Official 2013 Sony W802A series LED TVs (KDL-xxW802A) --- 47" and 55" --- Owner's Thread - Page 22 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #631 of 1202 Old 07-24-2013, 11:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
borf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sehej Rana View Post

i would be concerned about issues like clouding and screen uniformity..

Honestly I was disappointed with uniformity compared to the Samsung F8000 in bestbuy.
Very dirty. Bjorn's stays away from all-white screens, so it was fine. That's all one can do.
borf is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #632 of 1202 Old 07-25-2013, 07:29 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,599
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked: 867
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

I agree with the car analogy.. 8ms lag IS possible if the "production line" is short. We don't know do we?
I was arguing this: "the fastest that input port can receive is 60Hz" - which seems to limit lag to 16ms.
Maybe I misunderstood what you were saying.

 

Well, first, before anyone hops on this trivial detail here: when I talk about the input port speed, I'm talking about what is accepted as video feed to it and not the "undocumented" higher rates that some TVs can handle (when driven by a PC, for instance).

 

But no, you've misunderstood something.  Lag is defined as the amount of time between a signal sent to the TV and the TV actually displaying it.  That lag can be much longer than the time between input frames, as in the case of the car wash.  The fastest that car wash can handle is 12/hour (5 minutes between each).  But the lag is 1 hour long.  There's no issue the car wash input outracing the car wash output.  Nor with the input outracing the TV's ability to output.

 

You'll routinely see motion handling of some TVs push the lag into the 60's or higher.  That's just a more complicated car wash.  Interpolation is where the analogy to cars breaks down.  Basically it's like doubling each car mid stream and outputting them 2 1/2 minutes apart.


Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Unless, of course, it's to keep someone from creating a phone video in portrait mode, in which case it's a pretty good first step. Portrait mooks: KNOCK IT OFF.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #633 of 1202 Old 07-25-2013, 08:22 AM
Senior Member
 
gatorboi352's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sehej Rana View Post

The Sony's black levels are now decent, whereas the HX750's could only be described as "crappy." The W802A only achieves those deeper black levels when you activate the "Adv. Contrast Enhancer" setting, which seems to turn on the frame dimming feature. We usually avoid turning on such extras since they usually provide unnatural contrast, but here it's well executed and significantly improves black levels. Shadow detail was also very good, with the dimming not leading to crushing on even the darkest scenes.

http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/sony-kdl-47w802a/4505-6482_7-35661317-2.html

Conflicting reports i would say. More importantly i would be concerned about issues like clouding and screen uniformity. Black levels should be pleasing to my eyes not some instrument. seeing is believing.

I don't get that quote from the CNET review at all. The exact same argument can be said for the 750. I have a 750 with the Adv. Contrast Enhancer activated and I too can say " it's well executed and significantly improves black levels."
gatorboi352 is offline  
post #634 of 1202 Old 07-25-2013, 08:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
borf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

But no, you've misunderstood something. That lag can be much longer than the time between input frames, as in the case of the car wash.

Your car analogy is brilliant. My 240Hz scenario was total crap.The lag CAN go on for days. It is independent of input/output rate. I only used it to show that 8ms IS possible. Do you think so?

I was referring to pixel response time in the last post, not confusing it with input lag. Sony used to be the worst in this area (motion resolution), now they are the best with black frame insertion. I find it interesting.
borf is offline  
post #635 of 1202 Old 07-25-2013, 10:20 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,599
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked: 867
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

But no, you've misunderstood something. That lag can be much longer than the time between input frames, as in the case of the car wash.

Your car analogy is brilliant. My 240Hz scenario was total crap.The lag CAN go on for days. It is independent of input/output rate. I only used it to show that 8ms IS possible. Do you think so?

I was referring to pixel response time in the last post, not confusing it with input lag. Sony used to be the worst in this area (motion resolution), now they are the best with black frame insertion. I find it interesting.

 

Thanks for the compliment on my analogy.

 

Motion resolution is hugely affected by the sample-and-hold smearing on the retina.  It's a very complicated set of algorithms now involving many variables including, but not limited to:

  • duty cycle
  • eye motion
  • pulse technology
  • etc.

 

I'm not so sure on the 8ms.  1/120th of a second?  I almost doubt it, but can't completely form why because I don't know 1. what the TV's are fully doing in detail (they keep that @#$% a secret), and 2. what the leo bodnar device is doing (I mean precisely).  Especially since there were a few times that I think FourWude (from displaylag.com) found a 0ms return from it.  Eeeeeeeek.  Pretty soon the thing will say -60000 ms and you'll have a TV that displays your First Person Shooter's motion a minute before you make it.

