Emissive HDTVs Beat Transmissive UHDTVs in Value Electronics 2014 Shootout - Page 5 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 578Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #121 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 05:28 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,019
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
Liked: 350
I agree with Mark. I'm surprised in a forum like this that anyone is actually railing against the relevancy of having plasmas in the test.

AV forums like this one are generally gatherings of enthusiasts who are interested in AV technology, where it's been, where it is, where it's going in terms of performance.

Keeping examples of a technology (plasma) that was readily available until recently helps us grade were we are in terms of advancing video performance. It is very enlightening to anyone who cares about this stuff to find out (or confirm) that, at the moment, the dominant technology (LCD) still struggles to reach certain areas of PQ performance that had been widely available in another technology, and might even be deemed overall a step backward at this point in time, overall. (Again, depending on one's criteria).

Whether you like how LCDs perform better or Plasma, or OLED, these tests are informative either way. They are also helpful in terms of buying decisions: many here own plasmas, but are ready to upgrade when they see something clearly de-throne their display of choice. This year's test
helps inform those plasma owners who may conclude "looks like I'll be hanging on to my plasma for now."
For those interested in LCD, it's informative as to the state of LCD technology.

Obviously there seem to be people here who are more interested in "what's my next TV?" above all else, so including anything they can't buy isn't interesting for them. But for those people more widely interested in AV technology itself - the type that generally has kept this forum the most interesting - including the best from a variety of technologies gives the widest perspective on where we are now.
R Harkness is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #122 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 05:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sage11x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Brighton, MI
Posts: 2,514
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 319 Post(s)
Liked: 540
Why is there such a fervor from some members to see plasma dead and buried? Where does that come from? Don't they understand that competition breeds innovation and excellence? Plasma disappearing from the market is a bad sign for TV in general-- especially LCD. One can only hope that OLED sees continued development.
sage11x is offline  
post #123 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 05:43 PM
Senior Member
 
Eternal Noob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
I agree with Mark. I'm surprised in a forum like this that anyone is actually railing against the relevancy of having plasmas in the test.

AV forums like this one are generally gatherings of enthusiasts who are interested in AV technology, where it's been, where it is, where it's going in terms of performance.
Right on.

For the record, the F8500 got my unequivocal top vote, both because of viewing angle issues on the other TVs and because of color accuracy issues. It also had, hands down, the best, smoothest motion of the lot. Black levels do not provide the only variable that matters in image fidelity. It's a big one, sure, but there are others, and they matter.
CJayB and tubetwister like this.

-Noob
Eternal Noob is offline  
post #124 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 05:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,115
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 682 Post(s)
Liked: 859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Influence View Post
So Michael Bay doesn't intentionally add a completely unrealistic "yellow" tinge to all of his movies? While I agree in your definition of "realistic" i.e. what our eyes see in the real world is what we should see on our TVs, from my experience the closest I've come to that is with a properly calibrated (Rec. 709, Gamma 2.4 (now using BT.1886) TV (Sony 34XBR-960, then Fujitsu Plasma, now a Panasonic 65ZT60).


Let's stick with the Michael Bay movie example. His films are intentionally unrealistic because they are tweaked to be that way. I would love to have a calibration for my TV that removed this ridiculous tinting he does to all of his films to make them more "realistic" and "natural." Sadly that just isn't possible. I guess I'd need a "Matrix" calibration to remove the excess green they added to all of those films as well. See the problem? I'd spend all my time tweaking my TV and never getting to watch anything.


On the flipside, well shot videos like Planet Earth (on Blu-ray, not as much the broadcast HD version) or Baraka look absolutely amazing on my calibrated sets and achieve that "looking out a window" effect that we all crave. Colors are just right and the image has depth and pop, just like real life.


This is why video is supposed to be "authored" to a standard, which you then can match to your display. Far too much content is either poorly authored or intentionally "tweaked" to a different standard. Yes, this is often what the content creator wanted so we should view it as close to their intent as possible. We may not like their choices, but they tweaked the image for a reason, often to convey some sort of response or emotion. We should at least try to see it the same way.


