which technology really has the best picture

Donbellphd - You're on almost the exact same track with your thoughts as I am. I'm thinking 60' Sony SXRD for day to day viewing, and the Sony VW50 with 100" screen for special events, DVD concerts, etc. I had looked hard at the Sony "Ruby" but the $1,000. replacement bulbs put me off. From what I was told, Ruby's little sister (VW 50) has a different bulb technology with a more realistic replacement price. Plus I can buy both the RP and the FP for the same or less money than the Ruby. Now if I could just convince me wife that both of these have moved from the "want" category to the "need" category!

>>I am responding because you gave me more info to go and because the post from Rlwainwright was incorrect. <<

Hmmmm.

>> Plasma is the best choice when there is a lot of light and you want to be bigger than 42". <<

Where, exactly, in his post did he mention high levels of ambient light? And, this statement completely discounts the experience of 10s of thousands of very satisfied owners of mid to large screen RPTVs.

Face it, most every HDTV available, regardless of the technology used to display the image, looks quite good and will satisfy all but the most fussy and anal-retentive viewer.

>> My $0.02 worth. The first thing I would do in your case is decide on screen size. If you are sitting 12' from the display, a 50" screen size is going to look like a postage stamp, especially in the context of a 21' long room. <<

Wrong. I am sitting 11.5 ft. back from a 51" Hitachi RPTV in a room that is 26 ft. long. The picture is quite large enough. I would have preferred the 57" model, but funds at the time wouldn't allow for it. Nonetheless, the picture is absolutely large enough to provide a very satisfying viewing experience and I don't regret my purchase whatsoever.

-RW-

RW... don't sweat it, Duane is at it again. A long time ago he insisted that large flat panel LCDs were less expensive than plasmas (he was confusing flat panel lcd with rear projection lcd) and now he is spreading more misinformation. LCD with its brighter picture is clearly better suited for rooms with a lot of light (see the latest issue of Sound and Vision) and a 50" screen at 12 feet is fine, though 60" would be better for HD.

Personally, I prefer plasma over lcd with its better black levels and color saturation but I'd be hard pressed to buy one over a dlp or lycos display if space were not an issue.

RW, I would suggest we have different opinions, not that either is right or wrong regarding screen size.

To the original poster, Dave, I suggest you spend some time viewing different screen sizes at the viewing distance you will have in your room, and do that over different times to get an idea of what screen size you would prefer.

You've already seen two different opinions here. If you go to www.avsforum.com, you will find a lot of helpful discussions on screen size.

Bruce

RW,

The SMPTE recommended 16 X 9 diagonal size for a 12' viewing distance is 77.2", THX is 93.6". Of course these dimensions are aimed at achieving an immersive experience for movies, not just casual viewing. Even so, I prefer a diagonal size that is at least half the viewing distance, 60" at 12' at a minimum.

I think the most reasonable solution is likely to be reducing the viewing distance, and that works for near-field stereo listening as well. You might plan to sit so that you are at one corner of an equlateral triangle, the distance between your front LR speakers being one of the bases of that triangle. (You is intended to be generic.)

db