 

BTW, if you haven't been following the motion blur thread, you really should.  Sorry, I don't remember if I saw you there or not.  You'd love Mark Rejhon's most recent blur example.  It's very cool.


Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Unless, of course, it's to keep someone from creating a phone video in portrait mode, in which case it's a pretty good first step. Portrait mooks: KNOCK IT OFF.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #636 of 1202 Old 07-25-2013, 05:05 PM
Newbie
 
jlout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Greece
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi,

I'm about to buy the 47w805 and wanted to know if it will make a PQ difference from LG 42lm660s i currently have.

42lm660s is a pretty descent TV but i've never really loved it smile.gif

It just seems so dull and boring compared to my previous sammy le40a786r.

I saw w805 at a store and really liked it because of the sammy like "pop" and the passive 3d which is a must for me.

So, do you think it would make a difference compared to lm660s?

Thank you
jlout is offline  
post #637 of 1202 Old 07-25-2013, 09:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
borf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
I'm following Mark's posts like you. He is full of information.
borf is offline  
post #638 of 1202 Old 07-27-2013, 10:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

I'm not so sure on the 8ms.  1/120th of a second?  I almost doubt it, but can't completely form why because I don't know 1. what the TV's are fully doing in detail (they keep that @#$% a secret), and 2. what the leo bodnar device is doing (I mean precisely).  Especially since there were a few times that I think FourWude (from displaylag.com) found a 0ms return from it.  Eeeeeeeek.
That's simply because Leo Bodnar is essentially a photodiode circuit. It times a flash on the screen and the photodiode measures it. Very simple. I've created what is essentially an Arduino equivalent, but using an external computer program to display data, rather than extra embedded electronics.

The falses occur because sometimes a flash is detected by other sources (e.g. motion interpolation artifacts, strange scanning backlight behavior, ambient light such as flickering office lights). I've had similar falses with my custom-built Arduino photodiode-based input lag tester. External flashing lights interfere a lot, and sometimes there's even flicker in the blacks (because of a PWM-dimmed backlight, and LCD blacks aren't perfectly black).
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

I'm not so sure on the 8ms.  1/120th of a second?
It's possible on TN LCD computer monitors to real-time scanout the pixels as they come in from the video cable, with no full frame buffering. I've measured less than 4ms input lag (differential to CRT) on my 120Hz computer monitors, relative to a 120Hz CRT. It's not as common on LCD HDTV's to be able to have less than 1 frame of input lag, but they do exist (few and far in between).

The input lag measurement of Leo Bodnar is quite simple and obvious how it works (e.g. I know how it works without needing to open up the Leo device, as I have also created an Arduino-driven equivalent electronic circuit) -- the problem with input lag measurement standardization is that input lag is different for top edge, center, and bottom edge of the screen, due to scanout. There are pros/cons for each number.

Leo Bodnar input lag tester uses three flashing squares:
Top -- smallest input lag -- number most directly comparable to SMTT; input lag difference to CRT.
Center -- average input lag -- the fairest number, as most people stare at center of screen.
Bottom -- largest input lag -- the worst-case number

CRT's have zero lag (from video input) for top edge of the screen. But if you measure by the middle of the screen (where people actually stare; e.g. videogame crosshairs), they do not exactly have "zero" input lag from a video game perspective (end-to-end) because of the finite-time scanout gradually from top-to-bottom. But that's not solely the display's fault, but also the finite-speed delivery of video frames over a video signal cable. That's why input lag is less on a 120Hz CRT than a 60Hz CRT -- 120Hz frames are delivered "quicker" over the cable.

Useful links of top-to-bottom scanout behaviour:
-- High speed video of CRT versus LCD
-- High speed video of LCD
-- High speed video of LightBoost
As you can see, input lag for top edge is obviously lower, due to the top-to-bottom scanout.
By owning a Leo Bodnar, seeing different numbers for top/center/bottom, and by understanding the high speed videos, it instantly becomes obvious how the Leo Bodnar device works to an engineering-minded person.

The problem is different input lag measurement sites often choose an inconsistent standardization. So you're seeing numbers that are several milliseconds apart. Within the next few months (by end of 2013), I will be co-authorizing a large input lag article, since I've developed a new input lag tester that works at any refresh rate (including 120Hz), which I will launch later this year. Keep an eye on Blur Busters Blog this year for future input lag tester developments.

Some displays also strobe-all-at-once. For example, strobe backlights such as LightBoost or Sony Motionflow Impulse flash their backlight all at once on a fully refreshed frame (no top-to-bottom scanout). So you don't get consistent input lag differentials relative to the signal. The input lag differential at the top edge is bigger than the input lag differential.

Blur Busters Blog believes in standardizing input lag measurements to centre of the screen
(1) It typically matches the average input lag
(2) It is more independent of display image presentation differences (e.g. top-to-bottom scanouts, bottom-to-top scanouts, all-at-once strobe backlights, etc).
(3) People stare at center of screen more often (including in most videogames -- e.g. crosshairs).

Standardizing input lag measurements to the center of the screen, does, however mean, CRT's would now be assigned a finite input lag (rather than be 0ms), but it more accurately accomodates for the known fact that 120Hz CRT's have less input lag than 60Hz CRT's, because now we're essentially also including halftime of the video frame delivery over the cable, too (which happens to match average).

Alternatively, two different input lag measurements should be taken: "relative to CRT" (top-edge measurement/SMTT test) and "average / centre" (center measurement), and both numbers published for all displays.

P.S. My motion tests that people are currently talking about, is the UFO tests at www.testufo.com -- change the test using top selector -- also make sure you run these motion tests in a supported browser.
P.P.S. There is also an existing Sony Motionflow Impulse article on Blur Busters, too.
tgm1024 likes this.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #639 of 1202 Old 07-27-2013, 11:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Hey UFO, your name is the same name as my motion test.
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

It does add flicker, but the mode is amazing. Literally ZERO blur its incredible. I think for some games it is going to be worth it for sure.
Can you do me a big favour, connect a fast laptop (GPU-accelerated) to your Sony HDTV and run www.testufo.com/#test=mprt (in Google Chrome or another supported browser) with Sony's Motionflow Impusle? Speed up/slow down the scrolling until it looks like a checkerboard.

If this is too fast for you, try using this as a starting base:
www.testufo.com/#test=mprt&size=12&thickness=6&ppf=9

Then start speeding up "Pixels Per Frame" until it blends into a perfect checkerboard (black squares exactly as big as white squares) during Sony Motionflow Impulse. Once you get the perfect checkerboard, please report back your MPRT and MER numbers. If you're very enterprising, please do this test separately for White on Black Background, and then Black on White background.

This is the world's first web-based MPRT test (Motion Picture Response Time).

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #640 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 03:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
*UFO*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon View Post

Hey UFO, your name is the same name as my motion test.
Can you do me a big favour, connect a fast laptop (GPU-accelerated) to your Sony HDTV and run www.testufo.com/#test=mprt (in Google Chrome or another supported browser) with Sony's Motionflow Impusle? Speed up/slow down the scrolling until it looks like a checkerboard.

If this is too fast for you, try using this as a starting base:
www.testufo.com/#test=mprt&size=12&thickness=6&ppf=9

Then start speeding up "Pixels Per Frame" until it blends into a perfect checkerboard (black squares exactly as big as white squares) during Sony Motionflow Impulse. Once you get the perfect checkerboard, please report back your MPRT and MER numbers. If you're very enterprising, please do this test separately for White on Black Background, and then Black on White background.

This is the world's first web-based MPRT test (Motion Picture Response Time).

Ok so I dont know exactly what my findings mean, but with impulse mode off i have to set it to 11 and it says 16.7 mrpt. Now when I switch impulse mode on, it does not matter how fast I make it go, it wont make a checker pattern. It starts to get so fast its impossible to track your eyes with the UFO, but you can still clearly see the vertical white lines. This is on a w900a, but the impulse mode seems to look the same as it did on the w802a when I had it.
*UFO* is offline  
post #641 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 08:53 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,599
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked: 867
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon View Post

Hey UFO, your name is the same name as my motion test.
Can you do me a big favour, connect a fast laptop (GPU-accelerated) to your Sony HDTV and run www.testufo.com/#test=mprt (in Google Chrome or another supported browser) with Sony's Motionflow Impusle? Speed up/slow down the scrolling until it looks like a checkerboard.

If this is too fast for you, try using this as a starting base:
www.testufo.com/#test=mprt&size=12&thickness=6&ppf=9

Then start speeding up "Pixels Per Frame" until it blends into a perfect checkerboard (black squares exactly as big as white squares) during Sony Motionflow Impulse. Once you get the perfect checkerboard, please report back your MPRT and MER numbers. If you're very enterprising, please do this test separately for White on Black Background, and then Black on White background.

