[swaaye]

On the image retention topic, my Nook Color's IPS LCD reminds me of my plasma TV!

[Acert93]

Some nice info, thanks folks.

[Gubbi]

Originally Posted by MfA

Those test patterns were designed to make plasma look good They are locally monochrome (at the spots you use to determine the resolution).

The tests I've seen are black patterns moving on a white background and white patterns moving on a black background. That's a best case scenario for LCDs, gray-to-gray performance is worse.

You also avoid false colours for LCDs while exposing uneven decay times for the various phosphors in PDPs.

Cheers

[Lightman]

Samsung Series 8000 improves black and contrast compared to older LCD TV's.
It also has some problems, first of it is price (over £2000 for 55'') and second is relative high input lag even in Game Mode. I mean 2 frames of lag is normally ok, but for FPS players it might be too much.

Other than that excellent TV with amazing image processing and really low power consumption!

[Acert93]

Originally Posted by mrcorbo

I've been using a 42" 1080p Panasonic Plasma as a primary computer monitor for years now (it replaced a 36" widescreen CRT). It's power-hungry, hot and heavy relative to LCD but as a display it's been phenomenal. It handles games, movies and PC productivity with equal proficiency and image retention, while occasionally present, is really not a major issue. And I am probably a worst-case scenario for usage that would lead to IR.

Having said this, the dynamics of the market pretty much dictate that you get a LCD if < 50", so unless you decide to go real big and hit up that 50" @ $599 (I'm assuming you saw this deal @ Costco) there really isn't much of a choice.

Yeah, that is a pretty nice deal.

[RudeCurve]

Originally Posted by homerdog

Hum, I've spent way too many hours comparing different TVs in my downtime when I sold TVs during college and that is the one thing I could never spot. I was looking for it and I have very good eyesight.

Probably if you gave me the right material I could spot it. I was just using normal stuff that 99% of people would watch 99% of the time.

Turn off the lights, move a white cursor on a black background around the screen fast, you'll see it....if you can't then you're blind.

Originally Posted by Gubbi

Clueless.

Cheers

Just stating a fact...feel free to refute it with evidence to back it up.

[Billy Idol]

I have a Panasonic Plasma VT model with 3d and what else....I use it for PC, PS3, Xbox, movies and TV. I also play very long MP sessions, no problem with burn in. I bought the 3d top model, as it offered better, even faster reacting phosphor technology, optimal for motion. I don't see it, but one of my friends (he is the only one so far) sees the phosphor trails, but only when he fast flip his eyes from left to right. I recommend to test out the screen to see if this is an issue for you. The next TV will be again a Panasonic Plasma, as long as there is not a better new technology available.

I can highly recommend it for gamers and I can highly recommend it as an all-purpose screen.

[Grall]

Originally Posted by Lightman

Samsung Series 8000 improves black and contrast compared to older LCD TV's.

From what I've been told, Samsung 7000 and 8000 series have identical innards and LCD panels, with just differing bezel/stand designs.

It also has some problems, first of it is price (over £2000 for 55'')

Yeah, price was the reason I went with the 6000 series and not 7 or 8. Just too damn expensive. I paid around 8500SKR for my 6305 model I think, and a 7000 of equivalent size was around 15000SKR. Ok, so you can't replace the "brains" module in the 6000 series like is possible with the bigger versions, and you don't get "local" dimming...still not worth the price difference.

Also, the SPDIF output on my model is missing on the 7/8k series, so I'd have to buy a HDMI-compatible surround system for audio. That'd be an even greater expenditure. As much as I love gadgets, that's simply too much to justify.

Other than that excellent TV with amazing image processing and really low power consumption!

Yeah. Power consumption really has dropped fantastically. Even with the quite fabulous image processing TVs do these days it's amazingly low for such big panels.

[MfA]

I doubt you can see phosphor trails on a relatively recent CRT monitor (TVs have slower phosphor) or plasma TV ...

What your friend sees on the Plasma display is probably a form of judder, on a plasma display a single frame is always "flashed" multiple times because of the subfield display technique ... if your eye is moving smoothly the light from multiple subfields for a pixel does not strike your retina at the same spot. This is slightly related to the rainbow artifacts for colour wheel DLPs.

[Grall]

Subfield strobing should be at such a high frequency that the human eye cannot percieve it; like with a high quality CCFL low-energy lightbulb for example.

[homerdog]

Originally Posted by RudeCurve

Turn off the lights, move a white cursor on a black background around the screen fast, you'll see it....if you can't then you're blind.

That's crazy... and a little outside the scope of what I would use a television for.

[MfA]

Originally Posted by Grall

Subfield strobing should be at such a high frequency that the human eye cannot percieve it; like with a high quality CCFL low-energy lightbulb for example.

Plasma is a bit weird, it doesn't really flash a subfield at 8+ different intensities for a given frame ... it charges (or not depending if the subfield is active at a pixel) a cell and then sends a train of sustain pulses to keep it going at constant intensity. It's really more like plain PWM than anything else.

This means that the most significant bitfields are displayed/held for relatively long times.

[Gubbi]

Originally Posted by RudeCurve

Turn off the lights, move a white cursor on a black background around the screen fast, you'll see it....if you can't then you're blind.

Pioneer PDPs gen 7 and prior had blue phosphor that decayed twice as slow as the others. You could see this in white to black transitions. Panasonic PDPs of the same era had the same problem with green phosphors. That was 7 years ago. Panasonic first cut decay time by two thirds, with the introduction of 3D models they again reduced decay time, which is why Panasonic's PDP has such low 3D crosstalk.

Originally Posted by RudeCurve

Just stating a fact...feel free to refute it with evidence to back it up.

