Some of my friends went into a discussion about black level. You know everyone have is argument and quote to make a winner. I know their's a lot of stuff about black level but it's the problem- a lot of stuff here and there. Just wanna comparison thread to show it to them.

-From what i see and read and as everyone says here kuro plasma have an excellent black. Other plasma to.

-CRT seems to be a reference but some says they aren't above plasma.

-Some says dlp is the way to go on black level.

-Some says new lcd is equally good as plasma, other argue that their black is a tricky thing...

I just want real world number/examples to compare them.

CRT's, hands down have the best blacks, oddly enough I find that usually shadow mask CRT's tend to have darker blacks because the shadow mask is more light restrictive around each phosphor dot than the vertical wires that separate the phosphors on Sony (or other aperture grille CRT).

That being said the digital technologies rank as follows; right now Plasma is technically ahead of every technology in black levels, thanks to the Pioneer Kuro line. The next technology that has, consistently, better blacks is DLP, though the fact that it is a projected technology is something you really have to decide you like (personally, I hate it because unless you are within about 15 degrees off-center the picture quality gets dramatically worse. The tech with consistently the worst blacks is definitely LCD right now. Of course, the Samsung 81 series can do a perfect black (when there is literally no signal going to the unit or the screen goes completely black) but once there is really anything on screen the black levels immediately become just as good as that of the best CCFL backlit LCD model's, which still is not that good.

im going to have to disagree with you on that one. the Pioneer Kuro is the absolute top of the line in PDP technology. there are actually many newer generation CCFL backlit LCD's out there with black levels that are comparable to most other plasmas. hopefully in a year or two black levels on LCD will be equal to plasma's.

Once Dark chip 4 is implemented how much improvement will there be in DLP black levels?

the Samsung 81 series can do a perfect black (when there is literally no signal going to the unit or the screen goes completely black) but once there is really anything on screen near a black area the black level immediately becomes that of the best CCFL backlit LCD model's, which still is not that good.

hmmm. that's quite a statement considering i was standing in front of a samsung 81 series and a pio kuros at magnolia's last weekend and the samsung lcd was showing a much more satisfying image across the board.

the room was moderately lit (not enough light to read comfortably) so i guess the "black level" advantage of the kuros doesn't really kick in until you reach a light level that's close to total darkness.

from what i see lcd has the advantage of being brighter, have more contrast overall and really excellent black level performance when we are talking about the samsung 71,81, sony xbr 4,5 level of lcds. maybe sharps too but i haven't been keeping up with those.

as for the black levels of the samsung lcd going up with more image on screen i just don't see it at all. i guess you have to show material that is really poorly lit to see it. the material shown was a wide variety but mainly up to date movies and tv etc.

i don't discount the kuros line completely since i do know how the image comes together for plasma in a darkened room. i currently have a plasma as well as lcd.

im going to have to disagree with you on that one. the Pioneer Kuro is the absolute top of the line in PDP technology. there are actually many newer generation CCFL backlit LCD's out there with black levels that are comparable to most other plasmas. hopefully in a year or two black levels on LCD will be equal to plasma's.

In a year or 2 plasmas will be better in black levels as well as white levels. I don't see LCD truly catching up in overall dark performance for a while (very low black in all scenes and shadow detail to match).

I agree with those that says between plasma and lcd it depends on the room lighting situations. In a brightly light sunlight room LCD backside against a window....the black level on my LCD is much better than in a room that is totally dark. In the day the blacks right at the end of the screen look (are perceived to me) to be just as dark black as the outer screen casing.

Beyond simple how black does it get....you should consider the quality of the blacks. On one LCD a black bear looks muddy black....on the screen next to it you can see the reflective light off the black fur, you see strands.

I use dark hair for my black crush testing.

CRT is still king. All Plasmas and LCD's still tend to crush blacks. Don't be fooled by anyone that trys to tell you different.

I have a 60" Elite Kuro and a circa 1995 Barco Retrographics 801s in the same room, driven by the same source (HDMI splitter; HDMI direct to the Kuro and HDFury D/A for the Barco), so I can readily compare PQ between the two displays. Most of the time, I prefer the Kuro's picture because it better snap and contrast and is much sharper. This is probably caused by the poorer ANSI contrast of the CRT.

However, I have encountered material with very low light levels where the Barco looks dramtically better than the Kuro. (A good example is an anime called "Shigurui," which has a lot of night scenes with no highlights to cause your eyes' pupils to contract.) With this material, the Barco gets *very* dark while retaining richness and depth, while the Kuro's blacks start to look gray. (Admittedly a very dark gray, but gray nonetheless.) And of course, when the Barco fades to black, there's *no* visible light left.

