Emissive HDTVs Beat Transmissive UHDTVs in Value Electronics 2014 Shootout - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 578Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 08:41 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1072 Post(s)
Liked: 2238
Emissive HDTVs Beat Transmissive UHDTVs in Value Electronics 2014 Shootout


OLED and plasma HDTVs outperformed the LED-LCD UHDTVs, despite their smaller screens and lower resolution, resulting in a tie for first place.

-------

For the first time in the 10-year history of the Value Electronics Flat-Panel Shootout, there are two winners. Depending on how you parse the audience votes, the crown goes to LG's 55EC93000 OLED or Samsung's PN64F8500 plasma, which is why VE president Robert Zohn announced a tie.

As in years past, the audience vote determined the overall winner; the F8500 beat all of the LCD-based UHDTVs in every category and garnered the highest overall average score, while LG's new—and relatively inexpensive—OLED scored the highest of all the TVs in four out of six weighted categories. On top of that, the calibrators who set up the TVs chose Samsung's KN55S9C OLED as the best-performing display in the shootout. It's fair to say that, in the eyes of both the audience and the pros, LCD-based UHDTVs (which are known as transmissive displays because light must pass through the LCD layer) did not perform that well compared to OLED and plasma panels, which are called emissive because the pixels emit their own light.


LG's 55EC93000 OLED (left) and Samsung's PN64F8500 plasma (right) tied for first place

The difference between last year's shootout and the latest edition was quite stark: LCDs went from being a sideshow to the main attraction in the annual comparison of flat-panel displays. All the UHD/4K entrants were large and expensive TVs—78 inches or larger—relative to the TVs featured last year, which topped out at 65 inches with Sony's XBR-65X900A. According to the event organizers, the larger screen sizes are a necessity with UHDTVs, helping viewers appreciate the added resolution of UHD/4K content from normal viewing distances.

The problem with such large UHDTVs is that they cost much more than 65-inch models, but the extra money only buys screen real estate, not better performance versus smaller TVs that use the same technology. The prices of the LCD-based UHD/4K TVs in the shootout ranged from $6000 to $120,000, well outside of most TV shoppers' budget. Yet, paying a princely sum offers no guarantee that a TV will produce the best possible image.


DeWayne Davis (D-Nice) sets up a checkerboard pattern, which is used to measure contrast.

At the shootout, I noticed how obvious the dimming zones are on larger LCD UHDTVs. Based on my experience with the FALD (full-array local dimming) on Sharp's Elite and Vizio's P-series LCDs, I thought the current crop of UHDTVs would offer some tangible improvement over the flashlighting artifacts that plague edgelit designs. Instead, I witnessed obvious halo artifacts and pulsating shadows, even on the most expensive UHDTVs at the shootout. To my eyes, it was apparent that the FALD UHDTVs do not have backlit arrays with enough dimming zones to produce a plasma- or OLED-like image, one that is free of flashlighting and halo artifacts.

During the Q&A session at the end of the Saturday session, DeWayne Davis (D-Nice) said that his five Pioneer Kuros remain unbeaten in terms of image quality. I feel the same way about my Samsung F8500, the winner of last year's—and co-winner of this year's—shootouts. Based on what I saw last weekend, when it comes to the current crop of LCD-based UHDTVs, extra pixels and extra inches come at the expense of color fidelity, motion handling, and contrast. According to Robert Zohn, "Regardless of how you break down the ballots the message is clear, video enthusiasts strongly prefer self-emitting based displays over liquid crystal panels with edge lit or direct array light emitting diodes."

The results of the 2014 shootout do not mean that 1080p somehow beat UHD/4K—the display technology itself made the difference. The problem is that LED-LCD is the only consumer-oriented flat-panel display technology that is mass-produced in large sizes and UHD/4K resolution. And whereas a 65-inch HDTV is close to the optimum screen size for viewing 1080p content from nine or ten feet away, you need to sit much closer to a UHDTV to get the maximum benefit of the extra pixels—or else you need a larger screen to see the enhanced detail. The only TV at the shootout large enough to take full advantage of UHD resolution from a typical TV viewing distance was the 105-inch Samsung UN105S9W, which costs $120,000. In other words, unless you pay more for a TV than you would pay for a very nice luxury car, you only gain a fraction of the benefit of UHD/4K resolution.


