Discussion in 'LCD & LED LCD TVs Forum' started by Damo121, Sep 24, 2004.
Is it the higher the response time on a LCD, the better or the worse.
Lower response times = better picture, i.e. less smearing as the individual pixels can switch brightness/colour faster.
Higher response times = worse picture, picture can be prone to smearing as the pixels lag behind what should be displayed.
Thats not totally true Steve you might get a lightning fast panel which has poor contrast and brightness.
But the lower the Ms steve is right, the less ghsoting or blurring you will see on fast action scenes
Perhaps I should have been more clear, I didn't mean to imply a lower figure meant a panel could have better contrast/brightness... a lower response figure means that a pixel can change state faster. For a pixel to change state it is changing from one colour to another or from one brightness value to another. Of course as you say if a panel has lightning reaction times but an overall contrast ratio of 50:1 it'll still look utter pants.
The original question was relating to response time only and no other factors.
For what its worth, its quite straightforward. a 16ms response time is quick enough to support 60Hz updating, so would be enough for any NTSC video source, or games console in 60Hz mode.
Many PC monitors are often 25ms, which is slightly slower, but not the end of the world if budget is the main issue.
16ms is also the threshold at which a manufacturer can describe its sets as LCD 'TVs' and not monitors.
Separate names with a comma.