable
is
great, I am sure televisions for 5-10 time price have poorer pictures.
TV show rooms would never display a picture which would allow you
to ascess picture quality.





Great compared to what? Sure you don't automatically get a better picture by
spending more on a TV, but higher end sets do have far more adjustments,
higher quality video amps, and generally have tighter tolerances on the CRT.
Properly tuned I guarantee that a £49 portable would pale next to a £500
CRT.


Not to mention that, in isolation, the human eye is easily
fooled...this from training materials from a former employer.

Tom

"Albert Grennock" wrote in message
...

snip

Properly tuned I guarantee that a £49 portable would pale next to a £500
CRT.


I am sorry you are wrong, there would be no difference whatsoever, infact
the expensive TV is likely to be worse.
The technology required to produce a *perfect* TV picture is not
expensive,
infact it is pretty cheap. By perfect I mean as good as the signal
recieved.
Also due to the economies of scale more work goes into mass
producing cheap sets than building a handfull of expensive models, which
due to their high price makes a repair worthwhile.
The cheaper sets have to right first time.
Same goes for Rolls-Royces and Ford Focus's, the engineering on the
Ford is vastly superior.
Go into any TV show room and there will be no correlation between
picture and price, usually the more expencive sets have the worst
piccture.

Peope pay more for a TV set because they believe that they must pay a
price
to suit their 'status', the picture is the same.



Albert, your posts are nothing if not entertaining.

Dave

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 10:01:54 +0100, "Dave D" wrote:


"Albert Grennock" wrote in message
...

snip

Properly tuned I guarantee that a £49 portable would pale next to a £500
CRT.


I am sorry you are wrong, there would be no difference whatsoever, infact
the expensive TV is likely to be worse.
The technology required to produce a *perfect* TV picture is not
expensive,
infact it is pretty cheap. By perfect I mean as good as the signal
recieved.
Also due to the economies of scale more work goes into mass
producing cheap sets than building a handfull of expensive models, which
due to their high price makes a repair worthwhile.
The cheaper sets have to right first time.
Same goes for Rolls-Royces and Ford Focus's, the engineering on the
Ford is vastly superior.
Go into any TV show room and there will be no correlation between
picture and price, usually the more expencive sets have the worst
piccture.

Peope pay more for a TV set because they believe that they must pay a
price
to suit their 'status', the picture is the same.



Albert, your posts are nothing if not entertaining.

Dave


Well...if you get really close, the small screen picture looks
better... :-)

Tom

"Tom MacIntyre" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 10:01:54 +0100, "Dave D" wrote:


"Albert Grennock" wrote in message
...

snip

Properly tuned I guarantee that a £49 portable would pale next to a
£500
CRT.


I am sorry you are wrong, there would be no difference whatsoever,
infact
the expensive TV is likely to be worse.
The technology required to produce a *perfect* TV picture is not
expensive,
infact it is pretty cheap. By perfect I mean as good as the signal
recieved.
Also due to the economies of scale more work goes into mass
producing cheap sets than building a handfull of expensive models, which
due to their high price makes a repair worthwhile.
The cheaper sets have to right first time.
Same goes for Rolls-Royces and Ford Focus's, the engineering on the
Ford is vastly superior.
Go into any TV show room and there will be no correlation between
picture and price, usually the more expencive sets have the worst
piccture.

Peope pay more for a TV set because they believe that they must pay a
price
to suit their 'status', the picture is the same.



Albert, your posts are nothing if not entertaining.

Dave


Well...if you get really close, the small screen picture looks
better... :-)


LOL!

Dave

Albert Grennock wrote:
"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:bVl0f.5569$YH6.2895@trnddc06...


Picture quality is not a function of price, the picture on my =A349
portable
is
great, I am sure televisions for 5-10 time price have poorer pictures.
TV show rooms would never display a picture which would allow you
to ascess picture quality.





Great compared to what? Sure you don't automatically get a better pictu=
re
by
spending more on a TV, but higher end sets do have far more adjustments,
higher quality video amps, and generally have tighter tolerances on the
CRT.
Properly tuned I guarantee that a =A349 portable would pale next to a =
=A3500
CRT.


I am sorry you are wrong, there would be no difference whatsoever, infact
the expensive TV is likely to be worse.
The technology required to produce a *perfect* TV picture is not expensiv=
e,
infact it is pretty cheap. By perfect I mean as good as the signal reciev=
ed.
Also due to the economies of scale more work goes into mass
producing cheap sets

(BS snipped)

HELP! HELP! someone's anus has broken loose!