Overall, I am happy with the Kuro -- for 99+% of the material out there, it looks great. No buyer's remore here! But there is still room for improvement -- I want a flat-panel display that retains details in the blacks while being able to fade to invisiblity in a dark room. The Kuro's not quite there yet.

Overall, I am happy with the Kuro -- for 99+% of the material out there, it looks great. No buyer's remore here! But there is still room for improvement -- I want a flat-panel display that retains details in the blacks while being able to fade to invisiblity in a dark room. The Kuro's not quite there yet.

Your CRT goes completely black while still being calibrated for proper shadow detail?

I was under the impression that it is not possible for a CRT do be calibrated for total black without slightly crushing near black levels. I know I've never had a direct view set that was capable of doing it.

I want a flat-panel display that retains details in the blacks while being able to fade to invisiblity in a dark room. The Kuro's not quite there yet.

I know:(

Your CRT goes completely black while still being calibrated for proper shadow detail?

I was under the impression that it is not possible for a CRT do be calibrated for total black without slightly crushing near black levels. I know I've never had a direct view set that was capable of doing it.

I haven't seen one either and I work with studio CRTs. To get all detail w/in the shadows there's always been a slight glow to 0 ire. Granted that glow is darker than what Pioneer Kuro offers it still isn't perfect.

I have a 60" Elite Kuro and a circa 1995 Barco Retrographics 801s in the same room, driven by the same source (HDMI splitter; HDMI direct to the Kuro and HDFury D/A for the Barco), so I can readily compare PQ between the two displays. Most of the time, I prefer the Kuro's picture because it better snap and contrast and is much sharper. This is probably caused by the poorer ANSI contrast of the CRT.

However, I have encountered material with very low light levels where the Barco looks dramtically better than the Kuro. (A good example is an anime called "Shigurui," which has a lot of night scenes with no highlights to cause your eyes' pupils to contract.) With this material, the Barco gets *very* dark while retaining richness and depth, while the Kuro's blacks start to look gray. (Admittedly a very dark gray, but gray nonetheless.) And of course, when the Barco fades to black, there's *no* visible light left.

Overall, I am happy with the Kuro -- for 99+% of the material out there, it looks great. No buyer's remore here! But there is still room for improvement -- I want a flat-panel display that retains details in the blacks while being able to fade to invisiblity in a dark room. The Kuro's not quite there yet.

Yes, I get the feeling when people say the Kuro does "true black" its when there's highlights to make it seem that way. Thankfully about all of what you watch will have highlights. :) A bias light helps me not notice the glow you get, but its still there.

Ya know, but for a plasma to outperform a CRT in alot of categories especially in terms of the blacks rendered on all sorts of material is no small feat. And ya know before Kuro, I'd never say such a thing.

Your CRT goes completely black while still being calibrated for proper shadow detail?

I was under the impression that it is not possible for a CRT do be calibrated for total black without slightly crushing near black levels. I know I've never had a direct view set that was capable of doing it.

The Barco may be crushing blacks a bit, but my point is that it is capable of going completely dark. The Kuro can't do that, regardless of whether it is adjusted to crush blacks or not.

Why do people think black level is "The Measurement", that's beyond me.
First and foremost I want a good video processor, to be able to handle all kind of signal and scale/convert/etc it very well including 24p - in ideal case it's in the TV. Secondly I want an overall high PQ panel, not very good blacks with oversaturated colors etc like the most of those few Pios I've seen did. Third I want resolution to preserve the source's (HD DVD, HD streams) high resolution - no 720 panels in 2007, that's just stupid for me (along with the argument that you don't see it from further than 5-6 feet.)
Rest of the stuff - brightness, contrast, off-angle viewing etc - doesn't really concern me as most of the current top units are fine.
BTW wasn't it proven that Samsung 81-series has better black levels than Pioneers? :confused:

Many on AVS already know that black level is much more important than resolution and a quick search of AVS will show the facts.
While 1080p is nice to have, it is not a big deal below 60"....believe what you want to believe. It's overrated..plain and simple.
If people want to deny the pitfalls of even the top LCD's, that is their choice. I am not sure who they are trying to fool on AVS.
The Samsung 81 series has great black levels.....on a blank screen. ;)
Kuro stomps all over it with actual content. ;)

I came across this informative explanation about HDTV contrast issues, etc.