Obviously some people don't enjoy the look of a properly calibrated display. At least they don't at first. I was in my local BB/Magnolia a few weeks ago playing with an F8500 trying to decide if I should grab one more plasma for my family room before they are all gone and an older couple noticed how much I had to change the settings on the display. They thought the sets around the F8500 looked "better" than what I had done to the set. So I asked one of the "blue shirts" working to come over and stand next to the F8500. The Best Buy loop feed conveniently has a nice segment that shows a "blue shirt" employee for at least 20 seconds. I asked the couple which TV looked the most like real life now. They both immediately picked the F8500 that I had just tweaked and commented on how "wrong" the colors looked on the other TVs. I also asked them to look at the skin tones on the other sets in comparison. The nice lady commented that they all looked like "oompa-loompas" since they were so orangey/reddish.


I got 2 calibration jobs out of the couple, and convinced them to buy a 60" F8500 (they were only looking for a 50" screen when they came in). You are welcome Greg


But if you still don't like the calibrated look, feel free to adjust to your heart's content. After all, it is your TV and you can watch it however you want.
agreed. I'm very much a person that thinks my taste is important, but I'm not the person who should decide how a movie or tv show looks. and if I am that person, I want to watch it multiple times with different settings until every scene is exactly the way I want it. that's beyond impractical!


if you don't have accurate settings, you won't get that 'real life' look when you're supposed to. I'm not going to adjust my settings to make one movie look more realistic at the cost of making all others look less realistic. if one movie or song is recorded poorly and doesn't look good, then screw that movie/song. I'm not going to spend my time doing what the production company should have. and if I don't like the 'vision' that they sent out to the public, it's not my job to fix it. When I hear songs that don't sound good, I don't adjust my eq until it does, I skip to the next song.


the idea of tweaking settings every time is just disturbing to me. not only would it be a pita, but I'd also be constantly wondering if I could make it better somehow, or if it looks right if it's something I'm not familiar with(I don't know what scuba diving in underwater caves should look like, or what color that made up planet is supposed to be, etc).
so setting things to industry standards puts the responsibility on the production company, and not me, to get things right. my responsibility is to set my display to industry standards so that I see what they intended.

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 online now  
post #125 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 05:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,115
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 682 Post(s)
Liked: 859
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
I agree with Mark. I'm surprised in a forum like this that anyone is actually railing against the relevancy of having plasmas in the test.

AV forums like this one are generally gatherings of enthusiasts who are interested in AV technology, where it's been, where it is, where it's going in terms of performance.
.
exactly, the only way to be the champ is to beat the champ.


hearing how oled destroyed lcd in picture quality wouldn't have meant anything to me. but now, seeing how EARLY oled compared to one the best plasmas, I feel WAY better about the future of tv. oled definitely appears to be the real deal, and I'm comfortable with the thought that my next tv purchase may have to be oled.


I still wish plasma would stick around the value segment of the market, but I'm not as upset with TV's like the vt60, f8500, etc getting replaced with oleds. they seem to be only a year or two away from providing the same kind of quality per dollar.


there's just going to be a HUGE gap between oled and lcd now. plasma would have made a good middle ground for ppl who want decent picture quality but can't afford top of the line pricing. and I'm pretty skeptical that oled will reach the 60" for under 1000bux price point anytime soon.
Masterbrew2 likes this.

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 online now  
post #126 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 06:07 PM
Senior Member
 
Morning5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 114 Post(s)
Liked: 60
Quote:
Originally Posted by ynotgoal View Post
The motion issues with the LG OLED are probably more related to LG processing than to OLED technology. There is nothing inherent in OLED technology that would necessarily result in bad motion handling. This is where having multiple vendors (such as Sony) also selling OLED TVs based on LG's panel will allow for different sets to have different performance parameters.
Well I can say that Digital Noise Reduction enabled, increases input lag and the picture becomes a bit sluggish on my LG LCD. Im hoping LG releases a firmware update that allows turning Digital Noise Reduction OFF, on the EC9300 OLED.

My LG LCD had very low input lag with the factory firmware. I noticed that input lag increased a lot with newer firmware updates, perhaps LG forced the DNR.
igreg likes this.
Morning5 is offline  
post #127 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 06:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
barth2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,271
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Particularly when no 4K material was shown.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with what you said regarding display technology, but let's face it, as I said in another thread, this would be like having a shootout at the dawn of color TV and pitting 2 B&W sets against 2 new color sets...but feeding them only a B&W signal.

IMO that was the biggest failing of the shootout. How do you showcase UHD displays and not feed them a 4K signal to show what it looks like.
I don't think that's an apt analogy. B&W vs colors is a difference in kind. HD vs UHD is a difference in degree. Stand far enough away and you can't tell the difference between 2k and 4k, but as long as you're in visible range, you can still see colors. In any event, a good color TV shouldn't lose to a B&W TV.

Nevertheless there should have been 4k content. I'm surprised the reps did not volunteer to provide demo material.

I think when the 4k oleds come out, we're going to need to see shootout 2014 part deux to put this to rest. Heck, you, Ken, may have enough displays to do your own shootout. A tournament of Champions. Just need to borrow a kuro
barth2k is offline  
post #128 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 06:19 PM
Senior Member
 
Influence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 254
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
How can you tell the Bay tinge is unrealistic? You must know what realistic looks like, right? All I'm trying to say is that the standard of comparison should be the real world, not rec. 709. In your example, you've used the real world as your standard, that's what Bay's movies are yellower than, and that's what I'm saying we should be doing. The standard is what real scenes look like. That doesn't necessarily mean movies must be realistic.

Your point is certainly valid. There are clear limits to the range of color and dynamics in our current video standards. At this time though, we are stuck with Rec. 709 until 2020 (and possibly HDR - though I really don't feel like being blinded/squinting at glints of sunlight and such while watching a movie in my blacked out room) starts seeing wider adoption. In the interim, since all footage you watch is recorded and authored to the "limited standard" of 709, there really is no other option. We should make sure our displays are optimized as best as possible to ensure that we are at least getting the most out of the limited spec. Our current calibration methodologies are the best we have right now to meet that goal.


Oh, and get rid of the ridiculous curved screens too on sub-100" panels.
Influence is offline  
post #129 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 06:28 PM
 
Vegas oled's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 999 Post(s)
Liked: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morning5 View Post
Well I can say that Digital Noise Reduction enabled, increases input lag and the picture becomes a bit sluggish on my LG LCD. Im hoping LG releases a firmware update that allows turning Digital Noise Reduction OFF, on the EC9300 OLED.

My LG LCD had very low input lag with the factory firmware. I noticed that input lag increased a lot with newer firmware updates, perhaps LG forced the DNR.
That's what these shootouts are for, the manufactures gain a lot of knowledge from these top ISF calibrators. There is no reason to have NR filters locked on.
lyris likes this.
Vegas oled is online now  
post #130 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 08:06 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Montreal
Posts: 144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 77 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

Here's food for thought... I picked my PN64F8500 up for $2000.
Could you share with me how and where, please?

Pioneer KURO PDP-5080 HD TV (KURO 8G)
Pioneer Receiver VSX-1122-K
Sources: HTPC Dell XPS 8700 (Modified), Blu-ray
Energy RC & Veritas Speakers
Proud AVS Forum's Reader since 2006
XPSTester is offline  
post #131 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 08:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lyris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,457
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by ynotgoal View Post
The motion issues with the LG OLED are probably more related to LG processing than to OLED technology. There is nothing inherent in OLED technology that would necessarily result in bad motion handling.
Yes there is - sample and hold. If that point isn't somehow addressed, you'll get low motion resolution.
fafrd, dabotsonline and agkss like this.

David Mackenzie
DVD/BD Compressionist/Author
Reviewer & Tech Consultant, HDTVtest
lyris is online now  
post #132 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 08:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wxman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,847
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Liked: 243
I believe that the Kuro's and Panasonic VT/ZT should have also been on display and included in the judging. It is relevant. Those in the audience need to see how very little the industry has advanced LED technology, how poorly it stands up to 5+ year old technology, and that $10,000+ LED displays are indeed inferior. Maybe the industry needs to be embarrassed at this event. If no one holds their feet to the fire, they will see no reason to actually achieve 2008 Kuro or 2012 Panasonic video quality. Sure LG and Samsung produce excellent OLED displays, of which only LG is now producing, but will that even continue 2 or 3 years down the road? I hope so, I really hope so.
mobius, StinDaWg, chunon and 4 others like this.
wxman is offline  
post #133 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 10:17 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Montreal
Posts: 144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 77 Post(s)
Liked: 49
It really makes me smile when people say: "plasma is dead".