Samsung's 105-inch ultra-wide UHDTV is large enough to take advantage of UHD/4K resolution.

Ultimately, the LCD-based UHDTVs in the VE shootout offer larger screen sizes and more pixels, but not necessarily better image quality. If a broad array of currently available, demonstrably superior UHD/4K TVs and movie content existed already, the value proposition of UHD/4K would be better. As it stands, there's precious little native UHD content to watch on a UHDTV aside from still photos, home videos, 4K video games, a handful of movies, and a couple of TV shows—everything else is upscaled 1080p content. Put another way, if you mostly watch movies on Blu-ray and cable/broadcast TV, upscaling that content to UHD/4K resolution is not enough to compensate for the notably inferior performance of LED-LCDs.


David Mackenzie demonstrates the effect of upscaling 1080p to UHD using various algorithms.

My takeaway from this year's shootout is that it's difficult to mitigate the fundamental flaws of LCD technology, and it costs a lot to try. Interestingly, I went to last year's shootout convinced that Sony's XBR-65X900A UHD/4K offering had a chance at winning. By the end of that evening, I could see that the plasmas were the best performers, and by a significant margin. This year, once again I thought the LCDs had a real shot at winning, and I was wrong. Since OLED and plasma technology won the 2014 vote despite the handicap of smaller screen sizes and "only" 1080p resolution, I'm very interested in seeing how the forthcoming UHD/4K OLEDs from LG rank when subjected to similar scrutiny. Based on the performance of the two 1080p OLEDs at this year's shootout, it's possible that 2014's best-performing TV wasn't even in the competition.


The two winners, the PN64F8500 (top right) and the 55EC93000 (bottom right), also had the widest viewing angles.

I want to congratulate everyone who helped make the 2014 Value Electronics shootout happen. It is a tremendously valuable resource for videophiles—a unique opportunity to see how the latest TVs compare to each other. I specifically want to highlight the thorough professionalism of the calibrators—Kevin Miller, DeWayne Davis, and David Mackenzie. Thank you guys!


Like AVS Forum on Facebook
Follow AVS Forum on Twitter
+1 AVS Forum on Google+

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by imagic; 08-27-2014 at 06:42 AM.
imagic is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 09:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,337
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 248 Post(s)
Liked: 187
Let's test a few UHD TV'S but let's not feed them any UHD material. Nobody in the market for a UHD set really cares what they would look like showing UHD material anyway. Why would anybody care if one brand did a better job than another brand?
Ken Ross, mobius, vddobrev and 2 others like this.
andy sullivan is online now  
post #3 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 09:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wxman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,844
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 242
Is that bad off angle viewing of the 2 tv's on the left showing the red screen, or caused by camera? That red color on those 2 tv's looks horrible.
wxman is offline  
post #4 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 09:11 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1072 Post(s)
Liked: 2238
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post
Let's test a few UHD TV'S but let's not feed them any UHD material. Nobody in the market for a UHD set really cares what they would look like showing UHD material anyway. Why would anybody care if one brand did a better job than another brand?
Resolution has little or nothing to do with most of the image quality parameters that were tested. LCDs have limited viewing angles and a number of other issues that will manifest even with the most pristine and perfect UHD/4K content. Under current standards, the only advantage offered by UHD/4K is more pixels. Enhanced gamut and greater bit depth would make a difference, but that's not a part of the current spec.
Sean Max, tazz3, Djoel and 10 others like this.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
imagic is online now  
post #5 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 09:13 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1072 Post(s)
Liked: 2238
Quote:
Originally Posted by wxman View Post
Is that bad off angle viewing of the 2 tv's on the left showing the red screen, or caused by camera? That red color on those 2 tv's looks horrible.
The scene looked just about the same in person but the camera can distort things. I was very surprised by how much off-angle viewing affected the Samsung OLED. The Samsung U9000's off-angle performance was no surprise, it is a VA LCD panel.