This is the world's first web-based MPRT test (Motion Picture Response Time).

Ok so I dont know exactly what my findings mean, but with impulse mode off i have to set it to 11 and it says 16.7 mrpt. Now when I switch impulse mode on, it does not matter how fast I make it go, it wont make a checker pattern.

 

Which makes sense, or at least is good news.  It's pulsing ideally.

 

By the way Mark, regarding lag timing, in the CRT case that you're talking about, the vertical blanking period is substantial.  I (and all graphics engineers actually) used to use this time (triggered by interrupt) to transfer image data to the raster to prevent flicker.  Double-buffering approaches do that behind your back all the time.  The top to bottom scan time is not as it is for digital devices: the device is displaying as it receives.

 

In the case of an LCD though, the top to bottom scan time is exceedingly and unpredictably fast.  I looked quickly, probably too quickly, through your links, and didn't see an average timing for it---nor would I expect there to be one that is of any value.  But there's something more too: LCD doesn't strictly *need* that scanning mechanism.  Unlike analog CRT, the image data is always 100% present at the point the LCD decides to do anything with it, correct?  So displays are free to play games with how the LCD "fetches" that information and displays, no?


Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Unless, of course, it's to keep someone from creating a phone video in portrait mode, in which case it's a pretty good first step. Portrait mooks: KNOCK IT OFF.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #642 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 06:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

Ok so I dont know exactly what my findings mean, but with impulse mode off i have to set it to 11 and it says 16.7 mrpt.
This is normal at 60Hz for sample-and-hold, and demonstrates that the test is working correctly in the non-Impulse mode.
Quote:
Now when I switch impulse mode on, it does not matter how fast I make it go, it wont make a checker pattern. It starts to get so fast its impossible to track your eyes with the UFO, but you can still clearly see the vertical white lines. This is on a w900a, but the impulse mode seems to look the same as it did on the w802a when I had it.
That's excellent news. Your Sony Motionflow Impulse is behaving more like a CRT than an LCD. The test is not designed to measure MPRT's on a CRT.

____

Keep an eye on upcoming TestUFO additions. I am developing a new MPRT test pattern that is capable of measuring strobed LCD displays (including LightBoost). I have developed an upcoming test pattern that allows me to accurately measure MPRT's of strobe-backlight LCD's all the way down to about ~0.5ms to 1.0ms (with 10-20% error margin) -- without needing to use an oscillscope or pursuit camera.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #643 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 07:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

In the case of an LCD though, the top to bottom scan time is exceedingly and unpredictably fast.
Depends on the LCD.
- Some LCD's do a top-to-bottom scan in real time (same speed as CRT)
- Some LCD's buffer and then do a multiscan
- Some LCD's partially buffer (serially buffer the digital data) and scanout in an accelerated fashion (e.g. refresh a frame in 1/240sec)

Most LCD's do a top-to-bottom scan in one fashion or another, and I own a Casio high speed camera. You can get cheap 1000fps cameras for as low as $200 off eBay. I have created several high speed videos:

High Speed Video of a 2007 LCD Refresh Pattern:

.
High Speed Video of a 2012 LightBoost LCD Refresh Pattern:

.
Instructions For Creating High Speed Video of LCD Refresh

1. Purchase a cheap high speed camera, ~$180 to $500. A 480fps+ camera is ideal (e.g. Casio Exilim EX-ZR200, EX-FC200S, EX-F1, Fuji HS10, Nikon 1 J1); a 240fps camera is better than nothing (e.g. GoPro Hero 3)
2. Load TestUFO's flicker test pattern: www.testufo.com/#test=flicker&height=-1 [CAUTION: do not click link if epileptic]
3. Point camera and record the flicker in high speed video.
4. Play back the flicker in ultra-slow replay.

You can do this on HDTV's, including LCD and plasmas. It's rather interesting comparing the refresh patterns, and comparing the video to subjectively-measured / objectively-measured motion blur. I believe that I am the world's first blogger to take advantage of high speed video during display testing.

