NEWS: OLED Shootout Results in a win for Philips

ashenfie

Well-known Member
Yes it is possible the Philips had over saturated colours which was considered as "better". Again not saying the Philips is a bad TV I have never seen one, but odd how it won that so comprehensively and the EZ952 scored terribly when it is the most accurate consumer TV possibly ever made.

After using Warm2 and calibrated colours for years I cannot stand looking at cool colour temperature!
Unless everyone had a colour cards and compared them with the TV, how would anyone know what was right or wong?
 
Yes it is possible the Philips had over saturated colours which was considered as "better". Again not saying the Philips is a bad TV I have never seen one, but odd how it won that so comprehensively and the EZ952 scored terribly when it is the most accurate consumer TV possibly ever made.

After using Warm2 and calibrated colours for years I cannot stand looking at cool colour temperature!
The panny has motion issues which I don't believe panasonic fixed for the shootout so that didn't help.
 

Bl4ckGryph0n

Distinguished Member
Still seems odd to me the landslide victory for philips in both categories, when calibrated it is the least accurate compared to the other brands. The Panasonic has the most accurate calibrated colours out of all of them, yet scored terribly, Not saying the Philips is bad or anything, just odd results.
Can you educate me, how can one brand have the most accurate calibrated colours? Isn’t the point of calibration to do that in the first place?
 

Stever10

Active Member
Can you educate me, how can one brand have the most accurate calibrated colours? Isn’t the point of calibration to do that in the first place?

Well one TV can be capable of more accurate colours, for example some TV's cannot get accurate colours however much time you spend calibrating them they just cannot do it. In SDR most OLED's are decently accurate, in HDR10 the Panasonics are significantly better than other OLED's, Not saying that HDR will look bad on any of the TV's at all, just that the colours are not as accurate. Which is why I said it is odd the Philips won so comprehensively in the calibrated tests. Maybe because the Panasonic had stuttering at the time which is mostly fixed now although not completely fixed with all content, hopefully will be fixed in next firmware update. Just odd how the Panasonic got a pathetically low score (most accurate TV available) compared to the Philips (least accurate OLED).
 

Stever10

Active Member
Maybe because the voters were not calibrators, so they like over saturated colours. I expect that probably 90% of people who get a TV like over saturated colours more than calibrated colours, because it has more "pop". Personally I find over saturated colours annoying. I am not "dissing" the Philips here I have never seen one, but just stating facts that the Panasonic is the most accurate OLED (worst score in calibrated tests by a large amount, terrible score in fact), and the Philips is I think the least accurate OLED (best score by a large amount over Panasonic and a moderate amount over LG). Just odd the results that is all, considering the EZ1000 (basically same as the EZ952) won the HDTVtest shootout for "best home cinema TV" and "best overall TV". Just a bit odd results that is all.
 

Bl4ckGryph0n

Distinguished Member
Well one TV can be capable of more accurate colours, for example some TV's cannot get accurate colours however much time you spend calibrating them they just cannot do it. In SDR most OLED's are decently accurate, in HDR10 the Panasonics are significantly better than other OLED's, Not saying that HDR will look bad on any of the TV's at all, just that the colours are not as accurate. Which is why I said it is odd the Philips won so comprehensively in the calibrated tests. Maybe because the Panasonic had stuttering at the time which is mostly fixed now although not completely fixed with all content, hopefully will be fixed in next firmware update. Just odd how the Panasonic got a pathetically low score (most accurate TV available) compared to the Philips (least accurate OLED).

You keep saying it won so comprehensively, but that is not true. In the calibrated tests there wasn't much in it at all....So you are basically saying that AVForums doesn't know how to calibrate it? I think it was Steve who has done it...Good luck with that line of thought...

Maybe because the voters were not calibrators, so they like over saturated colours. I expect that probably 90% of people who get a TV like over saturated colours more than calibrated colours, because it has more "pop". Personally I find over saturated colours annoying. I am not "dissing" the Philips here I have never seen one, but just stating facts that the Panasonic is the most accurate OLED (worst score in calibrated tests by a large amount, terrible score in fact), and the Philips is I think the least accurate OLED (best score by a large amount over Panasonic and a moderate amount over LG). Just odd the results that is all, considering the EZ1000 (basically same as the EZ952) won the HDTVtest shootout for "best home cinema TV" and "best overall TV". Just a bit odd results that is all.
Ok, so now we all like over saturated colours...on sets that were professionally calibrated? What on earth don't you get....Perhaps this isn't the place for you if you don't trust the opinions anyway...
 

Stever10

Active Member
You are confirming here that you do not understand about different TV's having more accurate colours when calibrated, you seem to think they are all the same once calibrated.

Here is some facts with proof that you cannot argue with. As I have to resort to explaining it to you in pictures now.

Philips POS 9002 calibrated colour accuracy :

image.php


Panasonic EZ952 calibrated colour accuracy :

image.php


Notice how the colours are much more accurate on the EZ952? For example green on the POS9002 the 75% and 100% are almost the same, neon green grass etc.

