Brightness versus Contrast? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 15 Old 05-02-2013, 12:11 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Artwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hoover, Alabama
Posts: 4,817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 197
In what may be the last heavyweight bout of all times in Plasma land between the Samsung f8500 and the Panasonic ZT60 it seems like Samsung will be brighter and Panasonic will have blacker blacks.

Most people will tell you that contrast is a more important factor than brightness when it comes to picture quality.

There comes a point though at levels closer to absolute black that small differences in black level would not out trump another display that had slightly lighter blacks with a whole lot more brightness.

Assuming everything else was the same--and of course it won't be--how much brighter does the Samsung have to be to out trump the Panasonic's better blacks?

Hypothetically it could be close--it could depend on people's taste--like how much is a slightly better black level worth if the Samsung is WAY brighter?

In the past i have always thought that the better black level was ALWAYS superior and that is true because there haven't been substantially large enough brightness disparities between displays.

But maybe this is the year that there will be an exception to the always blacker is better rule.

I know if I couldn't hardly ever appreciate the better blacks but i could appreciate a much brighter set because it would look much better in the day that i might could be persuaded that it was better.

I haven't seen either of the two sets. There could certainly be other factors than contrast and brightness which would factor into the equation of better picture quality.

But how about it folks--all other things being equal will blacker blacks ALWAYS mean a better picture if the other set has almost as black blacks but is also WAY brighter?

If Panasonic is now through with improving picture quality performance with the ZT60--does it also mean that the f8500 and maybe possibly FUTURE Samsungs--may be the only things left in a few years standing against the Horror nightmare holocaust of complete LCD totalitarian mediocracy domination that sucks even more than the picture quality of the Chiller Channel on satellite?!!!

While I think that blacker blacks almost always result in a better picture--if Samsung could stay in business producing the f8500 and its sucessors so bright that the DUMBO LCD lovers and Joe Six Pack morons would even buy them--then Panasonic being out of plasma business in a few years wouldn't be complete death if there was at least A SINGLE Plasma model left to buy!

I'm for ANYTHING that will stop a 100% LCD world with picture quality--2K or 4K that sucks!!!

I'm for OLED doing that if they don't charge 99trillion dollars for it!
Artwood is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 15 Old 05-02-2013, 03:16 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tbird8450's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
But how about it folks--all other things being equal will blacker blacks ALWAYS mean a better picture if the other set has almost as black blacks but is also WAY brighter?

For me, yes. I am already at a point where I have sufficient brightness for my environment. My ISF Day mode (around 50 ft-L) looks great even on a sunny day with the lights on. I certainly wouldn't refuse additional brightness capability if it came with no compromises elsewhere, but it's not something that I pine for at all. If I had a lot more natural light coming into the viewing area, then that would probably change things. Everyone's setup is different.

Black level performance on the other hand, yes please. In a darkened room superior black levels can make a significant impact on picture quality. There is a point where you can go too bright, but you can't go too black (assuming you aren't crushing detail).

At home I've gone from .001 to .0005 to .0002, and each step down was quite noticeable. Even at .0002 ft-L I'm still not completely satisfied during critical viewing.

I don't find extra brightness to automatically equate to a superior picture (once you hit a certain point), so until displays are achieving true 0% blacks with no ill side-effects, it's not something that I care to give much thought to.
tbird8450 is offline  
post #3 of 15 Old 05-02-2013, 03:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
saprano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bronx NY
Posts: 3,378
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 241
I think everyone knows my stance on this already.

home theater addict
saprano is offline  
post #4 of 15 Old 05-02-2013, 06:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,521
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 387 Post(s)
Liked: 699
I THINK I would prefer better blacks to a brighter picture.

this is based on my absolute frustration with every tv I've owned since CRT's not producing anything close to black, while at the same time, when calibrating I never have the backlights maxed out.

so that leads me to the assumption that i'm content with brightness and crave deeper blacks.


that being said, I have been wowed by the f8500, and plan to give it first crack at being my new tv. if the blacks end up being brighter than expected, i'll exchange for a panny(which one is yet to be determined) and whether or not i'm completely happy with that, I will at least know that it was my best option at the time.