I bought my Kuro when it was declared the best out there and kept it since because I DID NOT FIND YET a better set in all aspects:
- LIFELIKE picture (as watching life through a clean window)
- STUNNING UPSCALING: we watch plenty of TV sent in in only 720p and plenty of YouTube videos ranging from 360p to 1080p. They all look SO MUCH BETTER on my Kuro than on my Dell Ultrasharp monitor (the FHD that followed did not have as good SD upscaling!!!)
- we watch the TV during the day (we got TON of windows) and night always with some background lights.
- the Panasonic plasma, despite buying some of Pioneer patents, NEVER, until ZT60 has any good upscalling (tested few weeks ago)

So after over 6 years since I own the set, my wife and I we agreed to keep this (built like a tank) set till it completely dies!

When I recently compared Panasonic, Samsung and Sony best TVs, surprisingly to me though, I found the MOST LIFELIKE looking TV that I would proudly take home was the Sony XBR65X950B!!!

I am positive if that TV was put near the 55" OLEDs and the 64" plasma, the appreciation of that 65" set would have been higher!!!

ANY set (lcd, plasma or oled) when blown to huge sizes such as 79" or more is so much easier target for the human eye to spot imperfections on TEST MATERIAL.

I challenge people to spot the differences in a BLIND TEST while watching some TVstations, nature programing or regular movies (forget the Harry Potter one scene! OK

Pioneer KURO PDP-5080 HD TV (KURO 8G)
Pioneer Receiver VSX-1122-K
Sources: HTPC Dell XPS 8700 (Modified), Blu-ray
Energy RC & Veritas Speakers
Proud AVS Forum's Reader since 2006

Last edited by XPSTester; 08-20-2014 at 10:20 PM.
XPSTester is offline  
post #134 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 10:25 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Montreal
Posts: 144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 77 Post(s)
Liked: 49
I look forward to the Sony (the LEADER of professional processing technology) OLED TV (which they would probably buy the panel from LG, just as they do it now) :-)
tubetwister likes this.

Pioneer KURO PDP-5080 HD TV (KURO 8G)
Pioneer Receiver VSX-1122-K
Sources: HTPC Dell XPS 8700 (Modified), Blu-ray
Energy RC & Veritas Speakers
Proud AVS Forum's Reader since 2006
XPSTester is offline  
post #135 of 687 Old 08-20-2014, 11:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,123
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 295
Anyone know if this Toshiba CELL TV was ever released? it have 512 zones.




I see blooming/halos when the TV is displaying CELL REGZA . I'm not sure if this is the same model as the one on the picture.but I saw a newer model on you tube with the same blooming/halos problems ,well probably they all were in torch mode.






What about this LG NANO LED. How was the perform of this TV?




On this video you can see the difference of LG EDGE LED ,FULL LED and NANO FULL LED.

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	toshiba-celltv.jpg
Views:	306
Size:	41.7 KB
ID:	221786  

Last edited by losservatore; 08-21-2014 at 01:21 AM.
losservatore is online now  
post #136 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 03:41 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,325
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 270 Post(s)
Liked: 590
Plasma is dead and buried.

Whether we wish it wasn't is pretty irrelevant at this point.

I hate to be on this side of the argument -- especially as I look over at my plasma -- but it's pretty pointless to compare plasmas to things you can / should be buying. If you want a closeout Samsung... fine. But most people won't do that. And soon you will have no choice.

This multi-year worship of a plasma no one else could buy was a pointless diversion that really did serious damage to the utility of the flat-panel area on AVS. I'd hate to see it repeated with plasma generally.

Let's move on.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #137 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 04:30 AM
Senior Member
 
rcapprotti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: ocala fl
Posts: 235
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by XPSTester View Post
Could you share with me how and where, please?
I believe it was an open box from Best Buy but I could be wrong
rcapprotti is offline  
post #138 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 04:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mattopotamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 561 Post(s)
Liked: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by XPSTester View Post
It really makes me smile when people say: "plasma is dead".

I bought my Kuro when it was declared the best out there and kept it since because I DID NOT FIND YET a better set in all aspects:
- LIFELIKE picture (as watching life through a clean window)
- STUNNING UPSCALING: we watch plenty of TV sent in in only 720p and plenty of YouTube videos ranging from 360p to 1080p. They all look SO MUCH BETTER on my Kuro than on my Dell Ultrasharp monitor (the FHD that followed did not have as good SD upscaling!!!)
- we watch the TV during the day (we got TON of windows) and night always with some background lights.
- the Panasonic plasma, despite buying some of Pioneer patents, NEVER, until ZT60 has any good upscalling (tested few weeks ago)

So after over 6 years since I own the set, my wife and I we agreed to keep this (built like a tank) set till it completely dies!

