AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 73 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,078 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Check out this quick video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnAaqy7mRLQ


I have seen post after post, of members recommending that the only correct setting for sharpness is 0/OFF. Then when someone says that their display then looks "fuzzy or out of focus" at 0, they are told that "you'll get used to it" and "it's the correct way to watch digital TV." The video above clearly demonstrates what can happen when the sharpness control is set incorrectly, and yes, incorrectly does include 0/OFF.


On my Samsung 60" 6420 LED/LCD, all ringing disappears around 12-18. At 19 on up, I can see a little ringing, but it only gets really bad around 60 on up (0-100). At 11 or below the image gets noticeably too soft or out of focus. I settled on 15 as it balances both issues perfectly.


Anyway, I'm sure there will be some posters that still hang onto "turning it to 0 is the only correct setting" and that the TV in the video "must be defective" and that's fine, but if you have turned your sharpness control down too far on the advice of many, and you think it doesn't look right, well you're correct, it doesn't look right!


Bring it on!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,078 Posts
Discussion Starter #3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim McC /forum/post/21817998


The correct seting is not always zero. It depends on the display.

You know that, and I know that, but a quick search of these and other forums, indicate that we are the minority.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,411 Posts
Jim is correct, it depends on the display's behavior for the control. A proper pattern, from a generator and/or disc, needs to be used.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,455 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by D Bone /forum/post/21818352


Unless I'm missing something, it's the same video that I posted?

oops, I didn't check your link before posting since I thought it was some random video that said to always leave sharpness at zero.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,553 Posts
Sharpness at 0 (zero) should not be taken literally, it just means use the setting that has no added sharpness (this is a given but it's easy to see how it could be misleading). As noted there are displays out there where a setting of 0 would actually make the image less sharp than it should be (in other words it's actually processing and blurring the image versus simply leaving it alone).


Jason
 
  • Like
Reactions: Notronuser

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,858 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by D Bone /forum/post/21818013


You know that, and I know that, but a quick search of these and other forums, indicate that we are the minority.

Welcome to the world of public internet forums! There's certainly no shortage of contributors who make statements, however self-assured, based upon faulty information, opinion, fads, presumptions, misunderstanding, etc., etc. Yes, even on the AV Science forum! Even when corrected, some will claim they are being attacked, rather than simply learning from the encounter and change their thinking. Humans can be like that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,455 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeAB /forum/post/21819190


Welcome to the world of public internet forums! There's certainly no shortage of contributors who make statements, however self-assured, based upon faulty information, opinion, fads, presumptions, misunderstanding, etc., etc. Yes, even on the AV Science forum! Even when corrected, some will claim they are being attacked, rather than simply learning from the encounter and change their thinking. Humans can be like that.

very true, those who frequent AVS represent a minority and those who actually know what they're talking about on AVS are a minority within a minority


learning requires an open mind
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,479 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smackrabbit /forum/post/21818706


Anyone that says that 0 is always the correct setting should not be listened to, and obviously has never used an LG display.

Also, just because it has been found that a sharpness setting of "50", or the halfway point on one individual TV in a model line or even similar model, does not mean it would be the same for ALL TVs in that similar model line. Not to mention the type of "sharpness test screen" being used.


And then there is the matter of individual visual acuity.



I know this many times causes squeamish reactions in those desiring "exact" numerical values. . . but no one can determine this particular value but the person viewing it.



Ok. . .. here it comes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,455 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phase700B /forum/post/21819640


Also, just because it has been found that a sharpness setting of "50", or the halfway point on one individual TV in a model line or even similar model, does not mean it would be the same for ALL TVs in that similar model line. Not to mention the type of "sharpness test screen" being used.


And then there is the matter of individual visual acuity.



I know this many times causes squeamish reactions in those desiring "exact" numerical values. . . but no one can determine this particular value but the person viewing it.



Ok. . .. here it comes.

I agree that calibrating sharpness on your actual TV is more reliable than copying the setting from another set of the same model. It may not be necessary in all cases but it certainly is worth the extra time to be 100% sure.