but to play the game, I think the Samsung needs to be twice as bright ir the Panasonic is twice as dark. and since the Panasonic seems to be somewhere around 3x as dark, well, I guess we'd need the Samsung to pretty much blind us to make up for it in terms of contrast. so, unless you like putting your sunglasses on for the daytime scenes, and then taking them off for the night time scenes, i'm still going to say deeper blacks is the best way to improve contrasts. not brighter whites.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #5 of 15 Old 05-03-2013, 01:20 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Artwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hoover, Alabama
Posts: 4,817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 197
Will the f8500 be BRIGHT enough to convert away any current LCD brightness worshipers?

Would anyone like to speculate on which company will quit producing high quality plasmas first--will it be Panasonic or Samsung?

Like what are the chances that the ZT60 will also be produced in 2014 but NOT 2015 because Panasonic will be trying to get into OLED?

What would be the chances that Samsung would still be producing a f8500 plasma in 2015?

It seems to me like 2015 will be THE critical year for HIGH QUALITY plasmas--if NEITHER Samsung or Panasonic produces a high quality plasma display in 2015 you can mark down THAT year as the year when AFFORDABLE High Quality video REALLY REALLY sucked!!!

I'm not saying that NO plasmas will be produced in 2015--what I am saying is that at some point plasma will HAVE to be killed off so they can sell either cheap 4K LCD that will suck or OLED that will cost trillions!

I think 2015 is going to be the death year for video.

The moral of this story is buy now--CHANCE buying in 2014--maybe you'll be lucky and sneak by by the skin of your teeth--if you wait til 2015 you'll probably be crying!

Another thing to look at will be how the industry plant posters around here will try to start selling people on 4K LCD that suck!

They will cry lower price while trillion dollar OLED lovers will explain exactly HOW 4K LCD sucks.

With such a grim outlook the f8500 or the Panasonic ZT60 may be the perfect BRIDGE TV to a decent future.

I think that will be when OLED gets affordable which should be 2017!

P.S. I'm sure the ever present sales force around here won't like my analysis.
Artwood is offline  
post #6 of 15 Old 05-03-2013, 01:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
MechanicalMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Missouri
Posts: 981
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

Most people will tell you that contrast is a more important factor than brightness when it comes to picture quality.

There comes a point though at levels closer to absolute black that small differences in black level would not out trump another display that had slightly lighter blacks with a whole lot more brightness.

Assuming everything else was the same--and of course it won't be--how much brighter does the Samsung have to be to out trump the Panasonic's better blacks?

Personally, I couldn't care less about the peak brightness of the F8500. I watch only in a dark room, and all of these models go brighter than I need them to. For me, the appeal of the F8500 is that it will be less affected by ABL than the Panasonic models, and I hate ABL. But ultimately, I will probably cheap out and buy an ST60. I don't think the F8500 or VT60 are worth the cost to me.
MechanicalMan is offline  
post #7 of 15 Old 05-03-2013, 01:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ph8te's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,673
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 458 Post(s)
Liked: 327
I agree with you Art and I think that many are using this years crop of Tvs as bridges to the "next" tech whatever that may be....

As far as the F8500 being available it wont be, but it could go under the H model (depends on how they handle model naming).......

As for which is more important, I think it depends on what the person buying the TV is looking for and what type of environment the TV will be going into. In the "perfect" world everyoen would have a "light controlled" setting and then we could for sure say that black levels would be more important as the lower black levels would be more prominent. However this is not reality so a wide range of offerings are needed. I do think taht the F8500 may be bright enough to convert some of the LCD masses, but there are still those that will prefer the extra brightness and design of the ultra thin bezelss of the LCD TVs......
Ph8te is offline  
post #8 of 15 Old 05-03-2013, 02:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rahzel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,714
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 147
Brightness vs contrast depends on your lighting conditions or your personal preferences. Panasonic plasmas can get bright enough for many people so the extra brightness that the F8500 is capable of is irrelevant. If you do most of your viewing in a brighter room, then the F8500 may be a better choice. In my theater room I do most of my viewing in the dark so the extra brightness means nothing to me, so of course I will take better blacks / better contrast any day. My relatively bright living room would be a different story.
rahzel is offline  
post #9 of 15 Old 05-03-2013, 03:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,521
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 387 Post(s)
Liked: 699
I think the f8500 is bright enough that it will keep those 'on the fence' from jumping over the LCD. I don't think it'll win too many LCD fans back.

anybody accustomed to watching a plasma will find the picture 'crazy bright'. but those accustomed to an LED in vivid mode are still going to find it dull.

