Associate
- Joined
- 5 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 1,175
- Location
- South Shields, UK
You won't get the detail from 1024*768. How can you?? Its a significantly lower screen res from 1080p. And not even a widescreen resolution.
Spec me a 40-42" LCD for Sky HD
- Thread starter Dodge777
- Start date
its down to what you display mostly
most of the reason why plasma image quality is regarded as better than LCD is when displaying standard resolution. Showing a SD picture at 1920 x 1080 stretches the picture much more and thus exposes more of the flaws
if you only expand it to fit on a 1024 x 768 screen, you dont stretch it as much and it hides much of the defencts of standard TV and thus looks better.
As for high definition content, most of the legally available HD content is gaming stuff be it console or PC. There are of course blu ray players as well, but the comment that LCD is better than plasma for gaming comes from the fact LCDs have much higher resolution and thus will look much better displaying a 1920 x 1080 PC image at that res, as opposed to downscaling it to fit 1024 x 768
But thats not to say plasma is hopless with HD content, there are more factors to IQ than just resolution. Theres the colour depth. Cheap LCDs will show the black background of starwars as grey for example. Great blacks has always been a plasma strong point. As has motion. Because plasmas dont have a refresh rate a as such, they handle motion better. However, due to the underlying nature of plasma, you often find your eyes can pick up on whats called "green fringing" as seen in this video
Plasma and LCD both have strenghts / weakness. Which you think is best is largely a personal choice
I see. But is the image quality not based on the resolution? The amount of pixels at 1920x1080 compared to 1024x768 is a big difference. Or what other factors come into it? Again sorry for the lack of knowledge from me, cant get me head around plasmas
In lay mans terms, you are correct. High res should imply better image quality, but it doesnt actually work out in practise as LCD and plasma are different technologies.
In an earlier post in this thread I listed 3 reasons to buy the LCD over the plasma. If you fall into one of those, then get the LCD, otherwise, the plasma will be better for you.
I know some people say that for console use plasma is good because of the LCD refresh rate problem. However, all my research tells me this is not the case - LCD IS the technology to go for if gaming is important to you. For all other purposes though, at any given price point, you should go for plasma. Its image quality is better - simple as that.
If I had £1250 to spend today, I would get a 720p Pioneer Kuro. If I had £2900, I would get a 50" 1080p Kuro. Anything between those prices will be filled by a Panasonic Plasma. LCD really doesnt get a look in, if (TV/Video) image quality is important to you, especially when you consider that 1080p LCDs can be had for less than £900.
If I had £750, then I would opt for a Panasonic or Samsung 42" plasma, as their SD performance is superior to anything that an LCD can do.
A lot of people forget that the vast majority of people still watch SD, hence, SD peformance has to be taken into account. LCD cant even come close to what a plasma can deliver, in terms of SD performance; especially low quality SD images.
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 1,175
- Location
- South Shields, UK
its down to what you display mostly
most of the reason why plasma image quality is regarded as better than LCD is when displaying standard resolution. Showing a SD picture at 1920 x 1080 stretches the picture much more and thus exposes more of the flaws
if you only expand it to fit on a 1024 x 768 screen, you dont stretch it as much and it hides much of the defencts of standard TV and thus looks better.
As for high definition content, most of the legally available HD content is gaming stuff be it console or PC. There are of course blu ray players as well, but the comment that LCD is better than plasma for gaming comes from the fact LCDs have much higher resolution and thus will look much better displaying a 1920 x 1080 PC image at that res, as opposed to downscaling it to fit 1024 x 768
But thats not to say plasma is hopless with HD content, there are more factors to IQ than just resolution. Theres the colour depth. Cheap LCDs will show the black background of starwars as grey for example. Great blacks has always been a plasma strong point. As has motion. Because plasmas dont have a refresh rate a as such, they handle motion better. However, due to the underlying nature of plasma, you often find your eyes can pick up on whats called "green fringing" as seen in this video
Plasma and LCD both have strenghts / weakness. Which you think is best is largely a personal choice
Good post, its what I was thinking buddy!
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 18,620
- Location
- Shakespeare’s County
Yeah then once you have said superb detail and it starts to move, ala film, sports or Coronation Street or anything else that generally happens on a TV the detail argument becomes totally different that no list of text specs will cover.