----

This is how I created the YouTube high speed video of LCD refreshes.
This technique is also useful for capturing the refresh patterns of strobed/scanning backlights, and also for accurately predicting the motion-blur-eliminating-efficiency of a specific strobed/scanning backlight. Interpolation-free backlight-based motion blur elimination with longer successful dark duty cycles have actually turned out to be remarkably accurate predictors of better motion resolution for full-strobe backlights. (e.g. Lightboost & Motionflow Impulse have a very distinct long dark frame, and both also happen to have the world's best LCD motion clarity for their specific display size)
Quote:
I looked quickly, probably too quickly, through your links, and didn't see an average timing for it---nor would I expect there to be one that is of any value.  But there's something more too: LCD doesn't strictly *need* that scanning mechanism.  Unlike analog CRT, the image data is always 100% present at the point the LCD decides to do anything with it, correct?  So displays are free to play games with how the LCD "fetches" that information and displays, no?
Yes, sometimes. But not always. There are conflicting goals, such as input lag.

If you want to minimize input lag, one must immediately sequentially display the image raster-style. The digital data is pushed over the DVI cable in a sequential raster fashion. To display it differently from a sequential CRT-style scan, you need to buffer the frame, and that adds input lag. The fastest LCD's have less than one frame of input lag; I have seen computer gaming TN LCD monitors that does a scanout that is only 2 ms* delayed relative to a CRT (*lag measurement method via CRT differential; not lag measurement method via screen centre). The only way to do this is via real-time top-to-bottom scanout. My VG278H does this too, as shown in the high speed video.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #644 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 07:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PENDRAG0ON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,477
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 558
Now I really want to pick up a 55w802a, all this talk has me very excited. I noticed that impulse mode has more lag when tested, could the flicker be throwing off the readings? If I can get an LCD with Plasma like motion and low lag I would be thrilled.

PSN - Pendragoongp
NNID - Pendragoon
Include your AVS username in the friend request.
PENDRAG0ON is offline  
post #645 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 07:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
*UFO*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

Now I really want to pick up a 55w802a, all this talk has me very excited. I noticed that impulse mode has more lag when tested, could the flicker be throwing off the readings? If I can get an LCD with Plasma like motion and low lag I would be thrilled.

I can tell you that with impulse mode on it feels just as fast when it is off and I'm very sensitive to input lag. The only thing it adds is amazing smoothness like ive never seen or felt before. The Leo Bodnar device doubles the true input lag of plasmas, so it may be doing the same thing with w802a/w900a because the flicker is very similar to plasma flicker.
*UFO* is offline  
post #646 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 07:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

Now I really want to pick up a 55w802a, all this talk has me very excited. I noticed that impulse mode has more lag when tested, could the flicker be throwing off the readings? If I can get an LCD with Plasma like motion and low lag I would be thrilled.
According to HDTVtest, the Impulse mode is measured to have 30ms of input lag, but that's not too bad -- it's far less than motion interpolation. It's quite usable for things like 60fps arcade racing and 60fps jet simulators, where tiny input lag just simply feels like vehicle handling. If you turn off Impulse mode, the input lag is 16ms (just one frame).

The lack of motion blur can make 60fps video gaming more fun, despite the extra frame of lag, because the lack of motion blur can make it easier to notice things during fast panning motions. For example, in a first-person-shooter, try circle strafing on a CRT and on LCD. It's hard to do on LCD unless it's impulse-driven (Lightboost or Motionflow Impulse). This can improve reaction times to the point where it exceeds the input lag caused by the strobing. Many console games only do 30fps, which does not benefit as much from strobing as 60fps does. So you will want to try a HTPC with a good GPU, to witness the stunning motion clarity of 1080p 60fps gaming with Motionflow Impulse. Some new consoles (e.g. PS4 and Xbox One) will do 60fps gaming more often than 30fps gaming, so it's also another factor worth paying attention to.

I've measured that LightBoost just adds +4ms of input lag on average, a lot less than Motionflow Impulse. So there can be further improvements down the line. That said, I think Sony's doing a relatively good job with Motionflow Impulse, if you don't mind the 60Hz flicker. (Just make sure you disable ambient light sensor to fix some of the dimness of Impulse).

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #647 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 07:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

The Leo Bodnar device doubles the true input lag of plasmas, so it may be doing the same thing with w802a/w900a because the flicker is very similar to plasma flicker.
Actually, that's not quite accurate.
It is not the Leo Bodnar device. It's the delay caused by all-at-once strobing (e.g. buffering, or refreshing in the dark, then flashing all at once). This is what causes the input lag delay. I've actually used my high speed camera & my prototype Blur Busters Input Lag Tester.

The input lag caused by strobing is because instead of top-to-bottom scanning, you now have all-at-once strobing.
See this high-speed video:

As you can see in this high speed video --
With strobing turned off (LightBoost OFF), you will see that the input lag of the top edge of screen is faster than the input lag of the bottom edge of the screen. That's because of the top-to-bottom scanout. (Video is output over a video cable in a top-to-botton scanning fashion -- whether it's Component, VGA, DVI, HDMI, or DisplayPort)

But with strobe backlights, the LCD is refreshed in total darkness, and then the backlight is flashed all at once.
Basically, the LCD is refreshing top-to-bottom in total darkness, and then the backlight is strobed all at once.
What this means is that the top edge of the screen is delayed by a full frame, the center of the screen is delayed by half a frame, and there is virtually no delay for the bottom edge of the screen. (Average input lag of a strobe backlight should be as small as half a frame lag). But if you're measuring using the top edge of the screen, then yes, the input lag can essentially behave as doubled relative to the SMTT approach. That's not the lag tester's fault, but a lack of understanding how input lag is measured.

This becomes easier to understand when watching the high speed video above.

So it is not the Leo Bodnar's fault; but simply the behaviour of flicker/strobing found in plasmas and in LCD's -- that is causing added display lag.

Regular top-to-bottom scan:
T+0ms -- top edge
T+8ms -- center of screen
T+16ms -- bottom edge

Full screen flash (plasma, LightBoost, Motionflow Impulse):
T+16ms -- top edge
T+16ms -- center of screen
T+16ms -- bottom edge

So, gentlemen and ladies, that is why. It's not the input lag tester's fault.
If "T" was 16ms, then T+0ms = 16ms, and T+16ms = 32ms.
So sometimes someone falsely thinks the input lag tester is "doubling" the input lag. This is untrue.

Vertical-screen-axis input lag behavior differences is not something everyone understands fully.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #648 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 07:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
*UFO*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Either way the leo bodnar device can not accurately read plasma input lag. Plasma displays that have confirmed 16ms input lag times read closer to 40ms with the leo bodnar device.
*UFO* is offline  
post #649 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 07:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

Either way the leo bodnar device can not accurately read plasma input lag. Plasma displays that have confirmed 16ms input lag times read closer to 40ms with the leo bodnar device.
It's a known problem when using various sensor based methods. Leo seems to avoid registering until very late (e.g. when pixels are fully bright). That can be because some input lag measurement methods (e.g. oscillscope) captures a faint subfield before the human eye can detect it:



This can be a problem when doing display lag measurements:
-- Do you measure display lag to first faint pixel visibility?
-- Do you measure display lag to full pixel visibility?
-- Do you measure display lag to the point a pixel is sustained bright at human timescales?

It's possible to have an LCD display with a lower display lag than the LCD pixel transition speed. For example, an older 10ms LCD that's got a real-time scanout. if you're measuring display lag to first faint pixel visibility (e.g. pixel becomes visible after 4ms), but still takes 10ms for the pixel to become fully bright at near final color value.

Therefore, plasmas with "known 16ms of lag" may actually truly be "about 25-30ms effective lag to human eye", because the first subfield strobe may trip an oscilloscope photodiode, long before the human eye can detect the plasma flicker.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #650 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 07:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PENDRAG0ON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,477
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

Either way the leo bodnar device can not accurately read plasma input lag. Plasma displays that have confirmed 16ms input lag times read closer to 40ms with the leo bodnar device.

So Samsung's f5500 and Panasonic's s60 lines are actually comparable to this Sony on lag, good to know. Now it comes down to price and screen size more so than lag...

This information really needs to be repeated in the Plasma and LCD lag topics.

PSN - Pendragoongp
NNID - Pendragoon
Include your AVS username in the friend request.
PENDRAG0ON is offline  
post #651 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 08:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
*UFO*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by PENDRAG0ON View Post

So Samsung's f5500 and Panasonic's s60 lines are actually comparable to this Sony on lag, good to know. Now it comes down to price and screen size more so than lag...

This information really needs to be repeated in the Plasma and LCD lag topics.

I had the 64" F5500 before the w900a and it felt like it was +/- 16ms input lag. Different review sites rate this set from around 34ms with leo bodnar test and another side rated it in the 60ms range. I think the best tool for input lag is your self. I play a lot of FPS games which require very little input lag which is why I still have the w900a.
*UFO* is offline  
post #652 of 1202 Old 07-28-2013, 08:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by *UFO* View Post

I think the best tool for input lag is your self.
+1

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #653 of 1202 Old 07-29-2013, 09:49 AM
Newbie
 
Swoley2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hello! Long time reader first time poster.