I think the f8500 will give Samsung more sales than the vt or zt. it'll attract ppl at the store level, and not just the ppl reading reviews and shopping very critically. if I was forced, i'd guess Samsung will produce plasmas longer. I don't think they're ready for OLED yet, and they'll want to undercut OLED pricing while achieving comparable pq as best they can. right now that seems to be the f8500. it's bright (enough), black (enough) and it will be much cheaper than OLED for quite a few years. who knows for sure though. if the f8500 only serves to take a chunk out of samsungs LED sales, then it's not doing them much good. they need it to dominate the plasma sales while not cutting into their already successful LED sales too much.

I feel like there's an expression dieing to be coined from all this.

in golf: drive for show, putt for dough
in baseball: HR's get glory, but base hits win games.

in tv: brightness for sales, contrast for satisfaction (i'm not a poet, somebody find the right words)

brightness obviously sells well, and attracts ppl in the store. from the friends I have in retail, they've been selling the f8500 like crazy. the ppl buying the vt, or asking about the zt come in to specifically buy it. nobody that walks into the store clueless ever settles on the vt.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #10 of 15 Old 05-03-2013, 09:20 PM
KOF
Advanced Member
 
KOF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 91
Don't know if anyone is going to care about my 2 cents since I am a gamer and I rarely watch movies, so my requirements are going to be vastly different from many of you here.

For more than 10 years, I've been looking for my 'CRT replacement'. I've been gaming on Sony FW900 for 8 years and now I'm using Sony Trinitron BVM. I am not a some stuck-up ludite who thinks CRTs are the best, I know painfully well where the CRTs suffer the most, namely size and ANSI contrast ratio. For over a decade, I've been looking for a flat panel that can give me the least compromises switching from a CRT.

My first and foremost importance is the motion blur, so LCDs were out right out of the gate. Even when there was a time where Samsung S-PVAs were killing Samsung & LG plasmas black level wise, I still gave no chance to LCDs, that's how much I care about response time. Plasmas, while still not perfect, were the only alternatives for me and I will still not care about the OLEDs until they get rid of sample and hold which I know is going to take quite a while.

Plasmas of course were quite dim, vastly dimmer than the CRTs such as XBR960 and the BVMs. I would have compromised with lower brightness as long as they also managed to get ABL under control, but nope, they had serious problems with that either. I didn't like it when I used an LG plasma and any scene with snow made me cringe. Pioneer Kuro 500M, while they had magnificent black levels and ANSI contrast ratio, still had problems with ABL and brightness, I had been waiting for one that could finally make me say "I am content", and that was the Samsung F8500. Now, let me make this clear, I STILL do not find the F8500's brightness sufficient, (Contrary to what anyone says, CRT owners are the greediest bunch when it comes to jacked up white because the CRT's concentrated brightness output under a strobe far exceeds even the LCDs according to Mark) but I'm willing to compromise as it provides the least compromise compared to say, Kuro or Panasonic.

So, I think I've finally found my dream flat panel that can at least make me content. Would I want deeper blacks? Sure, I loved the Kuro for what it was, but definitely not at the expense of ABL and brightness so I think I'm fine with the F8500's black which still is great.