Edit - I replaced that original image with a darker exposure that is more accurate.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by imagic; 08-19-2014 at 10:19 PM.
imagic is online now  
post #6 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 09:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lyris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,441
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post
Let's test a few UHD TV'S but let's not feed them any UHD material.
What UHD material?

Actually, Joe Kane did run some of his footage (captured on a Sony F65 if I recall correctly) at 2160p.

David Mackenzie
DVD/BD Compressionist/Author
Reviewer & Tech Consultant, HDTVtest
lyris is offline  
post #7 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 09:33 PM
Advanced Member
 
5x10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 439 Post(s)
Liked: 210
It's crazy that the samsung oled(bottom left) looks orange, but is giving off a red reflection right below the screen
vaktmestern and Vegas oled like this.
5x10 is online now  
post #8 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 09:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
losservatore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,117
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Liked: 295
Ouch this thread is going to hurt some people's feelings

Panasonic 65VT60 / Marantz SR7005 / Marantz UD7007 /PSA XS30 /Revel Performa3 F206 / Revel Performa3 C205 / Revel Surrounds/Sonos Connect/ Roku 3 / Amazon Fire tv / Xbox One / HTPC / Darbee 5000 /Sonos play:1 for bedrooms,kitchen,bathroom/Master bedroom Sonos sound bar/Sonos sub and Sonos play 1 surrounds.

Last edited by losservatore; 08-19-2014 at 10:12 PM.
losservatore is offline  
post #9 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 10:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Vegas oled's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,474
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 796 Post(s)
Liked: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5x10 View Post
It's crazy that the samsung oled(bottom left) looks orange, but is giving off a red reflection right below the screen
I also am surprised, this would be a good reason for the people to chose the LG OLED.
tubetwister likes this.
Vegas oled is offline  
post #10 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 10:09 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1072 Post(s)
Liked: 2238
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5x10 View Post
It's crazy that the samsung oled(bottom left) looks orange, but is giving off a red reflection right below the screen
I replaced it with a darker exposure that's a bit more accurate. The Sammy still looks a bit orange. Its off-angle behavior was not the same as an LCD.

Here is a picture with real content... looks much better.

RyanHomsey, 5x10 and Darkknightman like this.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
imagic is online now  
post #11 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 10:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
losservatore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,117
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Liked: 295
Mark Can you share pictures with the grey and black pattern or from the harry potter clip.






EDIT: CNET

LG OLED TV and Samsung plasma win 2014 Value Electronics shootout


http://www.cnet.com/news/lg-wins-val...shootout-2014/

Panasonic 65VT60 / Marantz SR7005 / Marantz UD7007 /PSA XS30 /Revel Performa3 F206 / Revel Performa3 C205 / Revel Surrounds/Sonos Connect/ Roku 3 / Amazon Fire tv / Xbox One / HTPC / Darbee 5000 /Sonos play:1 for bedrooms,kitchen,bathroom/Master bedroom Sonos sound bar/Sonos sub and Sonos play 1 surrounds.

Last edited by losservatore; 08-20-2014 at 12:26 AM.
losservatore is offline  
post #12 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 10:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fatuglyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mars
Posts: 1,352
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 95
The results aren't a surprise...I guess the only surprise is the fact that the LCDs performed like, well...LCDs, after many were convinced that this year's crop of LCDs was really that much better than last year's. Would have been nice to see the 65" Sony X900B in the lineup, since it's a completely different TV than the 79", and a seemingly great performer. The Panasonic AX800 would have been nice too but I guess Panasonic declined.

What I don't understand is all the talk about this Samsung OLED, when it's been discontinued for some time already. I remember having one on display when it was actually available, though. In a darkened room the contrast was jaw-dropping. But even in default or Movie modes I can recall the screen having an odd, slightly green tint when compared to the movie/cinema modes of the other TVs around it at the time. Perhaps it just needed a quality calibration. I do also recall it having a noticeable shift in color off angle, kind of reminded me of the shift exhibited my old Samsung phone with an OLED panel (a Galaxy S1).
agkss and tubetwister like this.

ht Panasonic 60" ZT60, Monitor Audio: Silver RX6, RX Centre, Radius 90HD; Martinlogan Dynamo 700, Marantz SR5006, PS3, Oppo BDP-103D
2ch Sony KDL-32W650A, Sony BDP-S1000ES, Marantz PM8004, JVC T-X3 tuner, Monitor Audio Silver RX1, REL T3, Apple TV, Peachtree Audio DAC•iT, Sennheiser HD598
lr Panasonic 50" ST60, Sony BDP-S5100, Apple TV
pc Energy CB-5, Audioengine D1, FiiO A1
fatuglyguy is offline  
post #13 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 10:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
barth2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 90
^^^ still looks too reddish. I can see too that that angle is not doing the f8500 any favor with its louvre filter.

