LCD Motion Blur: Fact and Fiction - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 09:18 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
TheOnion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This is an interesting article that concludes motion blur in LCD's is no longer an issue and the difference between 60hz, 120hz and 240hz is unnoticeable.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2356393,00.asp
TheOnion is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 10:23 AM
Member
 
dave300zx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 158
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
From the article:

"So it's time for both consumers and manufacturers to forget about response time and focus on much more productive and fascinating display technology and marketing issues, such as the upcoming generations of 3D displays."

Forget about response time? Is this guy off his rocker? There's a reason Plasma TVs still sell well. There's also a reason Sharp developed uv2a.

I don't think I'm the only one that can see a considerable difference between a 60hz and a 120hz tv.

I have to disagree with the article. Thanks for sharing.
dave300zx is offline  
post #3 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 11:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
spyboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,083
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Also from the article:

"Motion blur proved to be a non-issue for live video with all of the mid - to - high end LCDs in our tests."

It's been shown that full 240 Hz has less motion blur than 120 with a scanning back light, not to mention 60 Hz LCDs.

Not everyone can afford a full 240 Hz TV. It can make a difference if you watch sports, or action movies.
spyboy is offline  
post #4 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 12:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
walford's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 16,789
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I also do not agree that the report is very accurate since it tested only 2008 model 120Hz systems which are very differnent from the late 2009 120 and 240Hz models and many of these did not even offer frame interpolation they just diplayed the 60 fps frames twiice.
Also if the had done any testing with frame interpolation he would have provided some input on the differnces in the different settings they have available such as "low, medium, high" or their equivalent on the resuting PQ.
walford is offline  
post #5 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 12:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Beeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 1,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyboy View Post

Also from the article:
"Motion blur proved to be a non-issue for live video with all of the mid - to - high end LCDs in our tests."

posted by spyboy:.
It's been shown that full 240 Hz has less motion blur than 120 with a scanning back light, not to mention 60 Hz LCDs.

Shown by whom?

Only if frame interpolation is active (and set to full) on the 240Hz unit, will a motion resolution test equal a 120Hz scanning back light unit.
For example, using the Samsung custom blur setting, as it is lowered from a max. setting of 10, the motion resolution number drops accordingly.
Then the 120Hz unit with scanning back light would have a higher tested line count, even though it's frame interpolation is off.

When a motion resolution test pattern was used by CNET, they stated, "According to our test, the (Toshiba) 46SV670U delivered comparable motion resolution to the other (actual) 240Hz models we've reviewed (Sony, Samsung), coming in at between 900 and 1,000 lines,....."

A lot of people don't understand that with all frame interpolation off, a 240Hz set changes to a new frame at the same rate as a 60Hz unit with most common sources of 60i and 30p. (which is OTA TV, satellite, cable and SD DVD)

The article is referring to real world viewing where it is a "non-issue". Very few viewers are entertained by a test pattern for very long.
CNET concurred with the article by stating, "The effects of the 240Hz refresh rate on the (Samsung) LNB750 were similar to what we saw on the Sony models--in other words, difficult to discern (at best) when watching regular program material, but providing a noticeable reduction in blurring during test patterns."

During moving text, such as a stock ticker, the slight blur reduction is noticeable to me.

Furthermore, many people confuse motion blocking from encoder compression (on the input source), with motion blur.
Beeper is offline  
post #6 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 12:51 PM
Advanced Member
 
MitsuDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 685
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have a Mitsubishi 46" LCD and a Toshiba 32" LCD...both are 60 Hz sets...I don't see motion blur on either one.

Just my .02...YMMV...
MitsuDude is offline  
post #7 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 01:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pcrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,162
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have been looking at the newer LCD's after having not paid much attention for about a year. The 240hz LCD's look like ARSE IMHO as the movements are NOT natural looking.

LAME.
pcrx is offline  
post #8 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 01:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
winston9332's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,821
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Motion is not as good as plasma. Even on my Samsung LED with 120hz and 4ms response time, motion is not as fluid as that on my pioneer kuro. It's even worse on my 60hz Samsung LN40a550 in a sparebedroom. A lot of it also has to do with size. There is no perceptible motion blur on most small lcds.
winston9332 is offline  
post #9 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 02:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Beeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 1,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by winston9332 View Post

Even on my Samsung LED with 120hz and 4ms response time, motion is not as fluid as that on my pioneer kuro. It's even worse on my 60hz Samsung LN40a550 in a sparebedroom. A lot of it also has to do with size. There is no perceptible motion blur on most small lcds.

It's not the size, it's the distance.
Beeper is offline  
post #10 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 02:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
peterlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 615
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave300zx View Post

From the article:

"So it's time for both consumers and manufacturers to forget about response time and focus on much more productive and fascinating display technology and marketing issues, such as the upcoming generations of 3D displays."