When I recently compared Panasonic, Samsung and Sony best TVs, surprisingly to me though, I found the MOST LIFELIKE looking TV that I would proudly take home was the Sony XBR65X950B!!!

I am positive if that TV was put near the 55" OLEDs and the 64" plasma, the appreciation of that 65" set would have been higher!!!

ANY set (lcd, plasma or oled) when blown to huge sizes such as 79" or more is so much easier target for the human eye to spot imperfections on TEST MATERIAL.

I challenge people to spot the differences in a BLIND TEST while watching some TVstations, nature programing or regular movies (forget the Harry Potter one scene! OK
Even in a "blind" test the trained eye can see the imperfections. Hence why I see them and my GF does not until I point them out. Once you see the banding/clouding/etc you cannot unsee it.
Mattopotamus is offline  
post #139 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 04:59 AM
Senior Member
 
THX1720's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
But putting aside which standard is best, can't you at least understand that the standards differ? What you were intended to see and what you would actually see, if you were there?
Unless you were on the set, how would you know what it looked like in your "real life" false standard?
Turrican4D likes this.
THX1720 is offline  
post #140 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 05:38 AM
Advanced Member
 
Ricoflashback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 82
Plasma purists - - I know they are out there. And, for the most part, their collective opinion is that there is nothing that matches the quality of a plasma TV. The discontinuation of plasma production has more to do with the marketplace and the conscious decision by manufacturers on what will sell and what won't.

I didn't choose a plasma TV two years ago. My considerations were heat, weight and buzz. Plus, the 3D content did not look as sharp compared to the Samsung 65" LCD/LED that I purchased. Is it the perfect panel? No. But it's close enough for me.

I understand the calibrators argument. But there are a couple considerations here. Namely, who is doing the calibration? If it's Best Buy, then you're not gonna get the optimal result. Notwithstanding the cost - - calibrating to standards makes logical sense but not all TV's are the same. There seems to be some room for "tweaking" and that will be dependent on the quality of the calibrator. (By the way, how long does a calibration last? Set it and forget it? What about firmware updates?)

I believe you can get very good quality with standard settings from the manufacturer with some tweaking on your own. Am I a professional calibrator? No way. But isn't the point of technology to make it easier for consumers to get the best picture possible without having to pay for a calibration? I know that personal preference has a lot to do with this, but folks watching a TV that isn't professionally calibrated are not watching mush.

I remember fooling around with calibrated settings from CNET for my Sammy set that were supposedly set to "standards." They looked God awful. O.K. - - you can make the argument that you shouldn't use someone else settings, but if TV's are manufactured to within a certain specification - - shouldn't those calibrated settings offer a close picture to the reference set?

TV's have come a long way. I have heard that earlier projectors had to have professional calibration because the "out of the box" experience was horrific. That is changing.
fafrd likes this.

Home Theater Setup
Samsung UN65ES8000 LCD/LED
BenQ W1080ST Projector
Pioneer SC65 (Pre-Amp)
Wyred4Sound MMC-7 Channel Amplifier, 221wpc
OPPO 103, Directv GENIE
Darbee Darblet
ALL Paradigm - 7.1 - Studio 60's, V.2 (FL/FR)
CC-690, V.5 (C)
ADP 590 V.5 (SS)
MilleniaOne 2.0 (BS) - Velodyne 810 Sub
Ricoflashback is offline  
post #141 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 06:21 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,024
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1446 Post(s)
Liked: 2723
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
Plasma is dead and buried.

Whether we wish it wasn't is pretty irrelevant at this point.

I hate to be on this side of the argument -- especially as I look over at my plasma -- but it's pretty pointless to compare plasmas to things you can / should be buying. If you want a closeout Samsung... fine. But most people won't do that. And soon you will have no choice.

This multi-year worship of a plasma no one else could buy was a pointless diversion that really did serious damage to the utility of the flat-panel area on AVS. I'd hate to see it repeated with plasma generally.