I don't think it's fair to say the oleds and plasma won despite smaller sizes, as the Lcd larger sizes only magnify their flaws. Maybe we need a reshootout if the 4k oled and P series show up in time
tubetwister likes this.
barth2k is online now  
post #14 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 11:05 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1072 Post(s)
Liked: 2238
Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post
Mark Can you share pictures with the grey and black pattern or from the harry potter clip.
Here's a shot during the Harry Potter clip. It's a worst-case scenario of dark room viewing angle mayhem.

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04914.jpg
Views:	1883
Size:	174.0 KB
ID:	220386  

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
imagic is online now  
post #15 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 11:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Vegas oled's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,474
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 796 Post(s)
Liked: 543
Where OLED really trumps the f8500 for me is in bright room viewing. The f8500 is still very bright but blacks turn to grey. What looks like a darker store (designed to sell flat panels), does not duplicate the torture chamber of many living rooms even with the lights on.
Vegas oled is offline  
post #16 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 11:18 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1072 Post(s)
Liked: 2238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas oled View Post
Where OLED really trumps the f8500 for me is in bright room viewing. The f8500 is still very bright but blacks turn to grey. What looks like a darker store (designed to sell flat panels), does not duplicate the torture chamber of many living rooms even with the lights on.
I guess some living rooms must very very bright indeed. That said, I have not seen what you describe, at all. The F5300, yes. But the F8500? Blacks have never appeared grayish to me, no matter what time of day it is.

That said, OLED trumps all plasmas and LCDs ever made when it comes to deep blacks, and it handles bright room situations with aplomb.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
imagic is online now  
post #17 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 11:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
losservatore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,117
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Liked: 295
This LCDs need something strong to block the light that pass through the LCD layer.The sharp elite is a great example ,they also need to be made FALD with enough zones.
tubetwister likes this.

Panasonic 65VT60 / Marantz SR7005 / Marantz UD7007 /PSA XS30 /Revel Performa3 F206 / Revel Performa3 C205 / Revel Surrounds/Sonos Connect/ Roku 3 / Amazon Fire tv / Xbox One / HTPC / Darbee 5000 /Sonos play:1 for bedrooms,kitchen,bathroom/Master bedroom Sonos sound bar/Sonos sub and Sonos play 1 surrounds.

Last edited by losservatore; 08-19-2014 at 11:43 PM.
losservatore is offline  
post #18 of 683 Old 08-19-2014, 11:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
losservatore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,117
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 192 Post(s)
Liked: 295
Vegas oled we know that oled can get super deep blacks but plasma can still get deep blacks ,not grey like you said ,it will need an oled on the side to tell the difference.

Panasonic 65VT60 / Marantz SR7005 / Marantz UD7007 /PSA XS30 /Revel Performa3 F206 / Revel Performa3 C205 / Revel Surrounds/Sonos Connect/ Roku 3 / Amazon Fire tv / Xbox One / HTPC / Darbee 5000 /Sonos play:1 for bedrooms,kitchen,bathroom/Master bedroom Sonos sound bar/Sonos sub and Sonos play 1 surrounds.

Last edited by losservatore; 08-20-2014 at 12:13 AM.
losservatore is offline  
post #19 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 04:00 AM
Member
 
MLXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 27
I presume that as in previous years, visible panel flicker was not a criterion that was required to be evaluated subjectively and scored. It's a parameter that does not favor plasma technology. Individual sensitivity/susceptibility plays a big role, similar to varied personal experiences of the rainbow effect with color wheel based projectors. (For some people RBE is a deal breaker. Others may not notice it at all.)