Forget about response time? Is this guy off his rocker?

Here's why the article says response time as defined and spec'ed by manufacturers is a meaningless number that tells you nothing about the set's ability to minimize motion blur:

Quote:


LCD motion blur is generally evaluated with an industry-standard specification called response time. Unfortunately, it's not a particularly good indicator for real picture blur because it measures the time a pixel needs to go from black to peak-intensity white and then back again. But most picture transitions involve much smaller and more subtle shades of gray-to-gray transitions, which can take considerably longer to complete. On the other hand, blurring is much harder to detect visually when there are subtle gray-to-gray transitions because the initial and final states are so similar. But it's even more complicated than that because every pixel is actually made up of independent red, green, and blue subpixels that have their own separate intensities, frame-to-frame transitions, and times. So visual blur within a picture that has some motion is a fairly complex and nebulous phenomenon.

....

Because the published specifications can have a considerable impact on sales, it is often more important for a manufacturer to reduce the black–to–peak white–to–black response time value rather than improving the visually more important gray-to-gray transitions or reducing the motion artifacts that result from electronically pushing the response time. As a result, the LCD display with the fastest response time specification may not have the smallest visual blur. This was the case in our tests.

Do you have something to contradict or undermine this finding?

Quote:


There's a reason Plasma TVs still sell well.

90% of overall flat panel sales are LCD. In the small size segments, you can't buy plasma sets anymore. The main reason plasma still sells well in the larger sizes is the same reason why LCD dominates in the lower sizes: cost. A 58" plasma for $2200 or a 55" LCD for $4000?

Quote:


There's also a reason Sharp developed uv2a.

It's called marketing.

Quote:


I don't think I'm the only one that can see a considerable difference between a 60hz and a 120hz tv.

Saying "I disagree" is not a convincing refutation of the study's findings. This study was organized by a prominent firm that specializes in display technologies and testing was performed under controlled conditions over months of viewing a wide variety of material. If you can point to flaws in the methodology or implementation, feel free to share. I find this study very persuasive. Note that the study does say that motion blur is viewable with moving still images:

Quote:


The closest thing to moving photographs are the news and stock tickers on some television stations, and the vertical title rolls at the end of most movies. Television stations fine-tune their tickers to minimize the appearance of motion blur and artifacts in consumer TVs, a high percentage of which are now LCDs.

But when it comes to moving video, which is what 99.9999% of programming that's actually watched:

Quote:


Most of the live video sources we chose were sports-based because they have lots of motion and most have brightly colored uniforms and background content. We recorded them on an all-digital high-definition Tivo from full-bandwidth over-the-air ATSC broadcast television. It directly records the original broadcast MPEG data stream without any processing or degradation. Note that satellite and cable video sources have reduced signal bandwidth that introduces additional motion artifacts because of the extra compression needed whenever there is motion in the picture. We also didn't use any film-based content, because it's shot at 24 fps and requires considerably more interpolation and motion processing than video cameras with 60 fields per second.

Included were hours of recorded football, basketball, hockey, skiing, and golf. Most of these are daytime or brightly lit events. For darker content we used nighttime NASCAR racing; indoor gymnastics and ice skating; the television show Dancing with the Stars; and Over America, a 90-minute Blu-ray video (shot from a helicopter) that contains a lot of challenging, high-speed motion content against both daytime and nighttime scenery. With these choices of videos we were using very aggressive content for detecting motion blur.

One important issue for live videos, as opposed to the computer-generated moving photographs and test patterns we saw earlier, is that they are all shot from video cameras under varying conditions and may have unknown degrees of video processing. That can result in source video that is blurred with varied artifacts. We certainly didn't want to blame an LCD for a blurred or defective picture when the cause was in the source. In order to carefully monitor the quality of the source video we used the Sony Trinitron Professional HD Broadcast Studio Monitor, which did not have any visible motion blur or artifacts (except for barely visible tiny phosphor trails seen only in fast-moving test patterns). Whenever there was questionable content we carefully evaluated it on the Studio Monitor.

The shoot-out was fully operational for several months, so we had lots of time to study and compare all the effects, and over that period of time we had several dozen trained observers—including industry experts, manufacturers, engineers, reviewers, journalists, and ISF instructors—evaluate the effects themselves.

All the HDTVs were fed identical simultaneous digital video from the content list above using the digital Tivo or Blu-ray player. If any viewer claimed to detect motion blur on any HDTV we would repeatedly press the eight-second TiVo backup button and watch the sequence over and over again on all of the units (including the Studio Monitor) until we fully understood exactly what was happening on each. We did the same thing with the Blu-ray player and its content.

