[Odnetnin256]

I have come to the conclusion that, since I will be using a television 95% of the time for video games, and I am not willing to sacrifice high contrast in order to prevent burn-in (I want high contrast), and the fact that about half of the games will be in 4:3, and that I am not willing to use a stretch or wide mode other than normal with sidebars (I want the 4:3 content to be preserved in its 4:3 form, with no distortion), has steered me away from the plasma realm.


I know that technically, plasmas do offer better overall picture quality, but at least the LCD 768p will be a huge improvement over my current 480i analog CRT. Also, the LCD will last longer and maintain maximum brightness as long as I own the set. LCDs usually have higher resolution, too. Yeah, I realize that I will lose some shadow detail due to the bright black levels, but on the upside, I will be able to see more detail with bright black levels, because on my CRT the black level is so dark that some shadow detail is lost. So it goes both ways.


1. What do you think of my reasoning for this decision?


2. How does today's best high def LCD TV compare with a 1999 analog WEGA CRT in terms of PQ?

 

[orogogus]

Hrm- OK.


I think you are overestimating the risk, but that is your use-case and if it will help you sleep better at night, sure.


How does it compare? Hard to say- obviously it should be superior with a higher resolution image, but I'd say the blacks would most likely be somewhat worse and the color fidelity would not be as high (but maybe you like oversaturated colors and bluish tinge to black). I'm sure the WEGA will look better with an NTSC signal (as expected).


If you get a newer TV, I think you should be OK for console gaming and the like (from a ghosting point of view), but I don't have direct experience so YMMV.


It's good to come to a reasonable decision based on your perceived needs. My only real gripe with LCDs is that they aren't big enough yet and are ever more overpriced than a decent plasma!

Quote:

Originally posted by Odnetnin256 on my CRT the black level is so dark that some shadow detail is lost

FYI, there is no reason for this- proper grayscale calibration would make it such that your set doesn't crush blacks.

 

[Mayor McCheese]

I've got two problems with your statement (not your decision).


You say you chose LCD, but are you talking about FP LCD or RP LCD? Which brand and model are you getting? What are you spending? You can't ask people to evaluate your reasoning without giving a little more info.


Your statement about losing shadow detail is incorrect. As orogogus said, a good CRT or plasma will give an acceptable black level without losing shadow detail if it is properly calibrated.


edit--------------


Judging by your other posts it looks like you are interested in FP LCDs. If you are that big of a gamer I would definitely suggest playing a few games on them before buying one. Motion issues related to response times are still present from what I've seen and heard. I would definitely make sure you aren't annoyed by these possible issues before shelling out the big bucks.

 

[JuiceRocket]

What games are you planning on playing? I know you won't be playing the xbox, are you going to be playing mostly PC games? I 2nd what McCheese says about testing them before buying. I know that many still have smearing and motion issues. Take a look online for some reviews on gaming sites that include LCDs, they should be able to give you a good idea of what LCD is good for gaming.


-JR

 

[Bishamon]

I would agree that, in your situation, I wouldn't even consider anything phosphor-based.


I play a lot of videogames and won't consider plasma (or CRT-based RPTV, or direct-view CRT) for the same reason. In the last four years I've gone from a 480p 40" LCD projection, to a 720p 43" DLP projection, to a 768p 32" direct-view LCD.


It all comes down to personal choice; I trade poorer contrast, black levels, and slightly less natural colors, for not having to worry about burn-in, or having to make sure my contrast is turned way down when playing videogames.


As for smearing and motion issues, the new sets with 16ms (or faster) response times should have no problems; My 32" Samsung is perfect for videogames.

 

[kilmar]

I've had my plasma for 6 months now and I play around 15-20 hours of games a week on my plasma. I have not had any burn-in experience on my plasma.


I think that the burn-in issue with plasma have been overly exaggerated. I may be wrong and I am destined for burn-in.

 

[JuiceRocket]

When I hear people say they won't give up high contrast, it always makes me wonder what their games look like. When I calibrated my unit, and dropped the factory contrast settings, the picture definately looks a lot better than the day-glo settings that came set to the unit.


When I go into B&M stores with my wife/friends, and look at plasmas/lcds, we're always pretty amazed at how terrible they look with the jacked up contrast and color levels. I've never had anyone ever play games on my plamsa and say "wow man, that's so dark, your contrast levels are low". In fact, they've all commented on how amazing it looks.


I think it's safe to say when plasma owners drop their contrast, they are mainly doing it to get a more realistic image and up the PQ of the unit. The 2ndary benefit is that it can help reduce any burn-in that might occur. If I felt I was giving up any PQ because I'd lowered my contrast settings, I wouldn't have purchased a plasma.


-JR

 

[Mayor McCheese]

Quote:

Originally posted by Bishamon I would agree that, in your situation, I wouldn't even consider anything phosphor-based.

Well, my phosphor-based CRT monitor that I'm using at home plays video games 95% of the time (except for the other 5% that I spend typing in messages like this one). The two phosphor-based CRTs that I use at work display static images all day long.