I'm looking to get a KDL-55W805A based on its great reviews and input lag. I have special purposes I need the tv for but it all comes down to a very exact question:

Has anyone connected to a PC directly with an HDMI cable (no adapters) and forced the refresh rate to 120hz on 1920x1080p?

If anyone is willing to test the instructions are very simple if needed. Takes about 2 minutes.

Thanks!
Swoley2k is offline  
post #654 of 1202 Old 07-29-2013, 12:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swoley2k View Post

If anyone is willing to test the instructions are very simple if needed. Takes about 2 minutes.
Instructions: Using a HDTV as a 120Hz monitor -- Getting 120Hz natively from a computer into an TV

Some HDTV's manage to sync to native 120Hz in an undocumented manner, but 1080p @ 120Hz native seems to have had has had more success rates on some Vizio and Pansonic models.
It is probable that Motionflow Impulse will be disabled (i.e. not work) when you're using 120Hz mode, but try it with it on/off as well.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #655 of 1202 Old 07-29-2013, 01:23 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,599
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked: 867

Mark, are you sure that a 1000fps camera is fast enough to capture that top to bottom scan you show on the dell 2007FP?  How do you know that you're not getting the effect of a beat frequency between several high speed flashes?
 


Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Unless, of course, it's to keep someone from creating a phone video in portrait mode, in which case it's a pretty good first step. Portrait mooks: KNOCK IT OFF.
tgm1024 is offline  
post #656 of 1202 Old 07-29-2013, 02:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 8,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Mark, are you sure that a 1000fps camera is fast enough to capture that top to bottom scan you show on the dell 2007FP?  How do you know that you're not getting the effect of a beat frequency between several high speed flashes?
Yes, anything that is recording 480fps and faster is fast enough.
It's not a beat frequency effect.

A 480fps camera is fast enough to capture 8 frames per 60Hz refresh, and 4 frames per 120Hz refresh, which is enough data to reveal the pixel transitions. It clearly reveals the top-to-bottom scanning.

Additional proof of top-to-bottom scanning is simply by viewing this test pattern in full screen mode:
www.testufo.com/#test=blurtrail
And seeing the tilting effect in the line, especially at faster speeds.
The tilting shows up on a CRT / shows on an iPad in landscape mode / shows on an LCD computer monitor.

On displays with top-to-bottom scans (including many LCD computer monitors), there is a tilting effect in horizontally-moving vertical lines/edges. Displays that reduce input lag to the barest minimum possible, are found in the computer world (touchscreens, and computer monitors) and thus they have to realtime-scanout their images, and as a result, there is the same tilting effect on these LCD's as on CRT's. Even in LCD's that framebuffer their images, they still have to scanout the pixels at some finite speed (from one edge to another) so even on those, there are varying amounts of tilts (lesser for faster scanouts/refreshes).

Plus, it's already scientifically written about in many places. The other "proofs" is sufficient proof that the high speed video is correct.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #657 of 1202 Old 07-29-2013, 07:34 PM
Newbie
 
allenwp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi Mike, thanks for the thoughts. I now understand where a lot of confusion is coming from on input lag...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon View Post

Blur Busters Blog believes in standardizing input lag measurements to centre of the screen
(1) It typically matches the average input lag
(2) It is more independent of display image presentation differences (e.g. top-to-bottom scanouts, bottom-to-top scanouts, all-at-once strobe backlights, etc).
(3) People stare at center of screen more often (including in most videogames -- e.g. crosshairs).

This idea of measuring the time between the frame-start signal and when the center of the frame begins to appear on the screen is very interesting, but is not actually "input lag" (aka "processing lag", aka "display lag") -- In fact, this new measurement technique captures a combination of different parts of the system: It represents latency of transmitting a frame that is inherent to the signal type as well as the processing latency inside of the display. I would recommend calling this new measurement at the center of a frame the "half frame lag" or something.

According to Wikipedia, input lag (aka "processing lag", aka "display lag") is defined as:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia View Post

It refers to latency, or lag measured by the difference between the time there is a signal input, and the time it takes the input to display on the screen

Said differently, input lag is the processing time. Or, it is the time between when a signal, like that of a pixel colour value, is received by the display and when the related change begins to appear on the screen, not counting response time thereafter.