The participants' conclusions were consistent across the board and will likely surprise most people: There was essentially no visually detectable motion blur on any of the LCD HDTVs, regardless of whether they had 60- or 120-Hz refresh rates, strobed LED backlighting, or advanced motion enhancement processing. When viewers thought they saw motion blur, with only a handful of minor exceptions, the blur was either in the source video or a temporary visual illusion that disappeared when we reviewed the segments in question. Unlike the moving test patterns and moving photographs, the eye is unable to detect the blur in live video because the images are much more dynamic and complex, and undoubtedly because of the way the brain processes and extracts essential information from visual images.

peterlee is offline  
post #11 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 02:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
primetimeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 3,656
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by MitsuDude View Post

I have a Mitsubishi 46" LCD and a Toshiba 32" LCD...both are 60 Hz sets...I don't see motion blur on either one.

Just my .02...YMMV...

Consider yourself lucky.
primetimeguy is offline  
post #12 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 02:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
spyboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,083
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by winston9332 View Post

Motion is not as good as plasma. Even on my Samsung LED with 120hz and 4ms response time, motion is not as fluid as that on my pioneer kuro. It's even worse on my 60hz Samsung LN40a550 in a sparebedroom. A lot of it also has to do with size. There is no perceptible motion blur on most small lcds.

This poster has it correct. If I had the slightest interest in watching sports or action movies on a little 32 inch screen, I wouldn't expect much either way.

But since I am only interested in the largest of panels (for my purposes 65 inches), motion blur is a real issue.

There are several sources of information about motion blur.

To those of you who can't see the difference, that's just great.

But to those who know what to look for, a full 240 Hz implemented correctly can make a visible difference with sports and action movies.
spyboy is offline  
post #13 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 02:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
peterlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 615
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyboy View Post

But to those who know what to look for, a full 240 Hz implemented correctly can make a visible difference with sports and action movies.

The study participants included "industry experts, manufacturers, engineers, reviewers, journalists, and ISF instructors," in other words, people who design, build, review and calibrate this stuff for a living. That sounds like a pretty good group of people who "know what to look for" but what do they know. If there's a comparable controlled study that provides evidence motion blur is a real, detectable problem for routine, real world programming, please direct us to it. In the meantime, feel free to continue to stick your head in the sand.
peterlee is offline  
post #14 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 02:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
spyboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,083
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 40
In the words of the original poster, "motion blur is NO LONGER AN ISSUE". That is quite different than saying that motion blur isn't visible...and doesn't exist on many panels. I already noted that the article talks about mid-to-high end panels.

Please feel free to construe the article any way that suits you.

Fact is motion blur is still out there.
spyboy is offline  
post #15 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 02:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sharkcohen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
The article says nothing about eye tracking or the concept of sample-and-hold.

Back off man, I'm a scientist.
sharkcohen is offline  
post #16 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 02:57 PM
Advanced Member
 
peterlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 615
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyboy View Post

In the words of the original poster, "motion blur is NO LONGER AN ISSUE". That is quite different than saying that motion blur isn't visible...and doesn't exist on many panels. I already noted that the article talks about mid-to-high end panels.

Please feel free to construe the article any way that suits you.

Fact is motion blur is still out there.

By that measure, burn in is still out there for plasma since there are tens of thousands of older plasma sets that are prone to it.

And to write "It's been shown that full 240 Hz has less motion blur than 120 with a scanning back light, not to mention 60 Hz LCDs" does not make it evidence. It's an assertion and the certainty and conviction that you assert it does not make it anything more. Shown where? Anecdotal testimonials on internet forums? This DisplayMate study provides evidence of its conclusion.
peterlee is offline  
post #17 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 03:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Beeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 1,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkcohen View Post

The article says nothing about eye tracking or the concept of sample-and-hold.

Which would make more of a difference on a larger screen or lower resolution, unless the viewing distance was increased.

I didn't catch if the screen sizes were mentioned in the article.
Beeper is offline  
post #18 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 03:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Servicetech571's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,691
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by MitsuDude View Post

I have a Mitsubishi 46" LCD and a Toshiba 32" LCD...both are 60 Hz sets...I don't see motion blur on either one.

Just my .02...YMMV...

Add my 60hz LG to the sets with no motion blur.
I still stick by get the biggest screen you can afford in a name brand TV. A larger size is immediately noticeable, some of the picture improvement technologies may require Blu-ray to discern the difference.
Servicetech571 is offline  
post #19 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 03:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
peterlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 615
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeper View Post

I didn't catch if the screen sizes were mentioned in the article.