It is worth a read.

http://www.carltonbale.com/2007/01/the-truth-about-inflated-hdtv-contrast-ratios/




Truth About Inflated HDTV Contrast Ratios (http://www.carltonbale.com/2007/01/the-truth-about-inflated-hdtv-contrast-ratios/)

Posted by Carlton Bale (http://www.carltonbale.com/) on January 4th, 2007
Just as resolution continues to increase on HDTV sets, so it seems does contrast ratio. I few years ago, digital displays were exclaiming how impressive a 1,000:1 contrast ratio was. Now 10,000:1 is not that uncommon. And since contrast ratio is more important to resolution in the production of a great picture, it sounds like these new displays should be amazingly fantastic. Unfortunately, these extremely high contrast ratios have little to do with real world performance and are, to a great extent, marketing hype.
First of all, it's necessary to understand the difference between the two types of contrast ratio measurements. The one used by pretty much every manufacturer out there is full on (100% white) / full off (100% black). While this can give some amazingly high numbers, people don't watch all-white or all-black screens. Comparing the brightest whites in one scene to the blackest blacks in another scene is not representative of the picture quality available at the exact instance the viewer is watching each scene. (Measuring the screens at 2 different times also allows further manipulation of the display between tests, such as switching to a different color wheel setting, changing the aperture of an iris, or taking the measurement at a more favorable location on the screen.)
The contrast ratio that matters most for the most common viewing scenarios is ANSI contrast ratio [1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrast_ratio)]. With ANSI contrast ratio, the black and white levels are measured at the same time on the same screen using a 16-square black and white checkerboard image. What this means is that it is representative of the contrast ratio achievable at any one point in time; this is what is really important to viewers. [Edit: see AlenK's comment below regarding situations where On/Off contrast ratio become important.]

The reason ANSI contrast ratios are not published is because of marketing. ANSI contrast ratios are much lower than on/off contrast ratios. An ANSI contrast ratio of 250:1 would be an impressive result and 600:1 would be outstanding — but much too low of a number if casually compared to an on/off contrast ratio of 6,000:1.
This info is for front projection and does not directly relate to flat panels:One last point that is critical is the impact ambient light has on perceived contrast ratio. Ambient light kills contrast ratio on any and every display. If you make out the beige carpet below your flat panel, your contrast ratio is being negatively impacted. If there is 1 lux of ambient light in the room (i.e. a small candle), the max perceivable contrast ratio is 500:1. A dimly lighted room with 30 lux of lighting would squash the maximum perceivable contrast ratio to 50:1 [2 (http://www.practical-home-theater-guide.com/contrast-ratio.html)]. Unless you have a completely dark room covered in black velvet, you'll never be able to perceive the high on/off contrast ratios claimed by manufacturers — those numbers are meaningless otherwise.
Conclusion: If you're looking to buy a new HDTV, don't place much merit on the contrast ratio published by the manufacturer; it is pretty much meaningless for real-world (a little bit of light in the room) viewing. Plus, I've never seen a review of a calibrated display meet or exceed the manufacturer published contrast ratios. Look for independent test results that measure both ANSI and On/Off contrast ratio on a properly-calibrated display. If you are always watching TV in a well-lit room, the contrast ratio doesn't really matter anyway; display brightness is more important the brighter the room is. But if you like to enjoy the full performance of your display by turning the lights off, high contrast ratio is extremely important.
If you're considering a model for which no reviews listing ANSI and On/Off contrast ratio exist, use this rule of thumb:
CRT displays are pretty much the king of on/off contrast and give the best black levels, have great color reproduction, but lower ANSI contrast ratios [edited 2007-05-29]
Plasmas offer almost the same (and often better) on/off contrast ratio performance as compared to CRT and can offer better ANSI contrast ratios.
DLP is the best for digital front/rear projection displays
LCoS (aka SXRD, DiLA) are very close to DLP
LCD (both flat panels and front/rear projection) offers the poorest contrast ratios (especially on/off); however, they can be among the brightest flat panels and that makes them great for bright rooms where it is difficult to perceive contrast ratio.Like always, there are some exceptions. Always look at a display yourself before you purchase it. LCD flat panels have great bang-for-the buck and look pretty good on a bright show-room floor. See if you can view and compare it in your normal viewing environment (a completely dark room, a very bright room) before you make your final decision. Plasmas have great black levels but are terrible for glare and reflection off the glass front screen; plasma + direct sunlight = unwatchable combination.

Please stop fighting.