Sadly though, I also had to rule out the F8500 for one reason and one reason only, the input lag. What good is all the contrasty eye candy when the gameplay has to suffer? This is exactly why I had to stay with CRTs for way too long. If I find one factor sufficient, other one might suffer and this kind of pattern is way too common from the flat panel displays. My CRTs, outdated as they are, are still the ones that offers the least compromises when it comes to gaming. I don't have to compromise on response time and input lag for one. I will be waiting one more year for my dream flat panel and I really hope Samsung can produce a G5500 that can give me the same contrast ratio as the F8500, but with less input lags. Otherwise, I am simply going to go for a 32 inch BVM, which is probably going to cost more than what I will pay for a F8500.
KOF is offline  
post #11 of 15 Old 05-04-2013, 10:58 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Artwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hoover, Alabama
Posts: 4,817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 197
I think that the f8500 will sell so well that the ZT60's successor in 2014 will be the LAST great Panasonic plasma.

I wonder if Samsung's shaming them when it comes to sales might mean that the 2014 edition of the ZT60 might add maybe one last trick from Panasonic's bag of tricks?

All the patents that Panasonic bought from Pioneer--any chance that since Panasonic is getting out of the plasma biz that they might sell all of them to Samsung or is Panasonic so PROUD that they'll fall on their swords and take the patents to the Panasonic grave?

If you are plasma lover you feel like Secretariat is laying on the ground dying while 120 pieces of crap LCD are circling!
Artwood is offline  
post #12 of 15 Old 05-04-2013, 02:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,521
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 387 Post(s)
Liked: 699
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOF View Post

Don't know if anyone is going to care about my 2 cents since I am a gamer and I rarely watch movies, so my requirements are going to be vastly different from many of you here.

For more than 10 years, I've been looking for my 'CRT replacement'. I've been gaming on Sony FW900 for 8 years and now I'm using Sony Trinitron BVM. I am not a some stuck-up ludite who thinks CRTs are the best, I know painfully well where the CRTs suffer the most, namely size and ANSI contrast ratio. For over a decade, I've been looking for a flat panel that can give me the least compromises switching from a CRT.

My first and foremost importance is the motion blur, so LCDs were out right out of the gate. Even when there was a time where Samsung S-PVAs were killing Samsung & LG plasmas black level wise, I still gave no chance to LCDs, that's how much I care about response time. Plasmas, while still not perfect, were the only alternatives for me and I will still not care about the OLEDs until they get rid of sample and hold which I know is going to take quite a while.

Plasmas of course were quite dim, vastly dimmer than the CRTs such as XBR960 and the BVMs. I would have compromised with lower brightness as long as they also managed to get ABL under control, but nope, they had serious problems with that either. I didn't like it when I used an LG plasma and any scene with snow made me cringe. Pioneer Kuro 500M, while they had magnificent black levels and ANSI contrast ratio, still had problems with ABL and brightness, I had been waiting for one that could finally make me say "I am content", and that was the Samsung F8500. Now, let me make this clear, I STILL do not find the F8500's brightness sufficient, (Contrary to what anyone says, CRT owners are the greediest bunch when it comes to jacked up white because the CRT's concentrated brightness output under a strobe far exceeds even the LCDs according to Mark) but I'm willing to compromise as it provides the least compromise compared to say, Kuro or Panasonic.

So, I think I've finally found my dream flat panel that can at least make me content. Would I want deeper blacks? Sure, I loved the Kuro for what it was, but definitely not at the expense of ABL and brightness so I think I'm fine with the F8500's black which still is great.

Sadly though, I also had to rule out the F8500 for one reason and one reason only, the input lag. What good is all the contrasty eye candy when the gameplay has to suffer? This is exactly why I had to stay with CRTs for way too long. If I find one factor sufficient, other one might suffer and this kind of pattern is way too common from the flat panel displays. My CRTs, outdated as they are, are still the ones that offers the least compromises when it comes to gaming. I don't have to compromise on response time and input lag for one. I will be waiting one more year for my dream flat panel and I really hope Samsung can produce a G5500 that can give me the same contrast ratio as the F8500, but with less input lags. Otherwise, I am simply going to go for a 32 inch BVM, which is probably going to cost more than what I will pay for a F8500.