Let's move on.
Not everyone is going to run out and buy a $10,000+ LCD, either. Based on size, price, and performance, the F8500 deserved to be shootout, regardless of what technology it uses or when production will end. It's available now, and that's enough.
igreg, losservatore and riparian like this.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
post #142 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 06:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Mattopotamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 561 Post(s)
Liked: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
Not everyone is going to run out and buy a $10,000+ LCD, either. Based on size, price, and performance, the F8500 deserved to be shootout, regardless of what technology it uses or when production will end. It's available now, and that's enough.
I am always on the hunt for an open box f8500 or now the LG OLEDs. I am hoping to find a display model for dirt cheap now that the new ones are out.
Mattopotamus is offline  
post #143 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 06:28 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,024
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1446 Post(s)
Liked: 2723
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricoflashback View Post
Plasma purists - - I know they are out there. And, for the most part, their collective opinion is that there is nothing that matches the quality of a plasma TV. The discontinuation of plasma production has more to do with the marketplace and the conscious decision by manufacturers on what will sell and what won't.

I didn't choose a plasma TV two years ago. My considerations were heat, weight and buzz. Plus, the 3D content did not look as sharp compared to the Samsung 65" LCD/LED that I purchased. Is it the perfect panel? No. But it's close enough for me.

I understand the calibrators argument. But there are a couple considerations here. Namely, who is doing the calibration? If it's Best Buy, then you're not gonna get the optimal result. Notwithstanding the cost - - calibrating to standards makes logical sense but not all TV's are the same. There seems to be some room for "tweaking" and that will be dependent on the quality of the calibrator. (By the way, how long does a calibration last? Set it and forget it? What about firmware updates?)

I believe you can get very good quality with standard settings from the manufacturer with some tweaking on your own. Am I a professional calibrator? No way. But isn't the point of technology to make it easier for consumers to get the best picture possible without having to pay for a calibration? I know that personal preference has a lot to do with this, but folks watching a TV that isn't professionally calibrated are not watching mush.

I remember fooling around with calibrated settings from CNET for my Sammy set that were supposedly set to "standards." They looked God awful. O.K. - - you can make the argument that you shouldn't use someone else settings, but if TV's are manufactured to within a certain specification - - shouldn't those calibrated settings offer a close picture to the reference set?

TV's have come a long way. I have heard that earlier projectors had to have professional calibration because the "out of the box" experience was horrific. That is changing.
That's not how it works. The parts in your TV—and consumer TV, really—are not built to tight enough tolerances for each TV to look the same. That's why canned settings never work. TVs are getting better, but most TVs default settings do look like mush, compared to a properly adjusted TV.

There is a lot you can do without measurement devices, but a proper calibration will always include instrument-measured Gamma and color adjustments. If Best Buy employees frequently screws up calibrations, that's not an indictment of the science itself, it just means Best Buy's training is inadequate.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is online now  
post #144 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 07:11 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,019
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 123 Post(s)
Liked: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
Plasma is dead and buried.

Whether we wish it wasn't is pretty irrelevant at this point.

I hate to be on this side of the argument -- especially as I look over at my plasma -- but it's pretty pointless to compare plasmas to things you can / should be buying. If you want a closeout Samsung... fine. But most people won't do that. And soon you will have no choice.

This multi-year worship of a plasma no one else could buy was a pointless diversion that really did serious damage to the utility of the flat-panel area on AVS. I'd hate to see it repeated with plasma generally.

Let's move on.
But rogo, since everyone already owns a flat panel, buying a new one is predicated on replacing one's current TV.
So a comparison of the TVs we CAN BUY - e.g. the LCDS - to the current TVs we own is extremely relevant.

For the great many plasma owners, these LCD shoot-outs with plasmas are informative about the state of LCD vs plasma. Especially if you know you have a higher end plasma - and enthusiast forums like this tend to be populated by people who wanted to buy the better performers - controlled comparisons like these help the plasma owner in deciding whether to hang on to his current display, or whether there is something better now available in LCD to tempt him to upgrade.

I don't see how this could be irrelevant, especially in a forum like this one, in which we gather not only to decide on our "next TV" but to also share information about AV technology.
R Harkness is online now  
post #145 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 07:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
hernanu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Boston Suburbs
Posts: 2,537
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 73 Post(s)
Liked: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
But rogo, since everyone already owns a flat panel, buying a new one is predicated on replacing one's current TV.
So a comparison of the TVs we CAN BUY - e.g. the LCDS - to the current TVs we own is extremely relevant.

