Originally Posted by Adamg (Ret-Navy)
You make some good points. I have seen some amazing PQ with streaming content as well. In some cases it was hard to tell between the Streamed content and the UHD based version. However, this is the rarity. 95% of streamed content is low resolution in the first place. The problem lies in the Compression algorithm(s) used by the various Providers. Many of which operate on a moment by moment throttle. So to use streamed content to assess and dial in the PQ of your set is not advised. You just can't be certain that what your adjusting is the TV set's actual PQ or the Streamed Content PQ. That was my primary point. Many people here tend to conflate a bad stream PQ to the TV' PQ. Thinking the TV looks like crap, when its not the TV it's the compressed Stream Video content that looks like crap.
I respect your opinion and appreciate your thinking in response. In your car analogy what would you be comparing? The Cars performance or the Car's Tires performance? In this example the Car is the TV and the Tires are the Streaming content. In the above example I think you are judging the performance of the Tires on Snow and Ice. Variables. The Tires are the variables.
I know of no Professional Calibrators that use Streamed Content to calibrate a TV set. While they may use a particular Picture Setting dialed in specifically for Streamed content. This Streaming calibration setting will be a set of PQ compromised adjustments/settings. Reducing certain PQ functions to help improve how Streamed content displays. It will not reflect the full PQ potential of the TV.
I don't mean to sound argumentative. As you made some good points about how Great some Streamed content can look and about how much Streamed content has become the lions share of what people watch. All of which I agree with.
***And I certainly respect your opinion and enjoy reading your posts. Let me try to clarify my point. The road, in essence, is the variable (which represents source content.) And I’m sure I could have come up with a better example and one of my college professors would have probably given me a “C” for that grade. (But not one professor whose multiple choice (guess) test included the following: 1. All of these, 2. None of these, 3. Some of these, 4. a & c, 5. b & d.) I digress.
The road or source content, if a quality 4K/HDR feed (regardless of the source) is going to look superb on most 4K sets period. Cable, however, and to an extent satellite as well — is more of a challenge to upscale to 4K and not all TV’s will have the same technology or processing capabilities of the Sony 900F. If your goal is to evaluate the picture quality of a prospective TV you are looking to buy, then I’d recommend writing down what you watch the most and break it down by percentage. Then, compare the source content you watch the most and use that as your primary decision making criteria. That’s very hard to do unless you have the TV in your home under your viewing conditions.
If you solely evaluate a TV’s picture quality by the best source (in which you reference a UHD player and 4K/HDR disc) then you’d be hard pressed to tell the difference between many 4K sets and you might as well go with a cheaper display if that is all you watch.
Again, my main point is that the Sony 900F really shines with all source content but especially with non 4K sources. Not all 4K TV’s can make that claim.