Why do people think black level is "The Measurement", that's beyond me.
First and foremost I want a good video processor, to be able to handle all kind of signal and scale/convert/etc it very well including 24p - in ideal case it's in the TV. Secondly I want an overall high PQ panel, not very good blacks with oversaturated colors etc like the most of those few Pios I've seen did. Third I want resolution to preserve the source's (HD DVD, HD streams) high resolution - no 720 panels in 2007, that's just stupid for me (along with the argument that you don't see it from further than 5-6 feet.)
Rest of the stuff - brightness, contrast, off-angle viewing etc - doesn't really concern me as most of the current top units are fine.
BTW wasn't it proven that Samsung 81-series has better black levels than Pioneers? :confused:

Samsung 81 has a better black level. But its not necessarily better at black. Research local dimming.

I was once a believer in resolution over black level. That was a dumb assumption on my part.

Hmmm... increased resolution that can only be appreciated when I sit real close really doesn't seem too awesome when my image is so washed out I can't even appreciate the details given to me by pixels!

Oversaturation I can deal w/. Its called a color control and using the correct color space. Crappy black level can't be fixed unless I turn on all the lights in the house. (etc. every other display besides Kuro, front projectors, and the CRTs I've ever owned and seen.)

Plasmas have great black levels

I have to respectuflly disagree with "great" black levels.


In terms of blacks, CRT is better than any current available technology. All digital displays crush blacks to varying degrees.

There's no techology currently available that have mastered that thing called "blacks".

They either get deep blacks, but lack shadow detail. They have good shadow detail but can't produce "inky" blacks without crushing them.

They can't produce deep blacks unless its in pitch black room or the blacks only look black in a bright room and suffer in a dark room.

Unfortunately, the only technology that mastered this thing called "blacks" was a technology that was almost sued out of existence (even to some AVS'ers delight) and that technology is called SED.

If you take the CRT, The KURO and the Samsung 81 and combine them into one, you "might" get close to what SED would have given us.

Pioneer Kuro, and the very best LCD, DLP, and LCOS projectors all have very good blacks. The LCOS variants get the deepest.

Pioneer Kuro, and the very best LCD, DLP, and LCOS projectors all have very good blacks. The LCOS variants get the deepest.

What do you mean by Lcos variants?

What do you mean by Lcos variants?

Sony and JVC's versions of it. SXRD and D-ILA. The new JVC projectors have deeper blacks than any other digital display other than the Samsung 81, but the JVC does it without any dynamic trickery, it's purely panel contrast.

As far as I am concerned the Kuro's are the ONLY acceptable flat panel display out there. The Samsung comes close but when looking at the Kuro's side by side with the Samsung 81 series it became obvious that the local dimming idea, at least right now, does not perform as well as and consistently as the Kuro's. The Kuro's overall static contrast ratio just seems higher, yes, because of the IM-LED's in the Samsung it will look completely off when in a dark room but while watching demos of objects entering into completely dark backgrounds the Kuro's black levels, of course, stayed the same (which is to say the best out there), while the Samsung 81 immediately looked like the 61-65 series Samsungs out there once even a small section of the screen was occupied by something other than total blackness.

I definitely did something that I nearly regretted, and that was that I bought my PDP-4280HD without having seen the picture on it but I must say after extensively comparing all different types and brands of displays I can say that I am by far the most satisfied by the Kuro that I purchased (what a relief). Though I still believe that there is quite a ways to go with the on/off black levels, even on the Kuro's; we need another jump in black levels about equivalent to what we saw with the Kuro's to start closing in on CRT contrast ratio's (not ANSI of course).

Anyway, I hope that 2008 brings us even closer to closing the gap between digital flat panel tech's and CRT's, LG has already announced the G Platform Plasma's with apparently 30,000:1 contrast ratio's, who knows what might show up this year at CES, all I know is that I can't wait to find out.

Of my 3 sets, black levels are as follows (darkest to lightest):

1. Pio 4280
2. Mits 65831
3. Panny 58PX600u

I definitely did something that I nearly regretted, and that was that I bought my PDP-4280HD without having seen the picture on it but I must say after extensively comparing all different types and brands of displays I can say that I am by far the most satisfied by the Kuro that I purchased (what a relief). Though I still believe that there is quite a ways to go with the on/off black levels, even on the Kuro's; we need another jump in black levels about equivalent to what we saw with the Kuro's to start closing in on CRT contrast ratio's (not ANSI of course).

Yes. The blacks are very good on the Kuro, but there is definitely room for improvment. I think in a couple years we will see better levels than even the Kuro, at least a halving I would guess, if not more, near complete black possibly.

