Originally Posted by Gary McCoy
All LCDs are not created equal when it comes to viewing angles.
absolutely. Depends on quality and panel type. The laptop I'm posting this from has some of the worst viewing angles I've ever seen. My PC monitor is quite a bit better but can't touch my HDTV, which has an incredibly solid viewing angle for an LCD. I challenge anyone who doubts to come to my house and view my LCD from 70 or more degrees from the center and tell me that my LCD has bad viewing angles.
Both LCD and Plasma have come a long way in recent years, to the point that there is a large overlap in the middle - maybe 80% of all rooms used for TV viewing - where one is able to select the technology that you prefer, because both do a good job.
I think LCD has come a much longer way than plasma. Certainly in the realm of IR and Burn-in, PDP's are much improved, however LCD's have improved image quality, viewing angles, black levels etc. I used to work at Best Buy back when LCD's first started being used as PC monitors and HDTV's and they were horrible
back then. I never would have considered purchasing one.
But the 10% of brightest rooms demand a quality LCD with a matte screen. Such displays should not be used in total darkness - as they will be much inferior to a display with a clear glass screen.
Indeed. My own matte screen LCD performs admirably in any lighting condition except
near total darkness. The blacks look dark grey in that condition. If I turn on a few lights (the stairwell lights and the light above the front door, neither of which shine on the screen) they turn black again. I leave a couple of lights on and I don't have any issues.
The displays that buck the trend in a mistaken attempt to widen the appeal of the set - such as LCDs with clear screens and plasmas with agressive anti-glare finishes - compromise performance at the two bright and dark room lighting extremes. They have little purpose IMHO.
I beg to differ. LCD's with clear screens tend to put out quite a bit more contrast/brightness than matte screen versions. This is part of why the A650 has such a phenomenal picture quality for the LCD's of its time. And as long as you didn't have direct light sources shinning on the screen, you were good to go. And its blacks looked black, even in the dark. I'm now in a house where the living room has only 2 small windows, neither of which face the sun, so while I love my matte screen LCD, I really wish I had an A650 for the increase in awsomeness because there are now no light sources that would destroy its PQ at my living space.
The problem I have is that my baby's mama likes to rearrange furniture on a whim and I could come home from work one day to find every light source in the living room pointing directly at the center of the screen. That's happened to me more than once. That happened back when I had my CRT and the reflection made the tv completely unwatchable and myself completely unhappy, thus the decision to buy Matte over Glossy when I finally broke down and purchased an LCD.
So the only people who are absolutely WRONG in this debate are those that believe one display technology is "better" than the other. It all depends upon the viewing conditions, including the seating arrangement and ambient lighting.
That I totally agree with. Pretty much all the technologies currently being used are fine. They all have their strengths and weaknesses and like every other technology out there, they aren't perfect, but they do their jobs admirably and there are plenty of models that perform above and beyond the call of duty. Thats pretty much all anyone can ask for in a tech.