I feel your pain. i'm not so picky about the same things you are, but it seems like everytime we take a step forward, we take a step backwards in some other area.

cool, plasmas are thin... but the lag is terrible, they are dim, ridiculously expensive
hey, lcd's now... but they have terrible viewing angles, mediocre blacks, lag again, and poor motion
ok, plamas got cheap, nice... but now they buzz, get hot, still dim
lcd's use LED backlights... but they're expensive, don't help with viewing angles, etc....


what was wrong with CRT again? it was heavy and bulky. can somebody state something that was absolutely brutal with the PQ so I can sleep at night? I honestly just didn't pay as much attention back then so I don't know what i'm missing, but I was always happy with the CRT's we had, I've yet to be happy with a plasma or LCD.

out of curiosity, have you figured out what an 'acceptable' amount of input lag would be? and have you seen any recent TV's that accomplished this? supposedly samsungs do a lot better if you set the inputs to PC. disables a lot of the picture controls, but speeds everything up. I don't know if that's something that could put it back on your radar or not though. don't have any numbers, just rumours.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #13 of 15 Old 05-04-2013, 02:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,521
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 387 Post(s)
Liked: 699
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

I think that the f8500 will sell so well that the ZT60's successor in 2014 will be the LAST great Panasonic plasma.

I wonder if Samsung's shaming them when it comes to sales might mean that the 2014 edition of the ZT60 might add maybe one last trick from Panasonic's bag of tricks?

All the patents that Panasonic bought from Pioneer--any chance that since Panasonic is getting out of the plasma biz that they might sell all of them to Samsung or is Panasonic so PROUD that they'll fall on their swords and take the patents to the Panasonic grave?

If you are plasma lover you feel like Secretariat is laying on the ground dying while 120 pieces of crap LCD are circling!

the only saving grace, although i'm not sure financially it works out, is that plasma manufacturers could just keep producing THIS year's models and i'd still be picking them over 2018's LCD's.

the only way LCD is going to be an option is if it's full array(which apparently is also dead...) with a dimming zone for every 100 square pixels or something like that. there's just too many problems inherent with the system to overcome.

so what's going to be the problem with OLED? aside from cost to begin with. what aspect of PQ do we take for granted now that OLED is going to completely destroy? I've heard some grumblings that it's pretty unstable and will need frequent calibrations. that would be a kick in the pants, but more liveable than current tech I guess.

but yeah, for the sake of my own sanity, i'm making sure I buy the best plasma I can this year(need a new tv) because i'm not counting on being able to find a good, affordable tv 3-10yrs from now. I've gone through it before, missed out on the cheap RPTV with DLP, and was disgusted with the 'affordable' plasma options. to match a 1500 DLP I needed to spend over 5k on a plasma. i'd honestly say it wasn't until maybe 2-3yrs ago that a 1500 dollar plasma felt like a good deal again.

buy now or risk years of regret. once I get a good display i'm happy with again, i'm just gonna stick my head in the sand for the next 10yrs and hope what tech wins is cheap by the time I need a replacement

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #14 of 15 Old 05-04-2013, 11:08 PM
KOF
Advanced Member
 
KOF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 91
Thanks for giving me your perspective, I honestly thought nobody would give a hoot about what a gamer is going to say, lol.

What I really like about the CRTs is they are very trustworthy and reliable. Take plasmas for example. The 15 series from Panasonic had the dreaded rising/floating black. The 20 series improved on the floating black, but the rising black was still there. The 30 series had green blobs and pink tint issues. The later manufactured GT30 also had dithering noise issues. To add to the further injury, D-Nice is now saying the VT30, which is supposedly free of the 'rising black' has doubled the black level after a year. The 50 series, we were painfully observing Panny's manufacturing reliability slip, line bleeding was getting more frequent. I ruled out the UT50 because of this issue. Now the jury is out with the 60 series where the calibrators say they have similiar calibration issues as the VT30. Samsung, they have had the world famous buzzing for quite a long time. The D series suffered from horizontal line bleeding issue and brightness pop, the E series improved but had lower brightness cap, and the F8500 now has bandings. LG plasmas are famous for IR and PWM noise, but really, I did not see any IR from an LG plasma TV I've tried. LCDs are even worse. Larger size LCDs suffer from banding issues, and Samsung LCDs always has that crappy undefeatable auto dimming. I'm not even getting my hopes up for the OLEDs yet. They will also go through reliability pains and number one issue right now is burn in. Our 27 inch RCA CRT television has performed without ANY issues for over 14 years and it really pained me when I had to dump a perfectly working TV just to save on space. I went throught various CRT monitors as well and aside from a Samsung monitor that had its power supply busted, all of them were working fine when I dumped them. Now I only have a 24 inch FW900 I bought in 2005 and 20 inch Sony BVM that's over 90,000 hours and both are still operating like champs. Am I going to have an expectation that any flat panels that I buy today will still be operating after a decade? Probably not.