I disagree that individual visual acuity is a factor since there is a point where artifacts start appearing (ringing) that indicate the sharpness control is set too high and there may be a point where the lines begin to blur that indicates sharpness is too low. The ideal setting is the highest one that doesn't cause any ringing and/or the lowest one that doesn't cause blurring. Sometimes there is one exact value for both condtions and sometimes it is a (small) range of values. However, this has more to do with the internal design of the sharpness control in the TV than differences in visual acuity of the people watching the display. Otherwise, the professional calibrator would not be able to set the sharpness control for the customer (without having the customer tell them where to set it).


If you have less than 20/20 vision and cannot see ringing as it starts to appear on the test pattern that doesn't mean you'd want to go with a higher sharpness setting than if you had perfect vision and could the first signs of ringing instantly. If the correct setting for sharpness on your TV is 32/100 when set by someone with perfect vision it is still the correct setting for someone with less than ideal vision. Just because they can't see the ringing doesn't mean it isn't there or that it would be beneficial for them to use a higher sharpness setting, such as 40/100.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,479 Posts
I agree there is usually a "range" of values for sharpness settings on a particular model of TV.


There is still the question of what test screen to use. And I have used several. A few "agree" and a few do not. So it still is somewhat inexact. And, regardless of what you believe, what one person "sees" is often different than what another does. And then there is the tendency to "want" to attain an expected "neutral" point.


Besides, sharpness is not as critical a setting as most other parameters.


I won't debate this further. Because all it will do is go on and on. As Micheal Chen pointed out in the video. . . the correct setting for sharpness is where ringing disappears. . . to the observer.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,787 Posts
This subject has already been hashed out:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...ight=sharpness


Bottom line: set sharpness using a test pattern while viewing at the screen. This assures that the control will be defeated (or minimized if it's poorly designed) and will not add artifacts to the picture.


Visual acuity is irrelevant to the discussion, unless one is setting the controls on their display for only themselves and no one else. Also irrelevant to the discussion is what one person deems "reasonable" as this is different from one person to the next.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,455 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by HogPilot /forum/post/21820187


Visual acuity is irrelevant to the discussion, unless one is setting the controls on their display for only themselves and no one else.

+1, what I was trying to say
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,787 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by PlasmaPZ80U /forum/post/21820405


+1, what I was trying to say

My statement wasn't directed at you, sorry if you thought it was. It was meant to pre-empt the usual remarks that surface in this discussion which really have nothing to do with the issue. Statements of visual acuity and what is "reasonable" or "sensible" (perhaps two most overused and irrelevant words thrown around here) are inconsequential because they vary from person to person, especially for any display that will be watched by more than one person (which is most displays).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,455 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by HogPilot /forum/post/21820424


My statement wasn't directed at you, sorry if you thought it was. It was meant to pre-empt the usual remarks that surface in this discussion which really have nothing to do with the issue. Statements of visual acuity and what is "reasonable" or "sensible" (perhaps two most overused and irrelevant words thrown around here) are inconsequential because they vary from person to person, especially for any display that will be watched by more than one person (which is most displays).

Yes, I know.


I was just stating that I agree that visual acuity is not a factor for setting sharpness properly on a display and that I was trying to explain that to Phase700B in my earlier post.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,553 Posts
If we want to get technical...


It is a factor if the person setting it does not have the visual acuity to set it properly.



Jason
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,787 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaGamePimp /forum/post/21820533


If we want to get technical...


It is a factor if the person setting it does not have the visual acuity to set it properly.



Jason

Ha that would have to be bordering on legally blind if you were right at the screen and still couldn't set it properly
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,455 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaGamePimp /forum/post/21820533


If we want to get technical...


It is a factor if the person setting it does not have the visual acuity to set it properly.



Jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
I remember when I was calibrating my first big screen rear projection about fifteen years ago, one of the two big calibration discs at the time (either Avia or Video Essentials - at the moment I can't even remember if it was eveb DIGITAL Video Essentials back then) recommended setting sharpness to as close to 0 as possible. They listed all the normal arguments about reproducing a more accurate picture and having to let your eyes adjust to the settings before cranking the levels back up. Anyway, since those discs were so prevalent back then, I've always guessed that they were responsible for the wide spread, blanket statements I've heard countless times since. Although the display technology shifting so drastically from three guns to flat panels - and my first attempt at calibrating a HD plasma with an old AVIA DVD - was the first time I realized that the adage was extinct.
 
1 - 20 of 73 Posts
Top