No you didn't, you stated FUD.

Cheers

[Grearlacte]

LCD and Plasma TV looks the same based on its outward appearance.Plasma TV display is consist of cells and between each cell are glass panels.LCD panels on the other hand are consist of two layers of transparent materials. Plasma TV provides better contrast ratio and is more accurate in color. However, it is not as bright as LCD TV and that makes LCD tv better choice for viewing.

[Mize]

Originally Posted by Grearlacte

LCD and Plasma TV looks the same based on its outward appearance.Plasma TV display is consist of cells and between each cell are glass panels.LCD panels on the other hand are consist of two layers of transparent materials. Plasma TV provides better contrast ratio and is more accurate in color. However, it is not as bright as LCD TV and that makes LCD tv better choice for viewing.

LOL.
Plasma is akin to CRTs (both use excited phosphors) whereas LCD us a liquid crystal layer to preferentially block colors/pixels. Plasma has much better response time (fast motion can kill LCD picture quality), much better black levels, richer / deeper colors and infinitely better viewing angles. The only advantage of LCDs are: 1. lifetime expectancy (particularly at higher altitudes), 2. maximum brightness and lack of burn-in susceptibility.

[swaaye]

Power consumption is another LCD advantage. If one cares about that.

The LCD motion blur is I think the biggest problem. Plasma is vastly superior in some situations.

[Albuquerque]

Originally Posted by swaaye

Power consumption is another LCD advantage. If one cares about that.

The LCD motion blur is I think the biggest problem. Plasma is vastly superior in some situations.

LCD panels continue to improve their handling of fast motion, and also backlighting to some degree. The newest "F" series of Samsung televisions are getting rave reviews of excellent black levels, no more halo'ing with bright objects on a black background, proper brightness during 3D display, and very good handling of fast motion.

Not perfect still, but far better than even two years ago.

[Mize]

Originally Posted by Albuquerque

LCD panels continue to improve their handling of fast motion, and also backlighting to some degree. The newest "F" series of Samsung televisions are getting rave reviews of excellent black levels, no more halo'ing with bright objects on a black background, proper brightness during 3D display, and very good handling of fast motion.

Not perfect still, but far better than even two years ago.

Agreed. I have a 3-4 year old LCD for gaming that just sucks for movies (Panny Plasma for that), but the newest Samsungs are miles better. Another couple years...

[Albuquerque]

I'm drooling over the OLED displays that Samsung claims to bring to production in the first half of this year. They've said that a few times though, so I'm not fully convinced it will happen this time either.

Still, OLED would give you ultimate "thinness", the possibility of zero bezel, perfectly equal saturation and backlight across the entire screen, excellent motion characteristics, and very light power requirements. Will probably be god-awful expensive, too

[Mize]

Originally Posted by Albuquerque

I'm drooling over the OLED displays that Samsung claims to bring to production in the first half of this year. They've said that a few times though, so I'm not fully convinced it will happen this time either.

Still, OLED would give you ultimate "thinness", the possibility of zero bezel, perfectly equal saturation and backlight across the entire screen, excellent motion characteristics, and very light power requirements. Will probably be god-awful expensive, too

I've been drooling over OLED since I first saw the simple ones in 2003 on industrial instruments (low res, 1-3 color). I'm hoping my next TV is OLED, but it will have to cost less than a decent used car for that

[ToTTenTranz]

I have a ~4 year-old, 50" Panasonic plasma and it's great for movies and gaming alike.
As for TV, it connects to the box through a VSX921 receiver that upscales everything to 1080p so don't really know if its internal upscaler is any good.

As for image burning, yes it happens (mainly the HUDs or the bar in the browsers) but it disappears within a minute or less. I've never noticed any image burning when going from a game to a movie.

From what I see in the market, 50" plasmas cost as much as 40" LCD TVs, so I'd say it depends on size and how long will it be used every day (because of the difference in power consumption).

If it's something for a very large family and the TV is turned for most of the day, or if it's a public display like a bar or a reception, then I'd say the plasmas are prohibitive.

In my case, me and my girlfriend live alone in a small apartment, we only turn the TV at night during/after dinner. Sometimes it's a couple of hours, sometimes we don't even turn it on for days. It would take several decades for the electricity bill to compensate the price difference between a 50" LCD and that 50" plasma.

(The biggest "spender" is me when I find a good third-person game that I prefer playing with the gamepad (because the plasma rules for 1080p games on a decent HTPC.. damn ). Right now I'm on Sleeping Dogs, f#$% yeah!)

[Grall]

Originally Posted by Albuquerque

Still, OLED would give you ultimate "thinness"

Why would you need that? TVs hang on your wall or sit on a stand, you don't fold 'em up and put them in your wallet...

Fold is exactly what they will do however if built too thin, just by handling it. When you're down to less than 30mm already, what's the big rush in going even thinner?

perfectly equal saturation and backlight across the entire screen

Would depend on manufacturing precision.

very light power requirements.

Not currently a characteristic of OLED. Especially not when showing bright imagery...

[ToTTenTranz]

Nonetheless, the perfect blacks on a large AMOLED TV screen would make me want to spend my money on it... Lots and lots of it.

[Npl]

Originally Posted by Grall

Why would you need that? TVs hang on your wall or sit on a stand, you don't fold 'em up and put them in your wallet...

Fold is exactly what they will do however if built too thin, just by handling it. When you're down to less than 30mm already, what's the big rush in going even thinner?

Kill the sound reproduction even more so that any non-deaf buyers will have to get a soundbar too

[Mize]

One could argue that thin technology also means (and in this case *does* mean) thin to no bezel.
I would love to have 3x 1920x1200 AMOLED monitors with ~1 mm bezels [drool]