The size and models for 9 of the 11 LCD panels are given on page 2:

Quote:


The HDTVs included models from the top-tier brands of LG, Samsung, Sharp, and Sony—from midrange to top-of-the-line models. All of the units were from the 2008 model year. Differences between the 2008 and 2009 models are primarily in their marketing hype. For this article we had three flagship top-of-the line LCD models from Samsung (LN-T5281F), Sharp (LC-52D92U) and Sony (KDL-52XBR4). By studying the top-of-the-line models from the market leaders we were assured of examining the state-of-the-art for each display technology and each manufacturer. The consumer midline models included LG (42LG50), Samsung (LN40A550P3F), and Sony (KDL-40V3000). The remaining two LCD units were consumer HDTVs but not commercially available models.

peterlee is offline  
post #20 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 03:38 PM
Advanced Member
 
Ozymandis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Thurmont, Maryland
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I can absolutely see motion blur coming from a plasma or especially a CRT. It is still an issue for me.
Ozymandis is offline  
post #21 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 03:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Beeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 1,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandis View Post

I can absolutely see motion blur coming from a plasma or especially a CRT. It is still an issue for me.

jokin' or smokin'.
Beeper is offline  
post #22 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 04:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
Ozymandis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Thurmont, Maryland
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeper View Post

jokin' or smokin'.

Everyone has different vision. Some people don't see the phosphor lag in plasmas, or DLP rainbows either.
Ozymandis is offline  
post #23 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 04:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pcrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,162
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I used to see DLP rainbows in the older DLP sets and PJ's. After they improved them some the effect whent away.

The jaggy motion of the 240hz and some of the 120hz LCD's kinda reminds me of that DLP rainbow effect - once you start to realize it is there all you can do is go "WTF!?"

pcrx is offline  
post #24 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 04:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
walford's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 16,789
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Is it possible that there is some confusion here by discusing motion blur not being dependent on refreshing a 60FPS content twice or 4 times a second on a 120 or 240Hz display on current fast response time LCD dispaly sand smother motion casued by interpoalting and creating new frames on a 120Hz or 240 Hz displays. The comment in one of the above posts about the stick ticker moving much smother appears to be a function of frame interpolatiion and not for LCD panel response time.
walford is offline  
post #25 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 05:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Beeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 1,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by walford View Post

Is it possible that there is some confusion here by discusing motion blur not being dependent on refreshing a 60FPS content twice or 4 times a second on a 120 or 240Hz display on current fast response time LCD dispaly sand smother motion casued by interpoalting and creating new frames on a 120Hz or 240 Hz displays. The comment in one of the above posts about the stick ticker moving much smother appears to be a function of frame interpolatiion and not for LCD panel response time.

My comment on the stock ticker being less blurry (not smoother) was without frame interpolation active on a scanning back light set vs. the scanning feature off.

A scanning back light effectively shortens the perceived pixel response time to the retina by "hiding" some of that time.
It also resets the image to your retina to reduce motion blur caused by sample and hold. Best of both worlds.
Beeper is offline  
post #26 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 05:04 PM
Advanced Member
 
HD_Lantern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 551
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
On fast moving scenes, you can still see blur on an LCD, even at 240. This is particularly so the larger the screen gets. If motion is a concern, I'd go with a plasma.
HD_Lantern is offline  
post #27 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 05:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Beeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 1,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by HD_Lantern View Post

On fast moving scenes, you can still see blur on an LCD, even at 240. This is particularly so the larger the screen gets. If motion is a concern, I'd go with a plasma.

The question still is, was the blur on the source? And how did you determine it was definitely introduced by the TV?

That article addressed observing blur and being able to confirm on a CRT that in most cases the source was the culprit.
Especially if the source is over compressed OTA or cable/satellite.
Beeper is offline  
post #28 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 05:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
HD_Lantern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 551
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeper View Post

The question still is, was the blur on the source? And how did you determine it was definitely introduced by the TV?

That article addressed observing blur and being able to confirm on a CRT that in most cases the source was the culprit.
Especially if the source is over compressed OTA or cable/satellite.

Based on my eyes, I see blurring on a LCD even with a high quality blu-ray source. Try watching say, the Fast and Furious movies on a 50+ inch LCD versus a similar sized Plasma. I'd think that most people will notice blurring on the LCD.
HD_Lantern is offline  
post #29 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 05:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
Ralarcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HD_Lantern View Post

Based on my eyes, I see blurring on a LCD even with a high quality blu-ray source. Try watching say, the Fast and Furious movies on a 50+ inch LCD versus a similar sized Plasma. I'd think that most people will notice blurring on the LCD.

Opinion can blur fact , even in the face of a Double Blinded Placebo Controlled Study. People still believe that ,Vitamin C ,cures the common Cold. You will see, with your eyes ,that which your mind believes, no matter if it is real or not.

Cheers.
Ralarcon is offline  
post #30 of 181 Old 12-03-2009, 05:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Beeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: WI
Posts: 1,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralarcon View Post

You will see, with your eyes ,that which your mind believes, no matter if it is real or not.

Cheers.

I still see the Victoria Secret Fashion Show on every channel tonight.
Beeper is offline  
Reply LCD Flat Panel Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off