I saw a Samsung 64inch F8500 Plasma TV on display at a showroom in Australia and the flicker was very distracting. Of course the TV was probably set at maximum brightness and contrast for display purposes. I have a 2010 model 50" Panasonic Plasma (VT20) and it is flickery. This becomes noticeable and a bit distracting with expanses of white.

Changes in plasma screens since the advent of 3D

Plasma screen flicker has increased since 2010 when it became necessary to use low persistence phosphors with plasma panels designed for use with 3D shutter glasses. (Longer persistence phosphors would have resulted in noticeable ghosting when the screen was viewed with shutter glasses operating at 120Hz.)

Plasma panel flicker panel becomes even more obvious, all other things being equal, if the screen is very bright, as can be the case with the Samsung F8500.

Silence in reviews and in "shoot-outs"

As long as review articles, and competitions such as this one, remain silent about plasma panel flicker, unsuspecting customers, unaware of their sensitivity to flicker, may be in for an unpleasant surprise. They may even find themselves having to return their set for a refund. (Mind you, there's not too much stock of new plasmas on the shelves.)

Here's a post made to this forum in July 2013 about an unexpected experience with plasma screen flicker:
Quote:
Originally Posted by setguillaume View Post
I had no idea plasmas were prone to flicker until we bought one this weekend... Flicker isn't something mentioned in plasma reviews (not any that I have read anyway), and it was only at the last minute that we decided to buy a plasma over an LCD. Like Picasso Moon, the flicker is quite noticeable with bright and or solid colors, and for us it's also a dealbreaker. This particular model (a 60" Samsung F5500) has other issues as well, (the PenTile screen being just as unfortunate as the flicker) so we are exchanging it for a 60" Sony R550. The viewing angles on the plasma are great, but not worth enduring the eight other issues we have with the set.

Last edited by MLXXX; 08-20-2014 at 04:07 AM.
MLXXX is offline  
post #20 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 04:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,904
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 247 Post(s)
Liked: 218
What's the point showing Plasma performs better when Plasma is out of production end of this year.
fafrd and tubby497 like this.
8mile13 is offline  
post #21 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 04:36 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1072 Post(s)
Liked: 2238
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLXXX View Post
I presume that as in previous years, visible panel flicker was not a criterion that was required to be evaluated subjectively and scored. It's a parameter that does not favor plasma technology. Individual sensitivity/susceptibility plays a big role, similar to varied personal experiences of the rainbow effect with color wheel based projectors. (For some people RBE is a deal breaker. Others may not notice it at all.)

I saw a Samsung 64inch F8500 Plasma TV on display at a showroom in Australia and the flicker was very distracting. Of course the TV was probably set at maximum brightness and contrast for display purposes. I have a 2010 model 50" Panasonic Plasma (VT20) and it is flickery. This becomes noticeable and a bit distracting with expanses of white.

Changes in plasma screens since the advent of 3D

Plasma screen flicker has increased since 2010 when it became necessary to use low persistence phosphors with plasma panels designed for use with 3D shutter glasses. (Longer persistence phosphors would have resulted in noticeable ghosting when the screen was viewed with shutter glasses operating at 120Hz.)

Plasma panel flicker panel becomes even more obvious, all other things being equal, if the screen is very bright, as can be the case with the Samsung F8500.

Silence in reviews and in "shoot-outs"

As long as review articles, and competitions such as this one, remain silent about plasma panel flicker, unsuspecting customers, unaware of their sensitivity to flicker, may be in for an unpleasant surprise. They may even find themselves having to return their set for a refund. (Mind you, there's not too much stock of new plasmas on the shelves.)

Here's a post made to this forum in July 2013 about an unexpected experience with plasma screen flicker:
The Samsung LCDs used BLS to achieve higher motion interpolation, and that also creates flicker. The F8500 exhibited no visible flicker for the whole shootout, and I happen to be quite sensitive to that effect.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
imagic is online now  
post #22 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 04:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
vddobrev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 811
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLXXX View Post
I presume that as in previous years, visible panel flicker was not a criterion that was required to be evaluated subjectively and scored. It's a parameter that does not favor plasma technology. Individual sensitivity/susceptibility plays a big role, similar to varied personal experiences of the rainbow effect with color wheel based projectors. (For some people RBE is a deal breaker. Others may not notice it at all.)