 

[Bishamon]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mayor McCheese Well, my phosphor-based CRT monitor that I'm using at home plays video games 95% of the time (except for the other 5% that I spend typing in messages like this one). The two phosphor-based CRTs that I use at work display static images all day long.

Ummm.... that's nice.

 

[Picus_H]

Quote:

Originally posted by JuiceRocket When I hear people say they won't give up high contrast, it always makes me wonder what their games look like. When I calibrated my unit, and dropped the factory contrast settings, the picture definately looks a lot better than the day-glo settings that came set to the unit. -JR

I wonder about this too. I want to start by saying I think the original posters reasoning is very sound. Anyone that is truly worried about burn-in should probably steer themselves away from plasmas - but like JR I wonder about the contrast statements. Three times in this thread someone has mentioned turning the contrast down during games. On my plasma I have the contrast set to -1, and almost never raise it because it makes the whites look far too bright. It goes to 30, so there is quite a bit of room to move. I play PC games and have never had to turn it up or down, so I just wonder what you fellas mean when you say you'll have to turn the contrast down to play games?


Do you mean that you like the games high on the contrast but worry about the display burning in with it set too high? If so, I think you can eliminate that as a worry in regards to burn in. My display came with the contrast set to 28, which basically turned it into a giant glowing white screen. I can't see ever wanting to set it above 5 for anything, and I highly doubt that that setting would quicken burn-in. Id be more worried about static health bars, maps, icons, etc (which are definitely an issue).

 

[rogo]

Kilmar -- Burn in is more likely initially rather than later, due to the logarithmic decline in phosphor brightness. If you really see none on all white and all black screens, you are likely using your display in such a way that it won't burn in.


Mark

 

[stormsweeper]

Mark another who has played video games on a plasma w/o burnin. The tally (all for PS2):


Final Fantasy X, Wild Arms 3, Summoner 2, Virtua Fighter 4, Price of Persia: The Sand of Time, Ico, GTA3 and GTA:Vice city, Harvest Moon, and probably some others I don't recall. No game element burn-in.

 

[Jet Champion]

I honestly believe that anybody that suffers burn-in is stupid and deserves it!

 

[btrvalik]

I was sold on plasma but now I'm giving LCD a second look. I have not made my mind up yet but I'm considering LCD FP instead of plasma for the following reasons:


1) While plasma burn-in can be avoided, I'm concerned that since my wife and kids will be the primary users, following the rules may become a point of contention.

2) All these FP technologies are on a fast price and performance curve. I'm now thinking that whatever I buy now will be surpassed quickly over the next 2-4 years. I'm thinking that I should plan to upgrade sooner and move the first panel I buy to another room. It seem like it would be easier to find another place in the house if the panel was smaller (32" or so) than a 42"-50" would be

3) For a HT room 50"-60" would be ideal... a 40% price fall over the next few years would make a smaller LCD pay for itself

4) Given the HD content is still fairly hard to come by and will not be the "norm" for a number of years to come... isn't a smaller panel better suited to the material that is most available ?

 

[rogo]

"I'm concerned that since my wife and kids will be the primary users, following the rules may become a point of contention."


I doubt that's gonna be true if they are basically watching TV. The rules are simple.


"It seem like it would be easier to find another place in the house if the panel was smaller (32" or so) than a 42"-50" would be"


I did that too, fwiw. I got a 37" rather than a 42" or 50", figuring that it'd have a higher WAF in the bedroom.


"For a HT room 50"-60" would be ideal... a 40% price fall over the next few years would make a smaller LCD pay for itself "


Yes, if you give up size now, you will have "dry powder" to spend later. Not everyone can be like our moderator markrubin and buy a new plasma or LCD every week.


'Given the HD content is still fairly hard to come by and will not be the "norm" for a number of years to come... isn't a smaller panel better suited to the material that is most available ?"


This I don't see. DVD is great on any bigger display up to about 80". HD is great up to about 80". Both >>lose a lot

 

[btrvalik]

Thanks for you input..


When you say the rules are simple keep in mind I have 4 kids 2yrs - 8 yrs... putting the lid on the toothpaste can be a challenge. I've definitely seen panels with burn-in... mostly from being on CNBC to long. They mostly watch TV and DVDs is the black bars may also be an issue. I think these issues will be solved for plasma over the next few years....


I definitely like the bigger size but relocating it will be harder... if I felt confident that what I bought now would keep me happy for the next 8-10 yrs I would buy a 55" fuji and be done with it. I don't mind if the specs of new sets gets a lot better.. the 55 fuji looks great to me. The thing that would kill me is if after 5 yrs the picture looks like crap. I'm also considering getting a projector for movies in addition to a LCD for TV ... but those have another set of issues..


I've spent a fair amount of money ( ~20-30K) on audio for both 2 channel and the new HT room but I don't mind that since audio technology is not on the same curve as these displays. These displays seem like they will go similar to PCs... the longer you wait the better it gets and what was once great quickly turns into a boat anchor. I know the audio gear I buy will keep me basically happy for 10 yrs or so.


All we have now is a 20" Sony so even a 30 something inch set would be a big step up :^) The real funny one is my wife is the one pushing for a big set. At the end of the day it's all about trade-offs... I'm just looking for the best compromise.


Thanks

Bruce

 

[Odnetnin256]

What I mean is this. I like to play my games with contrast setting at approximately 80%. Turning is down makes it too hazy, and both white and black levels seem to have a gray haze over them. I want white to look nice, bright white, and black to look nice glossy deep black. Everyone on here criticizes LCDs for having mediocre contrast, but at least on the LCD I can keep the contrast setting very high with no risk of burn-in. On the plasma, once you have turned down the contrast to about 50%, the contrast is probably then even worse than an LCD's contrast set at 100%. So, I would actually be enjoying higher contrast by using an LCD. Also, I think that everyone on here underestimates the way I would use a TV for gaming. You all say that you never have problems with burn-in, but how often do you play games? Only 2 hours a day? I, here, plan to play games on my TV for periods up to 4 hours+ daily, with 4:3 sidebars for 50% of my games (with contrast set at 80%+). Are you STILL confident that a plasma display is robust enough to handle all this wear and tear, and still have a like-new brightness level after 5 years?

 

[GreenMonkey]

Dude, try calibrating your display. Seriously. I play PS2/Gamecube/PS1/SNES/Saturn/Dreamcast.... on my DLP projector (I was going to get a plasma, previously).


Your brightness is too low if you need your contrast cranked way up. Or vice versa. Calibration of contrast & brightness is to ensure your set is displaying all the white and black detail. When you crank up the brightness or contrast, you're losing white or black detail, or creating artificial blooming of the whites, or something.


If I recall, the contrast control should properly be called "white level". I guess technically it is the difference between white and black.


I found after calibration for DVD, videogames tend to be about 2 notches of brightness too dark. This is probably due to the DVD player being a different source than the PS2/Gamecube. Running the calibration DVD (Avia or DVE) from the PS2 should do the job.



My calibrated X1 projector has some black level issues (2000:1 theoretically), too. I can tell I've lost black levels in comparison to my former 27" CRT. Cranking up the contrast/brightness just makes the lack of detail more obvious. On LCDs, you would loose even more detail in the dark scenes.



You've either a) gotten used to abnormally high contrast over time, and thus it looks funny when it's set normally


or b) your other settings like your brightness are too low? I don't know.


Here's a good link explaining contrast, and why to high or too low is bad:

http://www.audiovideo101.com/diction...ctionaryid=114



Here's a good one as well. Plus, it explains the difference between the contrast control on an LCD and on a CRT - I guess there is a difference.

http://www.poynton.com/notes/brightness_and_contrast/

 

[Picus_H]

Quote:

Originally posted by Odnetnin256 What I mean is this. I like to play my games with contrast setting at approximately 80%. Turning is down makes it too hazy, and both white and black levels seem to have a gray haze over them. I want white to look nice, bright white, and black to look nice glossy deep black. Everyone on here criticizes LCDs for having mediocre contrast, but at least on the LCD I can keep the contrast setting very high with no risk of burn-in. On the plasma, once you have turned down the contrast to about 50%, the contrast is probably then even worse than an LCD's contrast set at 100%. So, I would actually be enjoying higher contrast by using an LCD. Also, I think that everyone on here underestimates the way I would use a TV for gaming. You all say that you never have problems with burn-in, but how often do you play games? Only 2 hours a day? I, here, plan to play games on my TV for periods up to 4 hours+ daily, with 4:3 sidebars for 50% of my games (with contrast set at 80%+). Are you STILL confident that a plasma display is robust enough to handle all this wear and tear, and still have a like-new brightness level after 5 years?

I understand what you mean now. I don't think contrast would be an issue at all, but I do understand your wariness regarding burn-in. As I mentioned above I would worry more about static logos/health bars/maps than your contrast being set too high. I would imagine the contrast would need to be almost 100% on the plasma before it became an issue and at 30 my Panasonic borders on burning my retinas.


I'm not trying to sway you at all. Again, I think in any case where burn-in is going to make you lose sleep at night you should definitely go with LCD. I just know that in my experience I haven't seen any burn-in. I play computer games on my plasma every other day or so ranging from 2-4 hours sometimes longer. Not a huge amount, so take that with a grain of salt.

 

[stormsweeper]

Quote:

Originally posted by Picus_H I'm not trying to sway you at all. Again, I think in any case where burn-in is going to make you lose sleep at night you should definitely go with LCD. I just know that in my experience I haven't seen any burn-in. I play computer games on my plasma every other day or so ranging from 2-4 hours sometimes longer. Not a huge amount, so take that with a grain of salt.

I've been known to play games for 8 or more hours per day. No burn in here. But go with what will make you happy, it's your money after all.