Joined
·
15,569 Posts
Hi folks,
My experience with the larger, 50" Plasma screens (Pioneer, mostly)has left me with some questions.
I've always noted that there seems to be a penalty in picture quality whenever screens get bigger - I see the defects in the picture much more.
First, people keep mentioning that, with a smaller 42" plasma you can sit closer, and that you don't want to sit as close to the larger screens. That doesn't make sense to me: if the larger screens have finer resolution then you should be able to sit *closer* than the smaller screens without being distracted by pixels. And in fact when I view the bigger screens from closer up, this seems to be the case.
Any comments?
Now, about large plasmas and artifacts: Do the larger 50" screens tend to show more defects and artifacts on a greater variety of source material?
I just saw the new large Pioneer Plasma at a home entertainment show (it was the Pioneer with the "ugly" plastic frame, as some called it).
It looked amazing on an HD signal. But when they played a DVD, "The Mummy," it was horrible. I could not believe the severity of the artifacts.
On all shots there was a shifting, drifting, focus and re-focus effect of digital processing going on. The picture had that old LCD artifact of smudging and blurring to motion. Some shots were so bad that when the actors moved it was literally like looking at an impressionist painting.
My question: is it likely the smudging of the picture was due to the Pioneer Plasma processing, or artifacts contained on the DVD transfer? And, if it was the DVD transfer, do the larger Plasmas reveal these artifacts more readily? (I had seen "Dinosaur" on a larger Plasma and it looked tremendous).
This experience has me wondering if larger plasma screens will look worse more often than they look better.
Any comments?
Thanks,
Rich
My experience with the larger, 50" Plasma screens (Pioneer, mostly)has left me with some questions.
I've always noted that there seems to be a penalty in picture quality whenever screens get bigger - I see the defects in the picture much more.
First, people keep mentioning that, with a smaller 42" plasma you can sit closer, and that you don't want to sit as close to the larger screens. That doesn't make sense to me: if the larger screens have finer resolution then you should be able to sit *closer* than the smaller screens without being distracted by pixels. And in fact when I view the bigger screens from closer up, this seems to be the case.
Any comments?
Now, about large plasmas and artifacts: Do the larger 50" screens tend to show more defects and artifacts on a greater variety of source material?
I just saw the new large Pioneer Plasma at a home entertainment show (it was the Pioneer with the "ugly" plastic frame, as some called it).
It looked amazing on an HD signal. But when they played a DVD, "The Mummy," it was horrible. I could not believe the severity of the artifacts.
On all shots there was a shifting, drifting, focus and re-focus effect of digital processing going on. The picture had that old LCD artifact of smudging and blurring to motion. Some shots were so bad that when the actors moved it was literally like looking at an impressionist painting.
My question: is it likely the smudging of the picture was due to the Pioneer Plasma processing, or artifacts contained on the DVD transfer? And, if it was the DVD transfer, do the larger Plasmas reveal these artifacts more readily? (I had seen "Dinosaur" on a larger Plasma and it looked tremendous).
This experience has me wondering if larger plasma screens will look worse more often than they look better.
Any comments?
Thanks,
Rich