New DLP or Keep my plasma - Page 2

Even though I cranked up the dials,I could not duplicate that look that my lcd gave on Blu-rays.

Simple as everyone has different preferences. Why do some prefer chocolate over vanilla? Most people tend to prefer that look which is why they sell more of those kinds in stores. I wouldn't go so far as to call it fake as opposed to more vivid. Again, personal preference.

He clearly hasn't watched avatar Id want my display to be as vivid as possible for movies like that. A lot of the time I like a more realistic look but when a movie isn't grounded in reality why limit your display for it?

My 73738 dlp is more than vivid enough for Avatar and is in no way limited compared to any current tech on the market and somehow I don't think James Cameron was after an unrealistic look but something that would best interpret the story he wanted to share with us, and was the reason it was released in theaters world wide with a good percent of those theaters being dlp based. Now if you guys are talking about Bizarro world or something that solely suits the give me more of the good thing attitude, then go for it! but every now and then go outside if you ever forget what the true reference point for vivid is, a beautiful sunset or sunrise and how about a stormy sky over a wheat field and fall and spring colors as well. But if Vegas is in your blood then head for the neon lights.Ahh! what wonderful choices we have.

Your right, just a sec, I'll go outside so I can get an accurate idea of how giant blue people, flying dragon horses, and big singing plants are supposed to look..........................................……............gee the dragons must be sleeping today
I dont think James Cameron has the power to get every single theater projector calibrated the way he wants them. Dlp or Lcos??? For that matter they could be using laser dlp projectors and may have filmed Avatar to go way outside the standard color range so that it can look realistic in Earth scenes and far more vibrant on pandora. Standards will always change, the laservue has the capability to get very vibrant even without turning the saturation control all the way up meaning you can maintain a realistic color range as well as going beyond it for added vibrancy. Of course your display is limited compared to a laservue, you didn't think you could spend far less money and get the same picture did you?
Edited by Mik James - 6/28/12 at 7:49am

I'm going to jump in here because I'm going through the same thing.

I'm not in love with the idea of plasma tech, but there is no denying it is the preferred TV this year.
The A94 is currently reasonably priced so I'm between that and a Panasonic plasma versus the Laservue.

I can't find a store in my state with a Laservue & the last model reviewed is 2 models back. I've never hated the way the Mits DLPs look in stores, but it's hard to cough up money for a TV sight unseen.

I'm sick of hearing comments about various TVs that look good for its size and/or price.

Size aside (75 vs 65) and power use and $$$, which is better PQ wise?
Are we talking negligible difference in quality at this level of the game or is quality the price you have to pay for the real estate you gain with DLP?

Kinda the point I'm trying to make at 73" and 11ft away I find the picture of my dlp of a better quality than an led, lcd or plasma. So no loss here.

Blue is blue red is red and the whole color gamut used by Cameron already occur outside. And yes I could have gotten the display of my choice but still chose Dlp for color accuracy and pop.

Like i said awhile back same projector bigger box, sounds like a really tough choice you have there, i'm not one to put aside power draw and size and $$$ though especially when the picture quality is probably similar. I read a thread awhile back where a guy was comparing his laservue to his kuro and the Kuro won for overall depth but he liked the way the colors looked on the laservue. Likely a little better vertical uniformity on the plasma where as the laservue can probably get a little brighter (not sure if youd need it) Life of the light source would be a good thing to research if your looking for something to tip the scales.

"Blue is blue red is red and the whole color gamut used by Cameron already occur outside. And yes I could have gotten the display of my choice but still chose Dlp for color accuracy and pop."
No blue is red and red is blue That's a little indirect i was referring to how much of the color seen outside is actually in the current standards.

Having your TV calibrated to the proper settings is what will make Avatar look like James Cameron wants it to, just as any movie from any director. Adjustments can be made with the cameras and on the disc transfer and all the technical mumbo jumbo and gizmos they use to make things look how they want. For the display to show it how they want, the display has to be set how it's supposed to. That's how any content being played will consistently look as intended. Cranking the dials or whatever, or just having them set wrong will have ALL content, Avatar and all the rest look other than intended. If that's what you like, awesome. Just saying your explanation using Avatar as an example is off. At least as I understand it.

Then i didn't explain it well enough. Everyone has a preference including James Cameron, and i'm also saying that display tech and standards are always moving forward. What is a standard color gamut now could easily be extended.
Edited by Mik James - 6/28/12 at 11:02am

Exactly. The movie "Cars" is another great example where I would want the "glossy red" to come through as opposed the more "realistic" color.



Once again, if you're spending this kind of money on a tv set, you should be able to get what you want as opposed to what you think they should want. Personal preference. Why do you think tv's come with the ability to fiddle around with the settings in the first place? Or for that matter, audio equipment with equalizers? Some people prefer more bass, right? You can also ask any eye specialist and he will tell you that people see color intensity at different degrees, for example two of my cousins will look at the same teal color while one swears it's more blueish, and the other more greenish. As I replied to you over in the other thread:

"my original question as to if anyone here actually knew if there was much difference between the WD-82840 & the Laservue A94 in regards to the more vivid/shinier/glossy colors since they both have the clear contrast screen, but one using lasers, while the other uses a lamp. It'd be really useful if someone could answer that question instead of criticizing other people's personal preferences.

Somewhere, people are really off track. If two different TVs are calibrated properly... then color A will be indistinguishable on either. Color B, C etc will also be indistinguishable. So whatever folks are talking about her is a bit silly. Ambient lighting conditions, screen reflections and how black the screen gets will be much more determinative. The point of calibration is not to produce pop but render color and grayscale as accurately as possible. Once you get the set within a certain tolerance of spec... the human eye can not detect the actual error. The current crop of Mits DLPs can be dialed in to around 1.0 dE errors on primary colors and near zero on secondary colors. These error levels are below the threshold of normal vision.

The DLP will have a more smooth film like appearance. Plasma will tend toward SDE (screen door effect) and rear projection DLP will tend to show some SSE (silk screen effect). The biggest drawback to picture quality on the DLPs is black level and that black areas of the screen tend to get corrupted by nearby bright areas due to light scatter. This is pretty unique to rear projection and it keeps the overall contrast ratio lower than plasma. This lower contrast can be mitigated by the use of bias lighting..

Not really relevant to what we were talking about but thanks for the info on the scatter effect, The laservue does decrease that though right?

I don't see why it would. It is a consequence of rear projection. When you get light bouncing off the screen on the inside it gets picked back up in the mirror and sent back to the screen again. It is essentially noise in the image. On a front projector the effect is almost zero. It is not a DLP issue but a rear projector issue. I imagine some very fancy screen technology could reduce it. I am guessing wobulation probably makes it a tiny bit worse. You can most easily see the issue on certain test screens that have big patches of very bright white against small areas of deepest black. The black areas will look milky white.

I have a CRT rear projection and a friend of mine has an RCA dlp. I know it's their on mine and on his but I figured some of it on his was due to dirty optics and contrast set to high. CRT rear projection ANSI can be effected by screen reflections, lens reflections and internal reflections within the crt's. On a dlp we can't get rid of screen reflections or lens reflections. The lamps shines it's light onto the chip and mirrors will turn of to deflect light, my understanding is that either the dmd can't deflect all of the light or the deflected light can present as unwanted reflections. If you replace the light source with lasers then you could better pinpoint groups of pixels while leaving others completely unlit minimizing unwanted reflections traveling through the optical path. That's how I imagine it works as I haven't really found much information on the inner workings of a laservue or dlp for that matter if you know somewhere I can learn more about them then drop me a link