perceptionist87
Established Member
Dear plasma enthusiasts,
Would it be mad to think our common ground is that none of us can stand LCD televisions ?
I personally have some prejudices because I was burnt twice with this technology.
The thing I believe in, is that this technology will never, never ever achieve to bring up a decent TV.
Here are the things I will always disgust about LCD:
- Latest design approaches:
crystal clear design, thick framings around the panel and in general plastic look. Why in the world are they all perfect black ? If a technology is so prone to not achieving black levels, the best thing to do is to put it in a perfect black frame, so you always have a reference point of how fubared the on-screen blacks are.
- Anti-glare filters:
results in having a great 'blob' of milky light on the screen. Instead of having sharp reflections that can actually add depth in dark areas of the screen, you end up with the light being dispersed all over the screen. Unbearable.
- Slow response times / motion blur:
watching a football match and the ball leaves white trails on the pitch isn't what I deem as satisfying. I remember watching world cup 94 without such issues and that was before flat screen TVs were common. Certainly can't and shouldn't accept that.
- black reproduction / backlight bleeding / contrast:
to create an image using a backlight for me is a non-sense on paper. How would even theoretically a plain black be possible if a potent backlight is running all time? And how in the world can high contrast ratios and dynamic range be achieved if the whole frame is dependant on one brightness level - the one of the backlight ? But it doesn't stop the manufactures from putting stickers on the screens, stating contrast figures that are just as made up as katie price's knockers.
- Off-angle viewing:
whoever invites colleagues or likes to watch TV with his girlfriend or family knows that this is a major no-go for the technology in the first place. Unless you like to sit in a row 0° perfectly centered in front of a screen.
- Ambilight:
Yes, that's also on my black list. I obviously won't state any brand name but I had one TV that had this well-praised feature. All it does is distracting from the actual image and kill the immersion to the happening on screen. By the way, watch a good plasma TV in low light conditions and it generates an ambilight much more potent than this contraptions who try to make up for lacking brightness of LCD.
- Motion enhancers:
looks catchy on the shopfloor. But actually it will mostly result in pixel clouds around moving objects.
Also sports will be displayed plain wrong with frame interpolation. For example, a football's or tennis ball's trajectory is a to complex thing to predict and trying it mostly results in double pictures of the ball in the wrong spot.
- Pricing:
even though the technology is full of quirks, it is mostly extremely expensive. Great thing to pay extra buck for sophisticated image processors that try (and fail) to fix quirks that should not have been around in the first place, isn't it ???
Would it be mad to think our common ground is that none of us can stand LCD televisions ?
I personally have some prejudices because I was burnt twice with this technology.
The thing I believe in, is that this technology will never, never ever achieve to bring up a decent TV.
Here are the things I will always disgust about LCD:
- Latest design approaches:
crystal clear design, thick framings around the panel and in general plastic look. Why in the world are they all perfect black ? If a technology is so prone to not achieving black levels, the best thing to do is to put it in a perfect black frame, so you always have a reference point of how fubared the on-screen blacks are.
- Anti-glare filters:
results in having a great 'blob' of milky light on the screen. Instead of having sharp reflections that can actually add depth in dark areas of the screen, you end up with the light being dispersed all over the screen. Unbearable.
- Slow response times / motion blur:
watching a football match and the ball leaves white trails on the pitch isn't what I deem as satisfying. I remember watching world cup 94 without such issues and that was before flat screen TVs were common. Certainly can't and shouldn't accept that.
- black reproduction / backlight bleeding / contrast:
to create an image using a backlight for me is a non-sense on paper. How would even theoretically a plain black be possible if a potent backlight is running all time? And how in the world can high contrast ratios and dynamic range be achieved if the whole frame is dependant on one brightness level - the one of the backlight ? But it doesn't stop the manufactures from putting stickers on the screens, stating contrast figures that are just as made up as katie price's knockers.
- Off-angle viewing:
whoever invites colleagues or likes to watch TV with his girlfriend or family knows that this is a major no-go for the technology in the first place. Unless you like to sit in a row 0° perfectly centered in front of a screen.
- Ambilight:
Yes, that's also on my black list. I obviously won't state any brand name but I had one TV that had this well-praised feature. All it does is distracting from the actual image and kill the immersion to the happening on screen. By the way, watch a good plasma TV in low light conditions and it generates an ambilight much more potent than this contraptions who try to make up for lacking brightness of LCD.
- Motion enhancers:
looks catchy on the shopfloor. But actually it will mostly result in pixel clouds around moving objects.
Also sports will be displayed plain wrong with frame interpolation. For example, a football's or tennis ball's trajectory is a to complex thing to predict and trying it mostly results in double pictures of the ball in the wrong spot.
- Pricing:
even though the technology is full of quirks, it is mostly extremely expensive. Great thing to pay extra buck for sophisticated image processors that try (and fail) to fix quirks that should not have been around in the first place, isn't it ???
Last edited: