AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 99 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,345 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi All,


I would like some opinions on the following pics - which one do you think is better and why? I agree that on both the colour settings may not be to each persons taste but even so, on other things like clarity, depth, detail, sharpness etc.


Thank you!


Bazzy!


Pic A:



Pic B:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,901 Posts
I strongly prefer pic A...and I'm sure Will does also because the second pic makes his skin look oily.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,001 Posts
Pic A by far. It is the most natural and retains its film-like appearance. Slight red push with Pic B. I notice some black crush within Pic B as well.


Chris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,089 Posts
What did you do to pic 2!?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,345 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Hi Guys,


Thanks for all your opinions so far - Wow - what can I say? I have just had my eyes tested and they are fine so there must be something wrong with my brain?! I am a natural plasma guy as I watch mainly in the dark so things like black levels are important to me as is SD performance for which the general consensus is that Plasma is best.


To me, Pic B has tons more detail (like there's no contest) compared to Pic A - the detailing in the lips, the pores on the skin, hairs etc - the picture seems much clearer and well defined. Pic A looks kind of dull and bland with less detail and clarity?


Believe it or not, Pic A is a G9 Pioneer and Pic B is a latest series Philips 9000 series LCD. I have not even bothered looking at LCD's really in any depth apart from just passing by in shops but when I saw this pic, I was stunned at the difference between the two? I know Philips have one of the very best pics out there for LCD's (as opposed to their reliability or customer service!) but I am finding it very hard to believe that an LCD (even a latest Philips one) is better than most decent plasma's let alone the mighty G9 Kuro. But then my eyes...


Is there a trap that I am falling into and why so many people seem to be drawn to LCD's then? Apart from the colour (which I would tone down a bit to my personal taste) it's the fantastic amount of detail and sharpness Pic B has that really draws me to it - now, tell me, where am I going wrong or is there something really wrong with the way my brain is wired?!


Bazzy!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,001 Posts
Bazzy,

Again there is no comparison. The Philips looks like the settings are straight out of the box with no adjustments. It looks like Will Smith was out on the Florida Keys getting a sun tan. Those colors look very bad.


Chris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,318 Posts
It's perfectly natural to be drawn to something so rich and vibrant, and it is personal perference. Pic B is basically Dynamic mode, an oversaturated, contrasty pic. It is introducing "details", that aren't really there (atleast that is the norm).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
410 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bazzy /forum/post/14189925


Hi Guys,


Thanks for all your opinions so far - Wow - what can I say? I have just had my eyes tested and they are fine so there must be something wrong with my brain?! I am a natural plasma guy as I watch mainly in the dark so things like black levels are important to me as is SD performance for which the general consensus is that Plasma is best.


To me, Pic B has tons more detail (like there's no contest) compared to Pic A - the detailing in the lips, the pores on the skin, hairs etc - the picture seems much clearer and well defined. Pic A looks kind of dull and bland with less detail and clarity?


Believe it or not, Pic A is a G9 Pioneer and Pic B is a latest series Philips 9000 series LCD. I have not even bothered looking at LCD's really in any depth apart from just passing by in shops but when I saw this pic, I was stunned at the difference between the two? I know Philips have one of the very best pics out there for LCD's (as opposed to their reliability or customer service!) but I am finding it very hard to believe that an LCD (even a latest Philips one) is better than most decent plasma's let alone the mighty G9 Kuro. But then my eyes...


Is there a trap that I am falling into and why so many people seem to be drawn to LCD's then? Apart from the colour (which I would tone down a bit to my personal taste) it's the fantastic amount of detail and sharpness Pic B has that really draws me to it - now, tell me, where am I going wrong or is there something really wrong with the way my brain is wired?!


Bazzy!

Picture (A) is from my PRO-110FD (8g). I think the extra detail you see in your pic could be from added contrast that makes it appear to have more detail. This is by no means saying picture A has more detail, as at first glance, B appears to have more.


When converting the RAW file from my Canon 20D in Photoshop CS2 I removed ALL contrast so if I were to add some more, I think it would appear to have a bit more detail. Also, using the RAW format there is no processing done within the camera. Everything you see in the picture is untouched until converted by Photoshop. Then there's the the issue of how well I focused the lens and exactly how sharp my copy of the lens really is. Also, if I didn't configure the settings of the shot properly (i.e. Aperture, shutter speed, exposure, etc.), that can cause "loss" of detail as well. There are a lot of things that go into taking photographs and to be honest, displaying them on our (mostly) non-calibrated LCD or CRT monitors is NO way to really see a true representation of what the panel looks like.


For me, I love seeing how much others are enjoying their panels and I like sharing the same with others. Unfortunately the best visual aids we can provide are pictures we try our best to make appear the same as we see them at home.


Below is the same pic, converted with the same settings except with the contrast at +50.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,345 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Hi,


I am very glad I asked this, as there was strong possibility that I could have fallen for this "Wow" factor when looking to buy especially when at that stage, one's desire to have something always seems to convince one over any niggling doubts or thoughts - It looks like I have a lot to learn and need to figure out a way how! May I ask then, will a plasma also show the same amount of super intricate detail when set up properly or if as you folks say, this LCD is set on this dynamic mode - when it is set up properly, all that fine detail will be lost? Finally, how do I train myself to ascertain what makes a good picture?


Bazzy!


PS: I apologize everyone - it seems Pic A was from a G8 Pro Kuro and not a G9 - thank you to Lewwdog for the pic!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
I will throw in my two cents (if that's worth anything):


Picture A looks more natural, overall. It looks like the sharpness in picture B is overblown. The reason why I say that is because I can easily pick out the graininess, which shouldn't be there. On top of that there's ringing around edges. Plus the colors - they really are oversaturated reducing some of the fine detail. The same detail can be seen on picture A, but there's not that inherent "shininess" that is inherent with exaggerated sharpness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,318 Posts
Thank you Aether for elaborating on my simplistic form of the explanation
.


I also work at a B&M, so I have become accustomed to explaining things in lamens terms so that it is easy to understand, which in general, really shouldn't be applied on AVS!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Pic B looks awful.


It's what you would get if you opened Pic A in Photoshop and went crazy with the sharpen filter and doubled the color saturation. Some people like that, some people like ketchup on everything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,636 Posts
Fanaticalism, hey even some of us around here need things said simplistically! Your post says what my posts says in fewer words! A lot of times less is more. And yet I am still talking... hmmm...
 
1 - 20 of 99 Posts
Top