"what was wrong with CRT again? it was heavy and bulky. can somebody state something that was absolutely brutal with the PQ so I can sleep at night? I honestly just didn't pay as much attention back then so I don't know what i'm missing, but I was always happy with the CRT's we had, I've yet to be happy with a plasma or LCD."

I'm not an expert, but I can give you a general idea. The reason why we both like CRTs is because of their massive on-off contrast ratio. High end CRTs like Sony XBR960 and Sony BVM can have a hair better black than a Kuro, yet their concentrated phosphor brightness on strobe is much brighter than even the LCDs.

http://www.blurbusters.com/faq/crt-comparison/

Mark has a very good explanation of how that can happen, but basically, CRTs operate on rapidly moving strobes, unlike LCDs and Plasmas that illuminate whole screen basically simultaneously. LCDs have higher combined light output than CRTs, but because this strobing, our eyes is tricked thinking CRTs are more dynamic. Also, when CRTs use strobing, the entire area other than the strobe itself remains black. (Remember, CRTs and plasmas are impulse based, they clear and reset the picture constantly, unlike sample and hold based LCDs. This is why CRTs and plasmas have little to no motion blur, but because of that, they're also much harder than the LCDs to photograph) Imagine a local dimming LCDs where there are 480 horizontal zones, but only single horizontal dimming zone can be illuminated at a time. That's the CRT's best weapon, having a huge contrast ratio between a pitch black unilluminated area and a fast moving strobe where the concentrated light output is extremely high. Kind of cheating, but at least it works and doesn't feel gimmicky. As I mentioned earlier, CRT's biggest weakness is mediocre ANSI contrast ratio compared to plasmas and LCDs, that's why CRTs can never give a pop that LCDs and plasmas can, but because the strobing is so fast, they can make best use of whatever ANSI contrast ratio they're given. CRTs work best on contents where there is a procedural sudden change from black to brightness and this kind of dynamic behaviour is akin to Samsung LCD's auto-dimming and plasma's brightness pop, only done right. When a content goes from dark to bright, my BVM can quickly dynamically brighten the picture, giving me excitement. Not so from Samsung F8500, where the movement is rather flat in comparison.
KOF is offline  
post #15 of 15 Old 05-05-2013, 07:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,521
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 387 Post(s)
Liked: 699
Quote:
Originally Posted by KOF View Post

Thanks for giving me your perspective, I honestly thought nobody would give a hoot about what a gamer is going to say, lol.

What I really like about the CRTs is they are very trustworthy and reliable. Take plasmas for example. The 15 series from Panasonic had the dreaded rising/floating black. The 20 series improved on the floating black, but the rising black was still there. The 30 series had green blobs and pink tint issues. The later manufactured GT30 also had dithering noise issues. To add to the further injury, D-Nice is now saying the VT30, which is supposedly free of the 'rising black' has doubled the black level after a year. The 50 series, we were painfully observing Panny's manufacturing reliability slip, line bleeding was getting more frequent. I ruled out the UT50 because of this issue. Now the jury is out with the 60 series where the calibrators say they have similiar calibration issues as the VT30. Samsung, they have had the world famous buzzing for quite a long time. The D series suffered from horizontal line bleeding issue and brightness pop, the E series improved but had lower brightness cap, and the F8500 now has bandings. LG plasmas are famous for IR and PWM noise, but really, I did not see any IR from an LG plasma TV I've tried. LCDs are even worse. Larger size LCDs suffer from banding issues, and Samsung LCDs always has that crappy undefeatable auto dimming. I'm not even getting my hopes up for the OLEDs yet. They will also go through reliability pains and number one issue right now is burn in. Our 27 inch RCA CRT television has performed without ANY issues for over 14 years and it really pained me when I had to dump a perfectly working TV just to save on space. I went throught various CRT monitors as well and aside from a Samsung monitor that had its power supply busted, all of them were working fine when I dumped them. Now I only have a 24 inch FW900 I bought in 2005 and 20 inch Sony BVM that's over 90,000 hours and both are still operating like champs. Am I going to have an expectation that any flat panels that I buy today will still be operating after a decade? Probably not.