I saw a Samsung 64inch F8500 Plasma TV on display at a showroom in Australia and the flicker was very distracting. Of course the TV was probably set at maximum brightness and contrast for display purposes. I have a 2010 model 50" Panasonic Plasma (VT20) and it is flickery. This becomes noticeable and a bit distracting with expanses of white.

Changes in plasma screens since the advent of 3D

Plasma screen flicker has increased since 2010 when it became necessary to use low persistence phosphors with plasma panels designed for use with 3D shutter glasses. (Longer persistence phosphors would have resulted in noticeable ghosting when the screen was viewed with shutter glasses operating at 120Hz.)

Plasma panel flicker panel becomes even more obvious, all other things being equal, if the screen is very bright, as can be the case with the Samsung F8500.

Silence in reviews and in "shoot-outs"

As long as review articles, and competitions such as this one, remain silent about plasma panel flicker, unsuspecting customers, unaware of their sensitivity to flicker, may be in for an unpleasant surprise. They may even find themselves having to return their set for a refund. (Mind you, there's not too much stock of new plasmas on the shelves.)

Here's a post made to this forum in July 2013 about an unexpected experience with plasma screen flicker:
+1

Every single plasma screen I looked at flickers, so I guess I am sensitive to this effect, and is one of the reasons I never bought plasma, as much as I wanted to try it at certain point in time.
Desk. and krips like this.
vddobrev is offline  
post #23 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 04:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
saprano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bronx NY
Posts: 3,395
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)
Liked: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post
Let's test a few UHD TV'S but let's not feed them any UHD material. Nobody in the market for a UHD set really cares what they would look like showing UHD material anyway. Why would anybody care if one brand did a better job than another brand?
There's no true high quality 4K content. Either way the results would of been the same. 8 million pixels is not going to mask LCD's many bad characteristics with PQ.
mobius, sage11x and tubetwister like this.

home theater addict
saprano is offline  
post #24 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 05:33 AM
Advanced Member
 
6athome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 647
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas oled View Post
Where OLED really trumps the f8500 for me is in bright room viewing. The f8500 is still very bright but blacks turn to grey. What looks like a darker store (designed to sell flat panels), does not duplicate the torture chamber of many living rooms even with the lights on.
I agree with this,I am wondering why OLED wasn't tops in motion?
CRT TV in 480? My cousin still has a CRT TV and it is painful to watch hockey games on it.
I have a Samsung 81F FALD LED LCD and still love this TV after all these years!
NEVER liked the GRAY of plasma or tube LCD! I don't live in a cave,that's why I have FALD TV'S, until OLED is close in price and 4K,I will stay with my FALD!
I don't make a room in my house to fit the TV,I buy the TV to be in the light of the room!
With Plasma being cheaper than LCD, I can't understand why it didn't outsell LCD TV'S?
I think this article explains why most people buy LCD over plasma.
http://www.tweakguides.com/HDTV_1.html

Last edited by 6athome; 08-20-2014 at 04:38 PM. Reason: reason
6athome is online now  
post #25 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 05:35 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 19,795
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 364 Post(s)
Liked: 440
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post


The only TV at the shootout large enough to take full advantage of UHD resolution from a typical TV viewing distance was the 105-inch Samsung UN105S9W, which costs $120,000. In other words, unless you pay more for a TV than you would pay for a very nice luxury car, you only gain a fraction of the benefit of UHD/4K resolution.


When viewed from 10 feet away, Samsung's 105-inch ultra-wide UHDTV is large enough to take full advantage of UHD/4K content.

[
A generally excellent write up BUT.

As has been noted over and over, you are talking about the present status of UHD displays displaying upscaled 1080p.


Over the the coming years, WE expect UHD source material via 4K Blu ray to bring to the display much more than increased resolution.

You say a set less than 8 ft wide can bring the FULL benefits of UHD/4K CONTENT when viewed at 10 ft. Your words, not mine.


That is just plain wrong. WRONG WRONG WRONG. Have I made myself perfectly clear? Your statement MAY be true re bringing the full benefits of upscaled 1080p to present UHD display standards but no way is that set big enough or the viewing distance close enough to bring the FULL benefits of the present UHD/4K to ones eyes.

When 4K Blu ray comes with what will be a raising of the 4K or UHD source quality bar, one will need a set that is at least 10 ft wide and to get the FULL benefits will require even close seating although most will choose to give up a little of the full benefits to sit at a more traditional viewing distance,

Now. How am I qualified to slap you here?. Just kidding re the slapping.

I have a top of the consumer line 4K projector, the Sony VPL-vw1000ES, on an 8ft wide Studeotec 100 screen in a black put fed by a Sony 4K server.

While my screen is only 8 ft wide I can zoom the picture so that it is 10 ft wide and even wider, throwing off screen 1 ft or more depending of image width on either side.


All kidding aside, you have a very tough job and must write a large amount of content with not a lot of time to carefully craft every line of print. I can nit pick and you, yuk yuk, are an easy target. Just kidding again. I am pretty sure you will agree with my comments re full etc and that you really didn't mean full literally.

Mark Haflich

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #26 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 05:57 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,608
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1072 Post(s)
Liked: 2238
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
A generally excellent write up BUT.

As has been noted over and over, you are talking about the present status of UHD displays displaying upscaled 1080p.


Over the the coming years, WE expect UHD source material via 4K Blu ray to bring to the display much more than increased resolution.

You say a set less than 8 ft wide can bring the FULL benefits of UHD/4K CONTENT when viewed at 10 ft. Your words, not mine.


That is just plain wrong. WRONG WRONG WRONG. Have I made myself perfectly clear? Your statement MAY be true re bringing the full benefits of upscaled 1080p to present UHD display standards but no way is that set big enough or the viewing distance close enough to bring the FULL benefits of the present UHD/4K to ones eyes.

When 4K Blu ray comes with what will be a raising of the 4K or UHD source quality bar, one will need a set that is at least 10 ft wide and to get the FULL benefits will require even close seating although most will choose to give up a little of the full benefits to sit at a more traditional viewing distance,

Now. How am I qualified to slap you here?. Just kidding re the slapping.

I have a top of the consumer line 4K projector, the Sony VPL-vw1000ES, on an 8ft wide Studeotec 100 screen in a black put fed by a Sony 4K server.

While my screen is only 8 ft wide I can zoom the picture so that it is 10 ft wide and even wider, throwing off screen 1 ft or more depending of image width on either side.


All kidding aside, you have a very tough job and must write a large amount of content with not a lot of time to carefully craft every line of print. I can nit pick and you, yuk yuk, are an easy target. Just kidding again. I am pretty sure you will agree with my comments re full etc and that you really didn't mean full literally.
Because human vision varies, it would be impossible for that to be a literal statement. Someone with 20/20 vision watching the 105-inch Samsung from 10 feet away is probably not getting the full benefit of "perfect" UHD.

Edit - Oh snap, I see I did say that in the caption to the photo. I fixed it, because you do have a good point.
SiGGy and Mrorange303 like this.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by imagic; 08-20-2014 at 06:04 AM.
imagic is online now  
post #27 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 06:04 AM
Member
 
MLXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post
The Samsung LCDs used BLS to achieve higher motion interpolation, and that also creates flicker. The F8500 exhibited no visible flicker for the whole shootout, and I happen to be quite sensitive to that effect.
Imagic,
LCD screen blanking is a feature that should be able to be disabled. With good design the customer should be able to select whether it is off or on.

On the other hand, plasma screen fast phosphor decay is a locked in characteristic. Once the panel has been manufacturered with low persistence phosphors, and given that plasma panels achieve variations in brightness through pulsing the subpixels with a variable duty cycle, flicker is inevitable. It is the nature of the beast.

Some people cannot notice plasma panel flicker even if asked to look out for it. Others can notice it but it is of little concern to them. Like vddobrev, I have noticed it with all plasmas in recent years. Inside a showroom even from a distance, I can identify a plasma panel just from the flicker. (At close range like most people I can identify the technology from the heat emitted!) However I have never noticed flicker as much with any plasma panel as I have noticed it with the F8500. This was my experience in two different showrooms in Australia where the F8500 was on display. I think the reason I found the flicker more noticeable was that the F8500 is unusually bright as plasma panels go. And I presume the showroom staff had their panels set up to showcase the high brightness capability of its modern design.

Presumably the brightness/contrast settings during the shootout were more conservative than "torch mode" showroom settings, so that the F8500 did not exhibit a noticeable degree of flicker for many or most of the people performing the evaluations, even for those with a fair degree of sensitivity to plasma flicker such as yourself.

A person with a high degree of sensitivity to plasma flicker would approach a shootout of this kind knowing that flicker would exist with all of the plasma sets on display. Such a person would be able to give a comparative ranking as between the different panels. Generally, LCD panels have no visible flicker. Then the question would arise of what weighting to give to this parameter compared with other screen characteristics being evaluated in the shootout.
Morning5 likes this.
MLXXX is offline  
post #28 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 06:40 AM
Member
 
Matthias Hutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Some explanation on flicker:

Flicker perception varies little by person. People that get migraines/epilepsy actually have a lower flicker perception. (You can still get headaches even if the flicker isn't visibly)
But flicker perceptions varies a lot with brightness, field of view and periphery.

So @imagic is probably right to say that he never noticed flicker in a controlled viewing environment and/or watching low APL movies, such as at the TV Shootout.

(mind where the graphs cross the 50/60Hz line)
fovela: looking strait at monitor
E = 35: monitor in 35 degree periphery
d = field of view of bright object on screen in degrees

Ideally any display should let you set the persistence duration, like in some 120/144 Hz monitors.
You can't do that on Plasma/CRT displays:

(P22 phosphor persistence)
Now if you "multi-flash" the image (e.g 100/120Hz CRTs, subfield drive plasma), you get jumpy motion (judder) instead of flicker.


For tech geeks, if you want to calculate if flicker is visible:
Code:
f(E,L,d, p) = (0.24E + 10.5)(Log L+log p + 1.39 Log d - 0.0426E + 1.09) (Hz)
f = CFF (flicker threshold frequency for CRT/Plasma flicker)
E = eccentricity in degrees (0 if looking straight at TV)
L = eye luminance in Troland, (215cd/m2 screen = 3.45 log Td)
d = stimulus diameter in degree (field of view)
p = pupil area in mm2 (Dark adapted pupil at 1cd/m2: 13mm2, log p = 1.1)
for other displays, the inverse of blackout duration should roughly be higher than CFF

Last edited by Matthias Hutter; 08-20-2014 at 07:13 AM.
Matthias Hutter is offline  
post #29 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 07:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
vaktmestern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,051
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked: 122
Shocked how bad Samsung Oled performed rgb oled was the superior Oled tech in teory
StinDaWg likes this.
vaktmestern is offline  
post #30 of 683 Old 08-20-2014, 07:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
HLdan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 502
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Liked: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas oled View Post
Where OLED really trumps the f8500 for me is in bright room viewing. The f8500 is still very bright but blacks turn to grey. What looks like a darker store (designed to sell flat panels), does not duplicate the torture chamber of many living rooms even with the lights on.
I have to respectfully disagree. I have both the 55" Panasonic Plasma with THX BrightRoom setting and the Samsung 64" F8500. The Panny's THX BrightRoom does a good job at compensating for high ambient light rooms but at the serious expense of washing out the black level. The F8500 should not only be more than bright enough for the brightest rooms, it does not wash out the blacks on the brightest setting nor does it turn them gray. Do you actually own the F8500 or are you stating an opinion based on what you saw in a store setting?
I respect OLED technology but three things I just can't get past right now. (1) The curved screen is absolutely horrendous and is backwards thinking IMO and makes it look just WRONG when trying to mount it on the wall. (2) It's too expensive and even though LG is coming down in price, historically their TV's have not had the best QC against Panasonic or Samsung and I don't see it as a wise investment buying the new kid on the block. There will be issues that need to be ironed out first and spending that much money to be a guinea pig or beta tester is just not worth it. (3) Size availability is limited and at 55" it's still outrageously too expensive.
HLdan 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