On a related note, the leo bodnar lag tester was not designed to test input lag, but was instead designed to be a quick way to compare factors such as input lag and response time between displays. It does an ok job, but actually measures something that is more than just input lag and partial response time. My best attempt at coming up with a new term for what the leo bodnar lag tester actually reports is "Frame Lag + Partial Response Time". Because there are different values on the different parts of the screen, I think we should describe them as "start frame lag" (top white block, aka "input lag"), "half frame lag" (center white block), "full frame lag" (bottom white block), and "average frame lag" (average of the three blocks).

Ever since the leo bodnar lag tester was introduced there has been much confusion because people were trying to fit an established term ("input lag") on to what the test tool was reporting (which is actually three points of "frame lag"). Let's be clear with our terminology to help the average person understand the values and ensure consistency between tests.

Please don't get me wrong, I think it is great that we're thinking of new ways to test displays! And because it's a new way of measuring, it also needs new terminology. Please let me know if there is anywhere else that discussion is taking place regarding this new measurement technique. I think I'd like to make a website devoted to explaining and visualizing these definitions for people...
allenwp is offline  
post #658 of 1202 Old 07-29-2013, 11:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
*UFO*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,368
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenwp View Post

Hi Mike, thanks for the thoughts. I now understand where a lot of confusion is coming from on input lag...
This idea of measuring the time between the frame-start signal and when the center of the frame begins to appear on the screen is very interesting, but is not actually "input lag" (aka "processing lag", aka "display lag") -- In fact, this new measurement technique captures a combination of different parts of the system: It represents latency of transmitting a frame that is inherent to the signal type as well as the processing latency inside of the display. I would recommend calling this new measurement at the center of a frame the "half frame lag" or something.

According to Wikipedia, input lag (aka "processing lag", aka "display lag") is defined as:
Said differently, input lag is the processing time. Or, it is the time between when a signal, like that of a pixel colour value, is received by the display and when the related change begins to appear on the screen, not counting response time thereafter.

On a related note, the leo bodnar lag tester was not designed to test input lag, but was instead designed to be a quick way to compare factors such as input lag and response time between displays. It does an ok job, but actually measures something that is more than just input lag and partial response time. My best attempt at coming up with a new term for what the leo bodnar lag tester actually reports is "Frame Lag + Partial Response Time". Because there are different values on the different parts of the screen, I think we should describe them as "start frame lag" (top white block, aka "input lag"), "half frame lag" (center white block), "full frame lag" (bottom white block), and "average frame lag" (average of the three blocks).

Ever since the leo bodnar lag tester was introduced there has been much confusion because people were trying to fit an established term ("input lag") on to what the test tool was reporting (which is actually three points of "frame lag"). Let's be clear with our terminology to help the average person understand the values and ensure consistency between tests.

Please don't get me wrong, I think it is great that we're thinking of new ways to test displays! And because it's a new way of measuring, it also needs new terminology. Please let me know if there is anywhere else that discussion is taking place regarding this new measurement technique. I think I'd like to make a website devoted to explaining and visualizing these definitions for people...

There is no confusion. Anyone could write anything on wikipedia its open source information. Input lag is the time it takes for a signal to be displayed on the screen, this includes the response time of the panel already.
*UFO* is offline  
post #659 of 1202 Old 07-30-2013, 02:37 AM
Member
 
Sehej Rana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 44
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Has anyone noticed a small amount of judder which crops up at times on their W802. Its most noticeable when a movie starts e.g in the movie "The Dark Knight rises" its most noticeable when the WB and the Legendary logo's are forming? I was wondering if this is a common issue or is there something wrong with my settings.

Something very interesting revealed : -

Mystery Panel Maker Revealed: 4K Sony Bravia X9 KD-55X9005A http://www.digitalversus.com/tv-television/sony-bravia-x9-kd-55x9005a-p15201/mystery-panel-maker-revealed-4k-sony-bravia-x9-kd-55x9005a-n30385.html

I wonder if the W802 uses the same panel.
Sehej Rana is offline  
post #660 of 1202 Old 07-30-2013, 05:28 AM
Senior Member
 
gatorboi352's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Hi folks! Newest member of the W80 family here after 2 hx750 duds.
gatorboi352 is offline  
Reply LCD Flat Panel Displays

Tags
Sony Bravia Kdl 47w802a 47 Class Full Hd 3d Led Lcd Internet Tv , Sony Kdl 55w802a 55 Class Full Hd 3d Led Lcd Internet Tv , Sony Bravia 40inch Led Tv 3d Support Bravia Hx750 Kdl 40hx750
Gear in this thread - Hx750 by PriceGrabber.com

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