"what was wrong with CRT again? it was heavy and bulky. can somebody state something that was absolutely brutal with the PQ so I can sleep at night? I honestly just didn't pay as much attention back then so I don't know what i'm missing, but I was always happy with the CRT's we had, I've yet to be happy with a plasma or LCD."

I'm not an expert, but I can give you a general idea. The reason why we both like CRTs is because of their massive on-off contrast ratio. High end CRTs like Sony XBR960 and Sony BVM can have a hair better black than a Kuro, yet their concentrated phosphor brightness on strobe is much brighter than even the LCDs.

http://www.blurbusters.com/faq/crt-comparison/

Mark has a very good explanation of how that can happen, but basically, CRTs operate on rapidly moving strobes, unlike LCDs and Plasmas that illuminate whole screen basically simultaneously. LCDs have higher combined light output than CRTs, but because this strobing, our eyes is tricked thinking CRTs are more dynamic. Also, when CRTs use strobing, the entire area other than the strobe itself remains black. (Remember, CRTs and plasmas are impulse based, they clear and reset the picture constantly, unlike sample and hold based LCDs. This is why CRTs and plasmas have little to no motion blur, but because of that, they're also much harder than the LCDs to photograph) Imagine a local dimming LCDs where there are 480 horizontal zones, but only single horizontal dimming zone can be illuminated at a time. That's the CRT's best weapon, having a huge contrast ratio between a pitch black unilluminated area and a fast moving strobe where the concentrated light output is extremely high. Kind of cheating, but at least it works and doesn't feel gimmicky. As I mentioned earlier, CRT's biggest weakness is mediocre ANSI contrast ratio compared to plasmas and LCDs, that's why CRTs can never give a pop that LCDs and plasmas can, but because the strobing is so fast, they can make best use of whatever ANSI contrast ratio they're given. CRTs work best on contents where there is a procedural sudden change from black to brightness and this kind of dynamic behaviour is akin to Samsung LCD's auto-dimming and plasma's brightness pop, only done right. When a content goes from dark to bright, my BVM can quickly dynamically brighten the picture, giving me excitement. Not so from Samsung F8500, where the movement is rather flat in comparison.

for what it's worth, I hung onto my CRT's as long as possible. the RPTV is now completely done, and will be replaced with the f8500, vt60, or zt60 as soon as I commit to one. I had a 25 and 27" zenith that lasted close to 10yrs each, but the picture deteriorated quite badly on both before we dumped them. the 27 got to a point where you couldn't read the text in credits anymore. made using the tv guide pretty useless, haha.

are 'best' crt was a 32" sony my parents bought when I was young, paid like 3grand for it. it only lasted a couple years before 'the picture tube went'. not sure exactly what they meant by that as we continued to use it for another 10yrs, but basically we never took it off 'vivid' mode and ruined it way before it's time.

I guess another issue with the crt's was getting that totally flat and rectangular image. but I can't help but think with all the processing being down in todays sets just to make various resolutions work on a fixed resolution panel, they would have been able to compensate for that no problem.

sometimes I feel like one of those old guys complaining about how harsh CD's sound and how much better vinyl is. hopefully my first 'high end' flatscreen will change my opinion.


PS, 90,000hrs!?!?! have you thought about going outside sometime tongue.gif

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1018AH, 5.1 audio
Sources: HTPC(Mediabrowser), PS3, XBOX360, Wii, Sony DVP-CX995V
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
Reply Plasma 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