Sony and JVC's versions of it. SXRD and D-ILA. The new JVC projectors have deeper blacks than any other digital display other than the Samsung 81, but the JVC does it without any dynamic trickery, it's purely panel contrast.

I haven't seen the new JVC projector. As far as Sony goes, you must mean their front projectors. I have never been impressed with the blacks on their RPTV's.

Yes. The blacks are very good on the Kuro, but there is definitely room for improvment. I think in a couple years we will see better levels than even the Kuro, at least a halving I would guess, if not more, near complete black possibly.Pioneer has a recent patent (oct 07) claiming a significant reduction in background luminence by selectively resetting each pixel instead of all at once. This makes it possible to actually keep pixels in the off state for an entire frame period (never before possible with plasma).

Pioneer has a recent patent (oct 07) claiming a significant reduction in background luminence by selectively resetting each pixel instead of all at once. This makes it possible to actually keep pixels in the off state for an entire frame period (never before possible with plasma).

That should achieve fantastic results. Did you find any projections on what year they intend to bring it to market?. That sounds like Local Dimming at the individual pixel level, which should banish the Black Crush Grinch which steals shadow details, for ever.

Now they can work on finding a cure for the dreaded flicker flu.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pew6MuONlcE

What do you mean by Lcos variants?

Sony and JVC's versions of it. SXRD and D-ILA. The new JVC projectors have deeper blacks than any other digital display other than the Samsung 81, but the JVC does it without any dynamic trickery, it's purely panel contrast.IMHO, Auditor55 knows exactly what is meant by Lcos variants. SXRD and D-ILA. He's spent plenty of time bashing them. I think he's just playing dumb to raise the subject so he can stir things up and bash them (criticize black levels, go on about green blobs, etc) again in his usual manner. Coincidentally he just popped up again in SXRD thread(s) in the RPTV forum where he's been bashing the SXRD and promoting SED.

I haven't seen the new JVC projector. As far as Sony goes, you must mean their front projectors. I have never been impressed with the blacks on their RPTV's.Ding, ding!

I agree with those that says between plasma and lcd it depends on the room lighting situations. In a brightly light sunlight room LCD backside against a window....the black level on my LCD is much better than in a room that is totally dark. In the day the blacks right at the end of the screen look (are perceived to me) to be just as dark black as the outer screen casing.

Thank you- This is a principle that a lot of people don't realize, including some experts and publications. They are apparently so stuck on foot-lamberts and contrast ratios, they don't always use their eyes to tell them what looks better in real lighting situations. Sure, the manufacturer numbers might be exaggerated, but how could their own instruments be wrong?

I currently own a Loewe Aconda CRT that has respectable black levels. I was recently in the market for a larger display. From reading reviews, I expected PDPs to have far superior for black levels, especially based on measurements quoting black levels, contrast ratios and reviewer opinions. I was a little surprised that some (even very expensive) models touted for black levels really weren't that good, either in a bright showroom or in the moderately lit home theater rooms. It didn't matter how I adjusted the picture settings. The plasma model I intended to buy was somewhat disappointing compared to some other plasma and LCD models, even though it had been highly regarded for black levels.

In a very dark theater room, those measurements and expert opinions may be pretty reasonable for comparison, if taken by the same person or organization in the same manner. In the showroom, or especially a moderately lit home viewing room, those numbers mean little. Some of us do watch noon Football with the shades up and the curtains open and would still like good black levels;-)

What I found seems like common sense. With any reasonable amount of ambient lighting, it was the darkness of the direct view screen's material itself that determined how deep the black levels appeared. If you watch anything during the day with direct or filtered lighting in the room, this is an important factor that the measurements don't consider. When the ISF technician suctions that color analyzer to the surface of the display, the ambient light reflecting from the surface is not the major factor. That's more appropriate for viewing conditions of a much darker room where the light emitted from the display itself is the major factor.

So, models of any technology that have lighter display surfaces or coatings aren't going to have the same "pop" and black levels as those with darker surfaces, at least when viewed in a lighted room. A darker screen material may not help with shadow detail or overall picture quality, but it does help with black levels in a brighter room. It's the same idea as putting a slide projector on a white wall or a top-end front projection system costing 10s of thousands of dollars on a reflective screen. In a dark room, the image is awesome. With moderate ambient lighting, the image is dull. With bright light, it's washed out.

Anyway, if you don't have an ideal, dark viewing room, be sure to adjust the picture settings in the showroom and let your eyes be the final judge. This isn't to tout one technology over another, but just to say that measurements don't always tell the whole story in all lighting conditions.