For the great many plasma owners, these LCD shoot-outs with plasmas are informative about the state of LCD vs plasma. Especially if you know you have a higher end plasma - and enthusiast forums like this tend to be populated by people who wanted to buy the better performers - controlled comparisons like these help the plasma owner in deciding whether to hang on to his current display, or whether there is something better now available in LCD to tempt him to upgrade.

I don't see how this could be irrelevant, especially in a forum like this one, in which we gather not only to decide on our "next TV" but to also share information about AV technology.
I see your point, it is valuable for people who own plasmas already to see if they should hold on to it or whether they'd be at least getting equivalent service from a new panel.

I don't know anyone personally <- (just me) who owns a plasma. Most of the people I know own LED TV's. To them, their next purchase will replace an LCD. It may be worthwhile, if they can afford it or want to, to buy an F8500, but they are most likely going to buy an LCD/LED.

So no, not only is it not irrelevant in my view, it is important to see the performance if historical results and progression of the technology is the point of this competition.

However, if someone is going to choose a new panel based on these results who doesn't already have a plasma or wants UHD, the choice is the bottom of the heap in 1080p based competition or an OLED.

Depends on the goal of the competition.
hernanu is online now  
post #146 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 07:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dsinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 105
^ Rich: The same argument applies to LCD owners. I have a 70" Sharp Elite and none of the LCDs in the shootout had as good numbers as it does. (Cyan is not an issue fro me: my Lumagen Radiance fixed that easily.) If other LCD owners have a 4-6 year old set, the new ones could easily provide a significant improvement even if they are second rate to the last remaining plasma and OLED. My conclusion from the shootout confirmed what I was already thinking; the 77" OLED is the only possible replacement at this point. How it performs in the real world will determine if this is true. Hopefully waiting.
Ken Ross and fafrd like this.
dsinger is online now  
post #147 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 08:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,252
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1173 Post(s)
Liked: 1321
^ What the man called "Dave" said.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #148 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 09:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
GregLee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waimanalo HI
Posts: 3,249
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Liked: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by THX1720 View Post
Unless you were on the set, how would you know what it looked like in your "real life" false standard?
To add to the examples I've mentioned above, here's another example. Some TVs have skin color controls. In my experience, they are not very useful, but why are they there at all? Because some viewers are unsatisfied with what people's skins look like, and want the means to try and get their TVs to do better with skins. How can a person be legitimately dissatisfied with skins' appearance? Well, I'm sure you know, but I'll just say, anyway, that we humans know what one anothers' skins look like in real life, and when the TV is showing us different, we can tell. We don't need to depend solely on the director's decisions or our neighborhood ISF technician to tell us when the skins are going wrong.

Please, now, don't let's go on about zombies and the Hulk not being intended to have the normal skin color. As well as knowing what reality looks like, we can recognize deliberate departures from the norm and make allowance for that in our esthetic judgments.

Greg Lee
GregLee is online now  
post #149 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 09:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
I WANT MORE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 'Middle of Nowhere"
Posts: 1,795
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 109 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
To add to the examples I've mentioned above, here's another example. Some TVs have skin color controls. In my experience, they are not very useful, but why are they there at all? Because some viewers are unsatisfied with what people's skins look like, and want the means to try and get their TVs to do better with skins. How can a person be legitimately dissatisfied with skins' appearance? Well, I'm sure you know, but I'll just say, anyway, that we humans know what one anothers' skins look like in real life, and when the TV is showing us different, we can tell. We don't need to depend solely on the director's decisions or our neighborhood ISF technician to tell us when the skins are going wrong.

Please, now, don't let's go on about zombies and the Hulk not being intended to have the normal skin color. As well as knowing what reality looks like, we can recognize deliberate departures from the norm and make allowance for that in our esthetic judgments.
I really don't know what to say about this.

Perhaps I misremembered.

I WANT MORE is offline  
post #150 of 687 Old 08-21-2014, 09:44 AM
Senior Member
 
THX1720's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post
I'll just say, anyway, that we humans know what one anothers' skins look like in real life, and when the TV is showing us different, we can tell.
Unless the actor is standing in your room you have no idea what their skin really looks like...
THX1720 is offline  
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

Tags
frontpage

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