Originally Posted by andrewfee
Hm, I'm not sure if it's worth entering this discussion. Much of this PDP vs LCD 'information' is completely wrong.
Join in! The more the merrier.
1. Sharpness should be set to the neutral position (typically 0) on all displays; LCD, PDP, CRT and others. The sharpness setting controls the amount of digital sharpness processing added to the image, it should always be disabled.
I agree. The sharpness on my LCD is set to 0.
LCDs are not overly sharp, they display the source as-is.
I agree again. Its PDP-fans who love to call LCD's "overly sharp". Notice the liberal use of "quotation marks" in my post
2. Noticing the grain/noise more with LCD. Actually, this is the opposite of reality. LCD will display the source as-is. If there is grain in the source, there will be grain on the screen. If there isn't any, there's none on the screen either.
again, I agree. The LCD isn't going to add film grain, its just going to show you what is there. However because of the clarity, it may seem like an unnatural level to some. When LCD's first started selling like hotcakes as HDTV's, a lot of newbies started asking about the presence of film grain which is something they hadn't noticed before with CRT in 480i. So much so that several websites that I know of made "stickies" of explanations of Film Grain and why it's there. (the question was almost as common as "why does my new Widescreen tv still have black bars with some movies"?)
Plasmas on the other-hand, especially Pioneer's sets, have to use considerable amounts of dithering to make up for their lack of precision. (they are not even close to 8-bit native displays) With Pioneer plasmas there is always noise in the image, even if there was none in the source.
Regardless of the noise in the image, the absolute best HD picture I've ever seen was on a Pioneer plasma. And I'm an unabashed LCD fanboy
I think it had to do with the color reproduction more than the clarity. The colors were simply gorgeous. Not the same as the "pop" associated with LCD's with Dynamic Contrast cranked to max, but simply a level of color fidelity that made the image a beauty to behold.
3. Most LCDs sold now are capable of accurate colour reproduction, it's just that they are also capable displaying image in a wide gamut mode that oversaturates everythingthe way they are typically set up 'out of the box' and in stores. With most, putting them into the 'cinema' mode will usually sort this.
My 5 series Sammsung LCD has a highly customizable "Movie" mode that I have adjusted to look as natural as I can without the proper equipment. It also has a "Cinema" setting that is actually very close to 6500k according to some reports. For the most part, I use my own settings in movie mode (adjusted using DVE HD basics but with Dynamic Contrast set to Low for just a bit of color pop because I love anime, and Dynamic Contrast + Anime = orgasm) but occasionally for some films, I will switch to the more accurate Cinema mode, especially for movies with dark content as the shadow detail in that mode is phenomenal.
4. LCDs are capable of going much brighter than PDP or CRT. This is what makes them much better suited for viewing in brighter rooms/daylight than either technology.
Agreed. One of the aspects of LCD that I love.
They can also be set to lower brightness levels better suited for watching in a darkened room as well.[/quote]
also agreed, but they can't match with plasma for viewing in a dark environment. PDP's are easier to calibrate for dark scenes especially for shadow detail and blacker-than-black levels because of the ungodly black levels they can generate. And while LCD's are getting closer and closer each generation that goes by, they aren't there quite yet. 2011 or 2012 may be another matter altogether though.
The big difference is that LCD is capable of maintaining its brightness regardless of the image being displayed onscreen. With Plasma, brightness can drop as much as 80% when comparing an image with a small area of brightness to an image where most of the screen is bright. CRT also does this but a good CRT would be less than 10% between a mostly dark and mostly bright image.
I have not found it possible to set PDP to a comfortable brightness for watching in the dark as a result of this. Either scenes where there are only small areas of brightness are displayed too brightly, or if set to display them correctly, scenes where most of the screen is bright are then too dim. With LCD the brightness level stays where I set it.
Are you sure this isn't because of the Auto Brightness Limiter found in many PDP sets?
5. Motion blur, black level are basically a non-issue on high end LCDs.
Wholeheartedly agreed. However there is content where motion blur can be an issue. I run into it from time to time. Mainly video content filmed at 60fps such as music concerts, some sporting events etc. Film which is normally shot at 24fps isn't affected by motion blur much at all. My LCD is only 60hz with no frame interpolation to speak of and I never notice motion blur even with very fast paced movies. I do notice it with content shot on video at a higher frame rate and at times, the blur can become quite distracting, but these occurrences are rare in my house. Thus while I do believe motion blur to be a non-issue for the most common of content, it is still a problem in some areas and improvements are still needed.
LCD black level I don't have an issue with at all, unless it is a really crappy no-name low-end model where the blacks actually look grey like a pre-2007 LCD. My solution to that would be purchase a better quality LCD and stop being cheap. Otherwise, I feel that the black level is adequate to good on most LCD's. I simply turn 1 single light on at night when watching in a dark environment and my LCD's blacks still look black, and I can even see to navigate the room when I want to refill my cup or go pee.
6. Viewing angle is better on PDP, you will have no arguments from me there. It's usually not a major problem on LCDs now though, as long as you're not watching at an angle in the dark.
I believe that viewing angle is one of the most repeated "flaws" of LCD and it is one that is probably the least problematic. It used to be a very big flaw, but then 2008 hit and the problem went away almost universally across the board, but to hear PDP fans talk, LCD's still have the viewing angle of a pre 2006 model. LCD's tend to lose a small bit of contrast in the off angles beyond 45-60 degrees. To get them to lose more than that, requires standing over 80 degrees from the center of the screen, which is a ridiculous angle to watch a tv from, nevermind the drop in contrast.
There is no 'best' display technology though. LCD, CRT, PDP and others all have various compromises. What might suit one person might not suit another. OLED might finally be something that is objectively better than all other current display technologies, but we won't know that until it's available in large sizes at affordable prices.
Triple agreed. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. Its about finding the display type that has the strengths you like and the weaknesses you can live with.
Personally, I prefer the flicker-free, noise-free image you get from LCDs to PDP. I find motion handling to be better on my 480Hz LCD than any plasma I've owned, mainly due to the lack of phospor lag, but also the judder reduction that 480Hz brings. I no longer have to worry about image retention/burn-in when playing games (something a friend of mine has had problems with on his Panasonic G20 since GT5 was released) and can use it as a PC monitor without worry. There is almost no noise from the panel itself (all PDPs I've owned buzzed loudly) it runs cool (the PDPs could have been used as a radiator in my small room) and is very energy efficient. (60W with a full 50% grey screen)
Regarding Image Retention: I get it on my 2008 Sammy LCD! Its called Image Persistence and has to do with the Liquid Crystals that retain a memory when they are twisted to a specific shape on a regular/continual basis. Its not usually permanent, but it can be if it isn't handled properly. LCD's are completely immune to IR like many believe, but it takes quite a lot to get it there (mine is from 4:3 content that my kids watch)
Other people prefer plasma. There are no viewing angle issues, and it's much cheaper. Some prefer the look of it as well. (though I'm convinced most that say that, haven't seen a properly set up high-end LCD)
I agree that a lot of people who say that LCD can't produce a good HD image haven't seen a properly setup high-end LCD. They can easily match the best PDP's image quality once you take into consideration the various weaknesses of each particular display technology.
Sure, I say this as a recent LCD owner though, so I'm obviously 'biased' and you will probably disregard my opinion. I've also owned a Pioneer KRP500M and had several other plasmas in my home, all of which I got rid of. (and went back to CRT until my 46HX903) As much as I like this screen, I can see that it wouldn't be for everyone, but it's the first flat panel I've owned that seems good enough for me to keep, and replace my CRTs.
I won't disregard your opinion. I am also an LCD owner and probably biased toward LCD (at least that's what they tell me on the Flat Panel message board!)