The colour accuracy is how close they are to the squares by the way, you seem to think all TV's are the same when calibrated, they are clearly not, especially in HDR, in SDR the differences are smaller and most new TV's can do SDR accurately.
 

Diagnosticz

Well-known Member
I totally agree with you thx75 - I too have been accused of 'missing the point' on here, and have also been threatened with 'action' for my comments, which have expressed my dissappointment with AVForums 'supporting' a Phillips win. dejongj also believes I've 'missed the point', and made a weird comment about me needing to 'count to ten', and re-read my statement of my 'invitation' to this event, which I'm glad I couldn't attend. Phil, you talking of everythings OK if you like it - well THAT is the biggest 'missed point' I've read in this whole thread. This WAS about the best PQ, not what people prefer. This shootout was not done correctly, and Phillips engineered it to win, no surprise there. I'm sad that some people took away from this that the Phillips was indeed the best (which is what they wanted), and some people didn't appreciate the intricacies of the setups and adjustments made to each TV, and how they would affect the outcome - motion processing amounts eg. Some even complained of the LG being the worst for blacks in the tunnel scene, when it was in vivid mode. Who cares. That comments show little/no understanding of what they were seeing. Most on here would completely dissregard ANY evaluation in vivid mode, as no-one, who has normal colour vision, uses it. I suppose I would have put the Phillips 1st in that mode, as that is the mode that Phillips has engineered it to look better than the over saturated etc settings of the other 3 in vivid. This, IMHO, was a non event.

A visual product like a tv is very difficult to judge outside of your own home environment.

Everyone has a diffrent perspectives of what makes in their eyes the best picture.

People view films with lights on others in pitch black. I have a 65vt50 plasma I watch films in pitch black and normal sky tv with lights on. I like a darker picture with low contrast and brightness and also lower color levels.

To me that gives me the most natural picture in my eyes.

I can't speak for the shootout I am just happy to see Philips back in the tv market I have always liked their tech and designs.

Would be nice to see them manufacture a 21/9 set like they have in the past.
 

Bl4ckGryph0n

Distinguished Member
You are confirming here that you do not understand about different TV's having more accurate colours when calibrated, you seem to think they are all the same once calibrated.

Here is some facts with proof that you cannot argue with. As I have to resort to explaining it to you in pictures now.

Philips POS 9002 calibrated colour accuracy :

image.php


Panasonic EZ952 calibrated colour accuracy :

image.php


Notice how the colours are much more accurate on the EZ952? For example green on the POS9002 the 75% and 100% are almost the same, neon green grass etc.

The colour accuracy is how close they are to the squares by the way, you seem to think all TV's are the same when calibrated, they are clearly not, especially in HDR, in SDR the differences are smaller and most new TV's can do SDR accurately.
Watch them side by side and see whether you notice the difference....And when was the last time you watched a movie?
 

daveteauk

Active Member
A visual product like a tv is very difficult to judge outside of your own home environment.

Everyone has a diffrent perspectives of what makes in their eyes the best picture.

People view films with lights on others in pitch black. I have a 65vt50 plasma I watch films in pitch black and normal sky tv with lights on. I like a darker picture with low contrast and brightness and also lower color levels.

To me that gives me the most natural picture in my eyes.

I can't speak for the shootout I am just happy to see Philips back in the tv market I have always liked their tech and designs.

Would be nice to see them manufacture a 21/9 set like they have in the past.
As I said - People with normal colour vision - you obviously don't have that; dark picture with low contrast and colour - YUK - it's not a criticism of you, many people have distorted colour vision. If your TV was calibrated you'd probably want your money back. That was the exact point I was raising. Yes we all LIKE a picture to look the way WE like it, but that's not the point really - if you don't like 'the look' of a calibrated TV, fine, but you can't then go on to accuse a correctly calibrated TV as looking/being wrong, when it's as 'right' as it can be made to be.
 

Stever10

Active Member
As I said - People with normal colour vision - you obviously don't have that; dark picture with low contrast and colour - YUK - it's not a criticism of you, many people have distorted colour vision. If your TV was calibrated you'd probably want your money back. That was the exact point I was raising. Yes we all LIKE a picture to look the way WE like it, but that's not the point really - if you don't like 'the look' of a calibrated TV, fine, but you can't then go on to accuse a correctly calibrated TV as looking/being wrong, when it's as 'right' as it can be made to be.

Also once you have used a calibrated / accurate TV, you notice anything else as looking "wrong", so it does not look better, for example if you watch a calibrated TV for a few weeks/months, anything else looks "wrong" and therefore "worse". If you calibrate a TV it will probably look a bit "boring" compared to some of the presets, but when you are used to the calibrated image it is better because it looks more realistic.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Sky Glass, Epson Laser Projectors plus Home Cinema Subwoofers and More…
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom